Fine then.
I drew up these charts on my own PC. They show the situation of my immediate family members. Chart 1 shows the investment curve of my grandchildren's RESPs. As you can see, the situation was on the upswing prior to October 31. As of November 1, a downward trend set in. Further on, there are signs of improvement, but only because additional investments were made in January. This chart reflects only to my grandchildren's RESPs.
The next chart shows my daughter's RRSPs. You can clearly see the impact of the November 1 decision and the subsequent stability. Clearly, there has been no real recovery.
The next page contains a chart showing my son-in-law's RRSP. There was a downturn, followed by a recovery because we reinvested funds from elsewhere. These funds were specifically reinvested in income trusts.
The next page shows my spouse's RRSP. I don't think any comments are necessary.
The same applies to the page showing my own RRSP.
The last page shows the situation of one of my sisters.
Obviously, these are personal and private documents. I'd like to ask a lawyer who is here today, namely Ms. Diane Ablonczy, to collect these documents after the meeting or after your in camera session. These are personal documents and I don't intend to bemoan my fate any longer.
My file also contains long-term planning and information about RRIFs. According to my projections, retirees won't be able to get by with a 4.5% rate of return. They may be able to hold on a little longer with a 6% rate of return, but if they are to truly survive, ideally their RRSPs needs to generate a return of about 8%. In this case, the retiree will pay considerably more tax and when he dies, the government will obviously take its share before the children and grandchildren get theirs. It's not difficult to maintain an RRSP when you are healthy.
While the Minister of Finance may well say that he works to pay bills for the current year, we are all left to worry about the years ahead, and we do worry.
I won't bore you with any more figures or personal tales.
Let me relate a simple story to you. In the fall of 2004, I invested some money in a company in Saint-Léon, Manitoba, that produced wind energy. I was entitled to tax credits from the federal and Quebec governments.
No doubt Mr. Paquette will hate me for contributing to the fiscal imbalance.
Subsequently, Ontario's Algonquin Power took over this operation. This facility operated in Manitoba, while investors come from across Canada, including Quebec.
As a result of your plan, Algonquin Power will probably be privatized. The Government of Canada will lose its subsidy, as will the Government of Quebec. As a small investor, the decision represents for me a permanent loss of revenue. Algonquin Power is no Ponzi scheme. However, it generates a 10% rate of return on my initial investment.
Therefore, I have a good question—