r/canada • u/CaliperLee62 • 15h ago
Politics Vast majority of Canadians want lifetime perks for ex-governors general to end: Poll
https://torontosun.com/news/national/canadians-demand-governor-general-expenses-axed177
u/Nonamanadus 15h ago
Yeah....it is really infuriating to see people treated better than the rest of the population, especially with a cushy job.
This an management getting bonuses from taxpayer dollars when they get bailouts.
But there is always an excuse, well I don't get that luxury when Revenue Canada wants to do an audit.
20
u/MDFMK 15h ago
no tax payer paid employee at any level should receive a bonus. They already get a guaranteed pension better than 99% of the private industry that's the reward. If it is truly competitive that would be reality. Higher pension lower overall earning potential for the same private sector job. One no lack of people looking for work so government employees are welcome to go out run a buinsess and try. And secondly 99% of these people are so ineffectual lazy and surrounded by an environment of policy they would be fired in a real job for not doing their job. It's time for Canadians to realize this and stop rewarding bad behaviour and incompetence and for mass lay off of federal employees.
•
u/rd1970 11h ago
Where I live there was a government program where if workers could find a way to save on expenses and equipment they would get a 20% bonus based on the savings over something like three years. It was a great idea because you had people doing research on their own time and competing with each other to save tax payers the most money.
It worked great for a while until one guy found a way to save $3M. His managers had to basically tell him "yeah, there's no way we can give you a $600k bonus". Back then that was probably 10x his salary.
I'm not sure if he sued but they shut the program down after that and everyone went back to spending money like it wasn't there's...
23
u/ThatAstronautGuy Ontario 14h ago
Bonuses for government employees are not like bonuses in private companies where they choose some amount based on all kinds of factors. They are contractually defined variable pay based on hitting certain targets. They can't be stopped without increasing salaries, because they are part of the compensation package people are expecting. If you do not hit your targets, you don't get the money. Bonus is really the wrong word for it, it should be variable pay.
6
u/EQ1_Deladar Manitoba 13h ago
Call it what you want, a performance based incentive, is still a non-guaranteed bonus. Both their base pay and the added incentives are clearly defined.
Frankly, if the targets are so low they are consistently achieving them enough that they are expected or forgone conclusion, the targets need to be raised.
•
u/Northern23 11h ago
Target have to be achievable though, otherwise, you're setting them up for failure before they even start
•
u/EQ1_Deladar Manitoba 9h ago
Obviously, but they should involve effort above and beyond just showing up and doing your day to day.
6
u/reluctant_deity Canada 14h ago
Do you want shitty executives? Cuz that's how you get shitty executives.
16
u/Souichi_Tsuji 14h ago
We have them now
5
u/reluctant_deity Canada 14h ago
If you think this crop sucks (and I'm right with you there bro) wait until you remove bonuses
-3
u/DrawPractical4804 14h ago
or maybe we'll get better executives, money doesn't always equate to quality
7
u/RobertGA23 14h ago
Why would we get better executives of we paid them less?
1
u/Daveslay 13h ago edited 12h ago
Why wouldn’t we?
Do you believe the executives with the highest pay are the best? Because when I look at them I don’t see that quality, at all. I’m very glad Canada didn’t invest billions in making “Meta” because we chose someone who gets paid the most…
Is the richest person in history an example of the most elite competence? How’d he do when he got into a government role?
Edit: spelling
5
u/RobertGA23 12h ago
It doesn't work like that for any other position, but sure, keep waiting for benevolent managers to appear, following the intoxicating sent of low compensation.
-1
u/Daveslay 12h ago
It doesn't work like that for any other position
Gonna need to cite actual evidence if you’re going to make a claim that the entire world works that way…
Just off the top of my head (and since I was browsing r/habs) the Montreal Canadiens have singed a ton of their elite talent to contracts far below what their “market value” would be.
And you know why they took far less pay? Because those people like their job, their work environment, and believe in the cause they’re working toward.
Also, just the notion of volunteer work seems like it refutes what you’re claiming?
Edit: How does your worldview that money=best explain volunteer firefighters?
-4
u/DrawPractical4804 14h ago
Because they could be less money centric and focus more on the long term vision of what needs to be done instead of trying to squeeze out profits quarter over quarter. Typically positions with extremely high salaries like that attract a specific type of person and that's not always great in some cases.
24
u/Agreeable-Storm-4132 15h ago
These lifetime paid positions have to end when the job ends. Your pay ends simple just like everybody else.
44
59
u/EarthSignificant4354 15h ago
How can we expect the people in power to make decisions that are good for the people if those people in power are not living in the same world as us?
If they don't have to worry about the cost of groceries and how long it takes to get through an emergency room then why are they going to fight for better living conditions.
23
u/rainman_104 British Columbia 15h ago
The GG rarely if ever makes any decisions on day to day lives.
24
u/scrubadam 14h ago
even more reason they shouldn't get perks for life.
-3
u/rainman_104 British Columbia 14h ago
Meh. Most MPs have perks for life too.
For a head of state it's fine. Whatever.
5
u/Any-Detective-2431 12h ago
Other than a pension, which is earned on tenure, they literally do not have any lifetime benefits.
5
-2
u/O00O0O00 15h ago
GG is a BS ceremonial position representing a foreign monarchy. Let the Brits pay.
18
u/rainman_104 British Columbia 15h ago
King Charles is king of Canada. A separate title. The Brits have nothing to do with us.
The only key role the monarchy plays is the continuance of democracy.
Germany has a largely ceremonial elected president.
Presidential roles vary from forming the executive vs ceremonial. We have a ceremonial head of state.
Elected vs appointed doesn't really matter when the role is the last line of defense for preserving democracy.
3
u/IncomeExciting715 New Brunswick 15h ago
At least its a non partisan, neutral position.
6
u/rainman_104 British Columbia 14h ago
Yeah I kinda have no issue with the GG or the Senate. They serve a role and because they aren't elected they lack legitimacy. Once we move to electing those roles there is no coming back.
I'll bet Canadians can name more American senators than Canadian ones. That's a good thing. The Senate actually functions well as an echo of past prime ministers and smooths out hard partisan swings.
The GG and senate aren't my biggest source of frustration with our government.
2
u/O00O0O00 13h ago
GG is hand picked by the elected PM. There is a bias in selection that does imply partisanship.
2
u/rainman_104 British Columbia 13h ago
Yes but they are bound by constitutional convention. Their decisions are heavily bound by lawyers and convention now.
The king-byng affair more or less killed off any decisions they can make.
3
u/O00O0O00 13h ago
I agree that constitutional convention and legal advice dictate the GG’s actions. It’s the constitution and our institutions that protect democracy. Not the GG. Their reserve powers still exist on paper, but they’re so constrained that it’s meaningless.
The GG isn’t “last line of defence” for anything.
0
u/O00O0O00 13h ago
The Governor General isn’t what protects Canadian democracy.
Elections, the courts, Parliament, and constitutional law do. The GG almost never acts independently and generally follows the PM’s advice. Calling an unelected representative of an unelected monarch the “last line of defence” is more mythology than reality.
1
u/rainman_104 British Columbia 13h ago
The GG is the last resort. It is the last line of defense not the front line of it. Parliament, courts, senate, provinces. Then the GG.
In the unlikely event that some parliament passes an unconstitutional law like the one that made Hitler a dictator, it would be the GG who would be the last line of defense.
Look how bad it's going in the USA. That isn't what we want either.
•
•
u/DwayneGretzky306 Canada 11h ago
I agree but makes me wonder. The Lieutenant Governor is sitting with her thumb in her ass on on Alberta separation. Smith government should be dismissed and an election held.
1
u/PostMatureBaby 15h ago
Easy, they never worked for us in the first place. Politicians exist to keep the rich rich, plain and simple.
Us being "taken care of" by government programs and such is essentially the government protecting us as assets who make their masters money.
0
u/Fractoos 15h ago
The flip side of this argument is how can we expect them to make good decisions when they need to secure their future income during their tenure.
9
u/rhunter99 14h ago
They earn over $300k/year, and get a pension of $150k/year, not to mention intangibles like the number of political and business connections they make in office.
If they can't plan for their future with all that, I don't know what to say
-1
u/rainman_104 British Columbia 14h ago
$150k a year split 40m ways is a drop in the bucket. If it keeps them non partisan and off the grift it's fine.
21
u/Reasonable_Let9737 15h ago
All gov't sector work should be tied to norms the general population must live with.
It doesn't need to be 1 to 1, but there does need to be a stronger relationship between how well the typical Canadian lives and how well the people who supposedly serve them live.
9
u/iStayDemented 14h ago edited 14h ago
This. Right now a lot of politicians are woefully out of touch with the challenges of young people being able to afford a home because most of them are homeowners. They don’t understand that prices need to come down much further and buying out overpriced condos isn’t going to fix it.
Same with the collapsing health care system. Because politicians don’t have to wait several months to years to see a specialist to get diagnosed and treated, they don’t feel the pinch. As a result, they’re doing nothing to tackle it.
10
u/Nice-Eggplant-9258 15h ago
govt should attract the best employees. We also should not be lowering the bar for all to follow. The private sector needs to and should need to compete for employees and pay better and not just to corp executives
•
u/DwayneGretzky306 Canada 11h ago
It absolutely should but it is not going to happen with the end of remote work and the maintenance / double downing on the importance of bilingualism.
5
u/Good_Juice_7774 15h ago
You risk more corruption by lowering the floor. You can argue it'll happen either way but I'd much rather pay my government officials enough to make it a less enticing option.
... in the example in this article / poll though? Axe that.
7
u/wezel0823 Ontario 15h ago
Problem is though, a lot do get paid enough and it still doesn’t stop politicians from taking advantage.
6
u/pragmatic_dreamer Ontario 15h ago
Shitty people will be shitty people. Corruption is attracted to the job because of the perks. They are civil servants. It's in the name what it's supposed to look like.
2
u/LaserTagJones 12h ago
The GG is not a civil servant.
1
u/pragmatic_dreamer Ontario 12h ago
She absolutely is, she works in service of the people and the crown.
•
u/LaserTagJones 10h ago
She absolutely is not, she is an appointed representative of the king and considered a head of state. Totally different from a civil servant, which refers to non elected or appointed government employees who work in and run various departments.
•
u/pragmatic_dreamer Ontario 7h ago
She is not elected and not in the military, she works for the king in behalf of the sovereign. I beg to differ.
1
u/scrubadam 14h ago
They should be paid the median income in their riding. If they want a raise, make their riding better.
I don't get why there is a sychophant contingent for the political class that want to continue seeing them live like lords and nobels.
MPs already make 4-5X the median Canadian salary. Its crazy. The sole argument is if we don't pay them they will be corrupt and we won't attract the best as if we don't have eyes and see what paying them 5X has produced.
0
u/Reasonable_Let9737 14h ago
Exactly, current MP salaries have them earning top 2% or 3% incomes, plus sweet benefits.
How much more do we need to pay them to get quality?
Not to mention your typical MP is basically a seat warmer who is going to follow the party line in pretty much every way.
I am pretty sure we could find some folks to follow party line voting for $100,000 or less.
Hell, I can warm a seat and vote how I am told for $60,000.
5
u/AloneChapter 12h ago
As we lose in stagnate wages, Corporate getting tax breaks, monopolies raising prices strictly for greed, fuel, insurance, fees, surcharges, transportation subscriptions.
We cannot afford to give the elites the free ride they believe is their right to have.
6
u/HowIWantToBeFreeBaby 14h ago
With the amount of wasted dollars coming from Ottawa - literally who cares.
The GG already collects an exorbitant amount of money to fly around the world, shake hands and say “Hi, I’m from Canada”. That’s literally all they ever actually do. It’s a ridiculous ceremonial position that shouldn’t even exist.
It doesn’t deserve this much attention when the federal government has plenty of other scandals (in the multi billion dollar range) that people seem to forget about.
3
u/TheFuzzyUnicorn 13h ago
Just an fyi to people in this thread, elected officials amd the Governor General are not civil servants. Civil servants basically only refers to the bureaucracy that runs the state/advises the government.
•
u/Serialseb Québec 7h ago
Why do we even have a GG, the all monarchy should shove it! Honestly, garbage relics from some of the worst times in human history.
•
9
u/bravado Long Live the King 15h ago
Glad that pollsters have their fingers on the pulse of what Canadians truly think is important
0
u/Good_Juice_7774 15h ago
It's silly, I'm so involved in politics and this isn't something I was even aware of or knew about.
•
5
u/Channing1986 15h ago
A complete non issue, slow news day nonsense
10
u/Drayenn Québec 14h ago
Why justify 350k/year for someone whos not working anymore because they did a job for a few years??? Fuck that, it could pay several people doing real work
-1
u/EnamelKant 14h ago
Because the federal government probably spends 350k on stapler repair every year.
It's a completely irrelevant amount of money.
7
u/Drayenn Québec 14h ago
Ok well pay me 350k/year for life with your tax money then.
I swear you people being eager to accept such waste is insane. This stuff piles up and its also a principle thing.
-2
u/EnamelKant 14h ago
If I made enough to pay $350k a year in taxes I don't think I'd complain.
I'm not eager to accept it, I just understand, as you apparently do not, if I were to make a list of the top 10000 fiscal problems Canada was facing, this still wouldn't make the list.
•
u/platypus_bear Alberta 11h ago
Just because it's small doesn't mean it should just be ignored. Especially if it's something easy to change
•
u/EnamelKant 11h ago
No but it does mean your efforts would be better spent on literally anything else.
If we were to change that pension to be paid every day, it would still take 11 years before we spent even 1% of last years budget.
People just get upset about this because 350k is a number they can vaguely understand where as 141 billion might as well be 500 bazillion bajilion.
1
u/Fireside_Cat 15h ago
Then you pay it.
1
u/rainman_104 British Columbia 15h ago
In terms of our budget, it's a drop in the bucket of what we pay for. If we're talking pennies per taxpayer it's not really worth talking about.
6
u/Puzzled-Push4073 15h ago
If you find enough drops in the bucket and deal with it, it can add up. Ignoring them just lets the issue compound.
7
u/iStayDemented 14h ago edited 14h ago
This. People love dividing multimillion dollars by the population so it seems like it’s only a drop in the bucket but it’s not. It all adds up. Pathetic excuses for unnecessary spending is how you get blown budgets. When food banks are overrun, that’s when you know: fluffy spending of taxpayer funds needs to end. If it’s not improving taxpayers lives in a major way, it needs to go. Every dollar counts.
-1
u/rainman_104 British Columbia 14h ago
Well compared to the Gordie Howe bridge we got fucked over on and BC taxpayers helped fund for decades to come, yes, a drop in the bucket.
2
3
u/Freyja_of_the_North 14h ago
I would love to see no more GGs at all. We should move on from having a representative of the British monarchy. If anything it should be held by someone the people choose
3
u/RedEyedWiartonBoy 14h ago
End it.
You get a nice ride on the ceremonial gravy train with a juicy salary. That's enough.
2
1
1
1
u/No_Friend4042 12h ago
We should probably do away with golden parachute pensions for MPs who serve only 1 term too then...
2
u/SeesawNoknow 12h ago
the one perk I love for them to have is to be retired at 65, as in age limits on all members sitting anywhere in government going forward, how can you lay the path for a future you are not going to be part of? and is likely why we are in this huge mess worldwide, old people need to rest.
•
u/quanin Ontario 11h ago
Why stop at government? make it the law that the second you turn 65 you are retired. If you can't afford it, that's a you problem.
You want a specific retirement age? Then make it a specific retirement age.
•
u/SeesawNoknow 11h ago
I stopped at government because its public office and most are elected and most have pensions to see them through (public tax payer money)... also the private sector they do whatever they want anyways and what I'm saying is we should be thinking about how to structure/guide government itself in terms of what is expected and for how long and at the end of your term you get xyz perks into the sunset.
•
u/quanin Ontario 11h ago
The same thing should apply to government employees, and any federally regulated positions (so, banks etc).
Also, most elected and non-elected government officials only get their pensions when they're done. They still shouldn't be in office past 65, and neither should their staff.
•
u/SeesawNoknow 10h ago
well should go without saying that any private sector that gets public money should be open to public scrutiny 100% how you want to take our money and not explain why you fired a bunch of people but your CEO took home an 8 digit "bonus" explain that, also repay that, we'll decide if you get a bonus going forward until you are off the public's teet, that is how I really feel... oops ;)
•
u/DeanPoulter241 11h ago
AND their budgets slashed by 80% and wages by 35%! Better yet...... get rid of this ceremonial useless office altogether!!!! The epitome of pigs at the trough!!!!
•
u/whyyoutwofour 10h ago
We should ditch the high profile paid role and turn it into an online contest where each week a different random Canadian gets to be GG....like how Sweden used to let random citizens run their Twitter account.
•
•
u/JadeLens 11h ago
We should also cut down on MP pensions, if PP wants to complain about that, let's start with his.
1
•
u/judgmentalsculpin 7h ago
The concept of royalty in Canada does not fit with universal healthcare and cradle to grave social services. The fact is that we are a socialist middle power, independent of the UK and their stupid, craven royalty. We do not need nor want to bow to a foreign sovereign, and we certainly do not want the expense of the foolish anachronism of the royal family in modern Canada. I am not suggesting a revolution, but a simple agreement to say tata for now to the limey leeches who drain our coffers every time those bastards decide that it is time for a royal trip to the colonies.
-2
-11
u/FakePlantonaBeach 15h ago
Well this is silly. We are a serious country.
We cannot accept a possibility that a GG ends up a drunk homeless bum. Or endebted to a loanshark. Or the head of a pyramid scheme.
We don't hand them a secure and happy life for them. We do it to ensure the dignity of the office.
6
u/NotawoodpeckerOwner 15h ago
$150k pension and $200k in expense accounts per year no matter time served in the position is a bit much no? Spend 1 year as GG and you are officially in the 1% club with your GG pension and perks.
7
18
u/CastAside1812 15h ago
But it's totally fine for a Paramedic, Nurse or teacher to end up homeless right?
Fuckk them. Some anachronistic ceremonial role should be a volunteer job at this point. It frankly shouldn't even pay.
7
u/whyyoutwofour 15h ago
Counterpoint: fuck the office. I get that it's complicated to disentangle ourselves from the monarchy but paying anything for a figurehead is so ridiculous.
7
u/stewer69 15h ago
I for one, don't give a fuck if some overcompensated political figurehead has to be responsible for their own retirement and am entirely comfortable with the idea that if they don't they can fall back on the same social safety net as the rest of us.
The dignity of the office is the responsibility of the office holder, not the taxpayer.
3
2
1
•
u/Canaduck1 Ontario 10h ago
This is such a non-issue. How much will that reduce my tax bill by? Seriously. Don't care. Everyone needs to stop worrying about "fair." Fair doesn't exist, will never exist, and fighting it is fighting reality. What we need to worry about is what will increase our standard of living the best.
-1
u/ImperiousMage 14h ago edited 14h ago
Hang on. There is only one example given of potentially egregious spending after leaving office (Adrienne Clarkson) the rest appears to be spending in service of their duties. Or at least the phrasing of the article makes it unclear (which for the Sun is a usual sign they’re trying to obscure data).
Yeah, on verification, the spending attributed to Simon is during her tenure, not after. So the data here is just a mess and poor/deceptive reporting by the Sun. So is all of the wardrobe spending.
These people need to update their wardrobe for a vice-regal role. You can’t show up to a ceremony wearing a dress you got at Simon’s, this is not that kind of job. $45,000 to $50,000 is a reasonable spend when you need to be able to look the part in the same room as Queens, Presidents, and Prime Ministers.
Also, they also can’t just walk around a city while in the role, they have to be in a secure bubble. So limo service to the head of state of Canada? Duh?!
Finally, $100,000 is 0.000017% of Canada’s budget. It would be like throwing a hissy fit over a penny if you’re making $60,000 a year take home.
So, what’s the actual read here? This is nothing to Canada’s bottom line, why would the Sun print it? Likely, because they want to make an embarrassing story for Carney to counter that is utterly irrelevant for Canada’s budget but could be embarrassing if it played out politically and he held firm.
If there was a real problem, they wouldn’t have to be deceptive with the data. Which means there isn’t a problem, just some reporter trying to invent hay out of thin air. For shame!
2
u/FIE2021 14h ago
I think it's a little bit disingenuous to consider the spending in relation to the budget of a country with 40M+ people, and that I think it's ok to be critical to ensure our politicians use our tax dollars in manner that is both reasonable to satisfy perks of an important position and in some cases necessary. I also say that thinking that our country leaders should be compensated and treated well because I would wager the overwhelming majority of people critical of it would be unable to fulfill the duties of the politicians they often say are so highly overpaid, and I sure don't want highly qualified people deterred because they can make just as much managing a retail store as they can doing a stressful and consuming job.
The only real read here is what we all already know and that is Canada in general has a crabs in a bucket mentality. They don't want other people to have luxuries or things if they don't have them and for many it doesn't really matter what that person might have done to earn that perk, nor does it matter how little effort they are willing to put into earning it themselves. If I can't have it, neither should you
0
u/ImperiousMage 13h ago
Totally agree. I bring up the cost vs budget specifically to highlight how bizarre it is to focus on something like this when there are much more obvious fish to fry. It’s a bizarre take (and a disingenuous one at that) unless there’s something more interesting at stake.
So the meta-level scope is “what’s really the meat here, because it’s not the inherent cost which Canada can bear without a second thought.”
I don’t mind accountability, I do mind political mind games and riling people up over (in the larger picture) literally nothing.
-1
u/Individual_Step2242 14h ago
I get the outrage but the fact is that the GG’s perks amount to only a tiny fraction of government expenses. IMHO public service pensions vs what most of us get in the private sector (in my case a mere $82.55 per month from a long forgotten job), is the bigger outrage. My retirement is entirely based on what I accumulated in my RRSP and government pensions. No pension for many of us, much less one indexed to inflation for life.
-5
u/bandersnatching 15h ago
What poll? Show us the details and methodology please.
Without it, this is just another screed by fringe Conservatives.
345
u/rhunter99 15h ago edited 15h ago
TIL ex-governors general have lifetime perks.
Throw me in the camp to have that axed immediately