A Letter to Michael Brown ( Algoma-Manitoulin)

This is a letter that has been sent out to Mr. Brown

Good morning Mr. Brown,

Attached for your perusal, is an e-mail that I've sent to one of your colleagues, John Gerretsen.

I am also forwarding to you an e-mail sent to Caroline Di Cocco.

Mr. Brown ... all of these e-mails (and there will be more) highlight the fact that members of your Liberal Party spoke very eloquently against the hypocrisy of Bill 27 ... but at the same time ... upon Bill 27 receiving Royal Assent on December 22, 1999 ... accepted unlocked pensions anyway.

Several months back I received a letter from Finance Minister Sorbara, in reply to some serious questions I had raised concerning Bill 27.

Most of his words were of the superfluous nature ... answering none of my concerns.

However the following paragraph definitely grabbed my attention.Mr. Sorbara said on October 27, 2006 ...

"With respect to your comments about Bill 27, I would note only that the legislation was passed despite the objections of Liberal MPPs."

Mr. Sorbara conveniently omitted the rest of the story ... the fact that Bradley, Caplan, Conway, Ruprecht and others from your Liberal party accepted unlocked pensions anyway.Mr. Sorbara failed to mention too that Sean Conway even said it was "wrong and immoral" ... but subsequently accepted his unlocked pension, despite his own words of indignation.

Mr.Brown ... saying one thing but quietly, while no know is watching supposedly, doing just the opposite ... especially when it means there will be personal gain .......... has our Legislature degenerated to the point that this has become the modus operandi for all MPPs ...

or is such behaviour just confined to the Liberal Party?

As Speaker of the House Mr. Brown, the parameters under which you rule the House go far beyond decorum and propriety. You do have the power to evict and suspend members from the House, should there even be the hint of slander.

How is it then, that this same level of decency, integrity, and sound moral principle have not been a requirement in the treatment of ordinary Ontarians, who hold locked-in pensions, as it relates to Bill 27?

Bill 27 should never have seen the light of day. The subsequent behaviour of all three parties as it relates to the EXCLUSIVE, EXTRAORDINARY FINANCIAL PRIVILEGE AFFORDED TO JUST 61 MPPs (of all party affiliations) courtesy of Bill 27, represents absolute contempt for the Ontario electorate!

Mr. Brown ... as Speaker of the House ... why has this atrocious legislation and equally atrocious behaviour of MPPs never been challenged?

I await your answer.

Kenneth Elliott

I would like to add to this letter that at the present time both the Progressive Conservative party and The New Democratic Party now agree that all Ontarions should be allowed to have their pensions unlocked 100% when they retire. They do not see it reasonable to keep the money from the people that saved it for their retirement.

Apparently the only party that feels that the seniors of Ontario are not competent enough to look after their OWN MONEY are the McGuinty Liberals.

Bill Costello