Finance Committee on June 1st, 2010

[Louis Plamondon, Bloc, Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour, QC]

As regards the retirees, I would just like to point out that, in some cases, these individuals have been receiving their pension for 15 or 20 years, only to suddenly see it cut by one third because, at the time of the closure, the $15 million that was needed was no longer there. So, these are people who may have retired at 58 or 60 years of age, and are now 75 or 80.

[Daniel Paillé, Bloc, Hochelaga, QC]

Pardon me for interrupting you. You are well acquainted with the seven-minute rule. You have been on this side before. Do we know what proportion of workers were already retired? Is there a chart—

[Louis Plamondon, Bloc, Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour, QC]

There were all retired. There is a retirees' association, and often these are individuals who have been retired for quite a few years. People who have been retired for 10 or 12 years must represent more than half of the former Atlas workers. And it is the same for the Jeffrey Mine.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

At the present time, there are still between 300 and 400 workers at the Jeffrey Mine. They have also seen their pension funds melt away. There are almost 1,000 retirees.

[Daniel Paillé, Bloc, Hochelaga, QC]

However, in the case of the Jeffrey Mine, you say there are still several hundred people who are working. How would this cover them? Would it cover them? Because this is a situation which is frozen in time, we do not have to concern ourselves with them. In that case, we would only be considering the 1,200 people at the Jeffrey Mine?

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

That is correct. If the new legislation means they recover their virtual losses, they will be better off.

[Daniel Paillé, Bloc, Hochelaga, QC]

So, it is clear for everyone—at least, we hope—that this would not apply either to Nortel, to a car manufacturer in Ontario, for example, or to other companies, which is something that may be of concern to government members, who might wonder how big the hole is. But it has been completely plugged.

[Louis Plamondon, Bloc, Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour, QC]

That is right. The others are already protected.

Since you referred to the auto workers, I just want to say that with the last loan provided by the government, $250 million was set aside by the company to bail out the pension fund. That money has now been paid back to the government. That shows that there has in the past been indirect government assistance to deal with specific situations.

[Daniel Paillé, Bloc, Hochelaga, QC]

I understand. What occurred in the auto industry clearly shows that, when the government provided loans, it demanded that the company pay and provide compensation. In this case, because there is a financial hole in two specific companies, there is a need to treat these people fairly.

[Louis Plamondon, Bloc, Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour, QC]

Exactly.

[Daniel Paillé, Bloc, Hochelaga, QC]

Take your time answering. We have all the time we need.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

No, your time is up.

Thank you, Mr. Paillé.

Mr. Généreux, please.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

To begin with, I would like to address some comments to the workers who are here with us today.

If our government has voted against this bill up until now, it is not out of a lack of compassion. I am a recent arrival to Ottawa and I can tell you that this has absolutely nothing to do with a lack of compassion on the part of our government. We are very sorry about the unfortunate impact these events have had on you in the last number of years.

Having said that, Mr. Bellavance and Mr. Plamondon, you know that we have been holding consultations for a number of months now on everything dealing with retirement funds in Canada. Those consultations are not only being held in Ottawa. We are also consulting in many provinces across the country. The provincial governments have agreed to come on side and help to develop the kinds of reforms that would improve our health care systems and avoid the kind of thing that happened to plant workers in your region.

My first question is as follows. Why did you introduce your bill again when we are in the process of examining all these issues? What is your true intention?

[Louis Plamondon, Bloc, Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour, QC]

This bill was introduced well before the government expressed any intention of holding the consultations you have referred to. It was even introduced in the previous Parliament. An election was called and it died. So, we introduced it again.

However, as we see it, this is clearly a very special case. As a result, a special piece of legislation and a special settlement are in order. The analysis being done by the government and its consultations with the other provinces on all pension plans—which is a good idea, in fact—are intended to result in a more general policy that would satisfy everyone and ensure that situations like these do not recur. The proper process was followed for the bill.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

They will not recover what they lost, whatever mechanism we put in place.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Yes, I know that.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

On February 5 last, you had not yet begun your consultations. After the election, we introduced the bill again.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

I know that.

I have a great deal of respect for the workers who are here today. I would like to get to the bottom of this situation by asking some questions.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

That is what we are here for.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

You have drafted a bill which, based on what you said, is aimed at two companies in Canada. That is pretty much what you just told us.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

That is how it turned out.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

I am going to try and stick to arguments when commenting and not be arrogant, if possible.

Do you think that every time two companies have a problem in Canada, we should come back to Parliament to pass a bill?

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Personally, I would have no problem with doing that. I would not be ashamed to do it. And I am not ashamed to have done what we did.

We might have found others, but it turns out there are only two. These are people who have been cheated, and who, as I said earlier, lost between 28% and 58% of their pension funds.

I believe that our role, as legislators, is to help people. These individuals came to meet with us, asking what we could do under the tax system to help them out. And the idea of doing this causes us no discomfort. We have calculated that, for these two companies, the cost would amount to between $3 million and $5 million a year. The role of lawmakers and government is to help these people.

[Louis Plamondon, Bloc, Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour, QC]

When we started this, there were two companies. We did some research, because we thought there could be more. However, we realized that, at the present time, there are only two.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Pardon me, Mr. Plamondon, are you telling me that in Canada at the present time—I am not talking only about Quebec, but of Canada—