Not that I'm a big fan of Peter Worthington. But the Toronto Sun columnist raises a good point today about serial killer Clifford Olson, who got paid $100k nearly three decades ago in a plea agreement where he didn't necessarily have to tell the police about all the kids he brutually murdered and raped. Now, we learn that Olson has not only collected Old Age Security the last few years, but last year also became eligble for the Guaranteed Income Supplement -- even though he claims he has over a half million stashed away in a bank account in Australia.
To be fair, Corrections Canada does say that the law regarding OAS is that all Canadian residents 65 or over with at least 10 years of residency (or have the equivalent with a pension treaty country) get the pension, and that in Olson's case it is being held for him in trust in a bank account somewhere in Québec, near the pen in Sainte Anne des Plaines where he is presently serving his life sentence.
But something about that strikes me as quite wrong. This isn't your ordinary criminal we're talking about. This is a ruthless and psychotic child killer in a class of his own. It's almost as if we're paying him for the crimes he has committed. And the main reason he gets the supplement is that because all that time he's been in prison he hasn't had a job -- or if he did, one that didn't pay enough so he would have to pay into the CPP and / or the RRQ.
My much more conservative friends (including those who have kids) obviously are livid about this story, but to be honest so am I. It's not like he's ever going to touch the money because there's no way the Parole Board would even give him day passes (or maybe they would!). Shouldn't the money be going to compensation to the families (if they got any at all to begin with, from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board)? I remember the panic that struck Canada during the 1980s thanks to Olson.
I remain steadfast in my opposition to the death penalty even for cowards like him, but a pension is not like the right to vote. OAS is an entitlement, which is not a human right like suffrage is. And if you commit a crime that heinous you should forfeit the entitlement for at least that time while you're in jail. He's being taken care of at taxpayer's expense so why should he be double dipping?
My friends and I do find it amazing that the animal didn't kill his own child which makes it even more infuriating.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
2 comments:
Even if Olsen does have money sitting in a bank account he won't be able to spend it on more than cigarets, candy and maybe the odd bit of clothing. In other words, the vast proportion of the pension will be sitting there waiting to be either inherited by some relative (who may not want to touch it) or it will eventually end up back in government coffers which, I believe, is what happens with unclaimed estates. So for me this isn't a big deal to get upset with.
Well.maybe paying for on line porn.!!!.Olson or any other person in jail has no need for pension money.While many pensioners are living at the poverty level on the outside and the pension plan is in need of funds invested to keep it stable for every one's future.No one who is in jail should be allowed more than the basic welfare amount for candy or smokes,After all.They are their for a reason,To be punished.
Post a Comment