Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. My friend, René, was supposed to provide a brief introduction, but we will keep our five minutes.
First of all, I would like to thank you for inviting us to appear again. I also want you to know that you are giving us hope. This is the first time, in seven or eight years of fighting to be heard, that so many lawmakers have been willing to listen. I hope that we will be explicit enough so that everyone will hear us and understand that what we are saying makes perfect sense.
Some people think that it is easy to live with pensions that have been cut. I would like to tell you about a mine back home, in Asbestos. Ninety-five per cent of asbestos workers have a single family income. It is not by working three shifts in the same week that their spouse could both work outside the home and raise their children. That is inconceivable. When you live on a pension that has been cut, it is the couple that is penalized—not just one person. It is very important that you always bear that in mind. In our area, we cannot go and work in a store here or there, because there aren't any. There is only an asbestos mine. Everyone has heard about Asbestos.
I also want you to know that we have presented a brief. We will use the five minutes we are allowed. I hope you have had time to read the brief that we forwarded to you. There is one correction on page 6—Mr. Steven Blaney's last name was misspelled. I actually phoned Mr. Blaney's office to apologize for that.
I would like to briefly come back to the comment made by the federal member of Parliament who referred to the 1,200 or 1,400… Why is this resurfacing at the federal level? Well, because I pay taxes to the federal government and because I am encountering all these problems as a result of Bill C-36, a federal statute that allowed a company to take advantage of bankruptcy protection and discharged our pensions as though we had never worked a day in our lives. And do not forget that, if we are here today, it is because we asked these people to explain why we were the only creditors not entitled to deduct their losses from their income tax.
My daughter is a pharmacist. She lost income as a result of what happened at the Jeffrey Mine and was able to deduct that loss on her income tax return. I lost a lot more than she did, and yet I am not allowed to deduct anything. Bill C-36 is a federal statute. If we are here today, it is because we are part of a federation. We are governed by two governments. As long as people continue to make that choice, that is the way it will be. Do not forget that if what happened to us had occurred in the public service—federal or provincial—tomorrow you would have a revolt on your hands. Maybe we should not have been such good little boys, because we did not kick up enough of a fuss. Keep in mind that there are 1,200 of us, 400 of whom now survive on the federal Guaranteed Income Supplement. That is another example that shows that the federal government can provide help from time to time. Because these individuals lost a significant amount of pension income, they are eligible for the federal Guaranteed Income Supplement, which they welcome.
The reason we are here today is that we firmly believe lawmakers in Quebec or Ottawa… They are lawmakers who are part of our governments, and we have every right to make the demands we feel are necessary. We do not feel as though we are being treated like full-fledged citizens.
Mr. Généreux, I understand what you meant. When it seems appropriate to say that this should be a provincial responsibility, then it is provincial. My response is that we pay taxes to the federal government, and therefore we are entitled to a tax credit. We have accepted the idea that the amount we get back will be less, so that people who have nothing will also get something. That is something we agreed to at Mr. Lessard's riding office.
Ladies and gentlemen, there is one thing I would like to say.