There was a day that a career in politics might have been appealing to me, but no more. I still have a great concern for what Canada is becoming and where our nation is headed, but keeping my head clear and my heart focused as I watch our country spin its way into the future has become a real challenge.
I don’t know if politics lost its appeal simply because I turned 58 and have lost patience with the constant strain of processing issues, or whether or not I am just getting a little more cynical about the process of governing. Anyways, hats off to politicians who chart a course and steer the national ship through turbulent times, knowing all along that history and generations of Canadians will ultimately render judgment on their decisions, right or wrong.
An old bill resurfaced recently when Ms Ruby Dhalla, Liberal MP for Brampton, Ont, a predominantly East Indian riding, introduced Bill C-428 for a second reading in the legislature. According to the official government site, “This enactment amends the Old Age Security Act to reduce from ten years to three years the residency requirement for entitlement to a monthly pension.”
The proposed amendment affects the Old Age Security Act (OASA) that deals with residency requirements. The new position is clearly described. Dhalla believes, along with some supporting seniors and immigrant groups, that “the current ten-year residency requirement places undue hardship on recent immigrants who are seniors…” From all appearances, Bill C-428 is not getting a very broad support. The Conservative Party is not supporting it. Many Liberal members are rejecting it as well, along with their leader, Michael Ignatieff. It looks as if the third and final reading will be defeated, and the issue might just blow away, for awhile anyways.
Canadians are amping up their own displeasure of this Bill for a multitude of reasons. Bloggers seem to be reflecting a common position. Fundamentally, they are at odds with people coming into our country, drawing upon our country’s retirement fund (OAS), and not paying a lengthy period of taxes into the fund (at least 10 years).
Some Canadians are sensitive about what they see as an abuse of Canadian generosity and compassion towards foreigners. Some are concerned about the disparity between the government’s financial support of refugees ($28,920 annual income – pension and social aid) and Canadian citizens who have worked long and hard, dutifully paying their taxes ($16,776 annually in Old Age Pension and Guaranteed Income Supplement).
Charity begins at home, and we need to take care of our own people, they say. They believe that pension plans are in jeopardy for many hard working Canadians, and this decision will place incalculable stress of our entire system. The Government estimates a cost of $700 million annually, but that does not take into consideration other side effects. Again, this would have to be subsidized by higher taxes for those already at work.
I remember reading about the rules pertaining to the life of the hobo during the great depression. You could call it hobo etiquette. If you were travelling and camped alongside other hobos, and they were making a corporate stew, you could eat from the stew if you had something to throw into it. This seems to describe the feelings of the citizenry right now.
What concerns me is not that Bill C-428 hit the floor of Parliament but that the Bill was considered serious enough to get to the third reading. It tells us more about us than it does about Ms. Dhalla. The laws we concoct, and then enact, reveal our most basic convictions about our essential values – hard work, compassion, fiscal responsibility, attitude toward immigrants, equality of treatment, care for our seniors, etc.
This Bill may be an evidence of political ping pong being played at taxpayers and seniors expense. No one will ultimately win. The senior community is a large one, as is the immigrant community. These represent a significant voter package, but someone has to pay the bill for this, and few know where the necessary funds will come from especially at this time.
It is possible that our policies on immigration are at the root of this issue. Bill C-428 is just one issue among larger, more global ones for Canada. Unfortunately, the presentation of this Bill has created unnecessary provocation at a time when the nation’s bills are the highest they have ever been. There is no question that this will continue to be a proverbial hot potato, however the Bill is resolved, and that a re-evaluation of our immigration policies will have to be fast-tracked.
I am concerned that laws are presented on the basis of polls and interest groups. How does one determine what laws should be presented? What values guide our decision making? What steers us as we drive back and forth between issues of compassion and fiscal responsibility? How do we balance aging poverty with a growing entitlement mentality?
Canadians are the best people on the planet as far as I am concerned. I love our heart for the refugee. I deeply appreciate the extent of our social net. The world knows our care for the aged. May God grant wisdom to our leaders so that our national course is set by a commitment to principle rather than sensitivity to pressure and political expediency
No comments:
Post a Comment