Bill C-27 (Historical)

An Act to amend the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985

This enactment amends the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985 to provide a framework for the establishment, administration and supervision of target benefit plans. It also amends the Act to permit pension plan administrators to purchase immediate or deferred life annuities for former members or survivors so as to satisfy an obligation to provide pension benefits if the obligation arises from a defined benefit provision.

Ethics

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that was not the question.

In October last year, the finance minister himself introduced Bill C-27, which would set up the same target benefit plans that he previously called for as executive chair of Morneau Shepell. The minister's family company called the bill a “positive step” and not surprisingly, welcomed its introduction. The fact is the finance minister's billion dollar family company will benefit directly from Bill C-27.

So again, specifically and clearly: why did the finance minister not recuse himself from discussions about Bill C-27?

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in 2013 when the current finance minister was the executive chair of Morneau Shepell, he said, “We need legislation enabling Target Benefit Plans”. Then, once he became finance minister, he introduced that legislation. The finance minister has been receiving tens of thousands of dollars a month from Morneau Shepell the entire time. That is a really obvious conflict. Why did the finance minister not recuse himself from discussions about Bill C-27?

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if he answered our questions, we would not have to be so noisy.

It took two years for the finance minister to carry out his plan, which he announced in 2013, to change the law so that his firm could make millions of dollars. That is how long it took for the minister to personally profit from a decision made by his government. Now, two years and millions of dollars later, the minister is telling us that he will sell his shares.

Does he take us for complete idiots? Does the Minister of Finance realize that this fairy tale for visionary millionaires is entirely unethical? Did he recuse himself from matters relating to Bill C-27, yes or no?

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this week, Canadians witnessed something never before seen in federal politics.

They watched as the Minister of Finance floundered around on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday. He was caught red-handed attempting to get small business owners, their employees, and farmers to foot the bill for his deficit spending.

We also discovered that he pocketed millions thanks to a bill he himself introduced, which is indisputably unethical.

Now that he has collected his bonus, will the Minister of Finance tell us if he participated in cabinet decisions about Bill C-27?

[Fiona Price, As an Individual]

Good morning. My name is Fiona Price. I'm here as one member of 180,000 National Association of Federal Retirees. I'm the vice-president of Peel-Halton, number 34.

Today I speak to Bill C-27, the act to amend pension benefits.

The suggested change causes trepidation. Will it affect those of us who are already retired? When we became government employees, we signed on in good faith and agreed to deferred compensation in exchange for our employment. To imply now that you are going to change how our monies are to be returned to us, after we have retired on a fixed income, is not in good faith. It's improper.

In 2015 Prime Minister Trudeau clearly promised our association in a letter to the then-president that defined plans, which “have already been paid for by employees and pensioners, should not be retroactively changed”. This seems to have been forgotten.

Retirement income security is essential for those of us who are already retired. Going forward, if you want to change the program, there will be no surprise to the younger generations signing on to work for the government, and they will be allowed to plan accordingly, as we did.

This topic also lends itself to ask that a minister for seniors be created, as we do need a dedicated voice advocating on our behalf. Seniors are the largest-growing demographic in Canada, contributing more than ever to our communities and economies.

I thank you for your time.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Mr. Speaker, Morneau Shepell thought that the Minister of Finance had placed his shares in a blind trust. We all thought he had placed his shares in a blind trust. He had not done that and in fact he was enacting legislation that would directly benefit him and Morneau Shepell.

I have a different question. Maybe the minister will answer this. At any time, did the minister discuss Bill C-27 with Morneau Shepell while he was the finance minister? At any time, did they discuss this bill?

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Mr. Speaker, in 2013, the executive chair of Morneau Shepell said, “We need legislation enabling Target Benefit Plans...in all Canadian jurisdictions”, so he made it happen. He became the Minister of Finance and he tabled the legislation himself. To make this conflict much worse, Morneau Shepell continued to pay that minister tens of thousands of dollars a month.

The question the minister has not answered is this. Why did he not recuse himself around discussions about Bill C-27?

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this government was elected on a promise of transparency and we are getting quite the opposite today.

The Minister of Finance and his company, Morneau Shepell, have benefited from the minister's actions. His company made money and the minister still holds shares in that company. He introduced Bill C-27, which directly increased profits at Morneau Shepell.

My question is simple: when did the Minister of Finance inform the Prime Minister that he was in conflict of interest and when did he recuse himself from any discussion on this bill?

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, in the few days after he personally introduced Bill C-27, a bill designed to attack the pensions of Canadians and help firms like Morneau Shepell, the value of Morneau Shepell stocks increased by 4.8%. For the finance minister's personal holdings, that represented a profit of over $2 million in just five days. That is more money than the average Canadian makes in a lifetime of work.

The minister constantly talks about serving the public. How does pocketing millions of dollars from his work as the minister do anything but serve himself?

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if he had such confidence in what he was doing, then why did he mislead all of his colleagues?

According to our information, in the five days following the introduction of Bill C-27, which will directly benefit Morneau Shepell and is a bill sponsored by the Minister of Finance himself, stocks in Morneau Shepell went up 4.8%. The Minister of Finance would have made more than $2 million profit on his shares.

He is an intelligent person. Does he not find there is perceived conflict of interest, since he was in a position to personally benefit from his own actions?

[Ron Watt, As an Individual]

Thank you, and good morning.

My name is Ron Watt. As you may have guessed, I'm a senior and I worked for the Canadian public service for 35 years. When I retired, I joined an organization that is now known as the National Association of Federal Retirees. I joined here in Windsor, am a proud member, and I continue to serve as the past president of that organization. We have about 850 members locally, and nationally we have about 180,000. That includes 60,000 ex-military personnel.

Today we have three points that we would like to leave you with for your consideration in the 2018 budget: one, secure retirements; two, strong health care; and three, a national seniors strategy. We feel these are the best ways to help seniors and their families.

On retirement security, I urge the government to scrap Bill C-27. This bill would introduce a new type of pension plan and target benefit pensions, while taking away retirement security and killing off a good defined benefit plan that people have worked for and that bring benefits back to their communities and their families.

For budget 2018, I believe the federal government should lead a national seniors strategy that builds on the home care and seniors housing investments that have been made so far. The strategy needs to include a national palliative and end-of-life care strategy and better pharmacare for seniors, and it must continue to tackle infrastructure investments with age-friendly communities and universal design standards in mind. To ensure residential needs are met, the government should appoint a minister responsible for seniors. This would allow public policy to be heard that impacts our age group.

In summary, these actions would lead to better productivity and a stronger economy, not just for seniors but for their families and Canadian communities.

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to appear. Good luck with your ongoing work.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, everyone knows that Bill C-27 furthers the private interests of the finance minister. The Conflict of Interest Act states that a minister is in a conflict “when he or she exercises an official power...to further his or her private interests or those of his or her relatives”.

Will the Prime Minister just admit that his Minister of Finance has violated the Conflict of Interest Act, or is he just too busy working hard for the French villa owners, or those who are working hard to become French villa—

Pensions

[Scott Duvall, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Certainly not supporting the middle class that is for sure, Mr. Speaker.

Workers at Sears Canada are very worried about whether their pensions will be protected, but guess who has been appointed to administer the Sears Canada pension plan? Morneau Shepell. This is a company that advocates transferring more risks from employer to employee.

The government promised it would fix our bankruptcy laws but it has done nothing.

Furthermore, if Bill C-27 becomes law, the finance minister will profit off workers getting stuck with weak pensions.

I have a simple question for the Prime Minister. Is this the real change he promised working Canadians?

Ethics

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the boss at Morneau Shepell told investors in 2013 that legislation was required to go after defined pension benefits and, voila, he introduced Bill C-27. Morneau Shepell told investors this legislation would be a game-changer.

The Prime Minister is talking about a gold standard of ethics. Gold for who, for the finance minister, who is now making $150,000 a month? A blind trust will not cut it. Will the Prime Minister withdraw Bill C-27, and his finance minister's blatant attack on the pension benefits of Canadian workers?

[Ruth Ellen Brosseau, NDP, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance stands to make millions in profit from a bill before Parliament that he himself wrote.

This may be the most blatant conflict of interest in history. It is undeniable that, if Bill C-27 were to become law, Morneau Shepell would reap greater profits, which would pour into the finance minister's pocket. That is totally unacceptable.

Will the Prime Minister admit that his Minister of Finance has utterly betrayed Canadians' trust?