Human Resources committee  In Canada and Quebec, it was very difficult to peg the rates at which premiums are paid under the Quebec and Canada pension plans to a high enough level. Personally, the idea of "flexisecurity" scares me a bit because we are already having problems with a single well-defined syst

Human Resources committee  We see that there's still a pro-cyclical system in Bill C-50--the rates increase when unemployment increases--and we are not comfortable with that. Even though you can repay over more than one year, we're still not comfortable with the fact that premium rates will increase. It's

Human Resources committee  We would also be quite supportive of such an initiative. By the way, as you probably know, in the province of Quebec we carved out the parental insurance from the EI and it has been repatriated by the provincial government. It's a little more flexible this way. So I agree with

Human Resources committee  Yes, absolutely. You have to see this from two sides. At one point, the government decided to impose higher premiums than what was required, as suggested by the chief actuary. As a result, we have a "balloon" of over $54 billion. We need to consider two things: the money we wou

Human Resources committee  Sure. Basically what we're saying is that if we had this $15 billion actual reserve, what would happen in an economic downturn or in a recession is that we would be using this $15 billion to keep the premium rate at a stable level as much as possible. Normally $15 billion shoul

Human Resources committee  Hopefully you won't need the $15 billion in a single year. So it should be probably invested in some form of diversified portfolio, with a component of very safe, fixed-return assets, like Government of Canada one- to three-year bonds, for example, for at least part of it. Anothe

Human Resources committee  My expertise is more in the financial area than in the administrative area. You spoke about misappropriation of funds. This word has significant implications.

Human Resources committee  We proposed $15 billion. We came to $15 billion as being the excess cost of higher unemployment during a recession over the average cost of the program. That's approximately how we came to $15 billion. By the way, I think we support all the transparency features that are in Bill

Human Resources committee  I'd like to very quickly express one concern. With the fact that we have this funding of one year going forward, there's a definite risk that if things go very badly and we need to increase the premium rate by possibly more than 0.15% and we want to stick to the 0.15% ceiling, so

Human Resources committee  We think what is proposed in Bill C-50 could lead to greater transparency than what we have under the current system. We think the gain in transparency and independence would offset any possible decrease in efficiency.

Human Resources committee  The board will be independent, and the various parties involved may have greater representation on it. We think this would make for independence and greater openness to the needs of Canadians.

Human Resources committee  Yes.

Human Resources committee  That is exactly why we suggest a formula using a longer period and a $15 billion reserve. The chief actuary would be able to include the interest on this reserve when he recommends a premium rate. So the reserve could not exceed $15 billion. Each time it exceeded this figure, the

Human Resources committee  Good morning, honourable members. I will speak partly in French and partly in English. I hope it doesn't bother you too much. If it does, please let me know. My name is Bruno Gagnon, and I thank you for inviting the Canadian Institute of Actuaries to share our views on part 7 of