Thank you for your testimony.
It is sometimes said that of all of the systems, capitalism is the lesser evil, but here we have an example of its worst effects. These testimonies are extremely compelling. I would like to make a few comments.
Someone said that the pension system was like an insurance system providing income, but I do not believe that that is the case. It is simply a salary that you agreed to set aside, along with the employer's contribution. Waiving these contributions for a certain length of time is as if you were not being paid your salaries, in practical terms. Obliging a company to take back these contributions or no longer pay contributions when solvency is over 125% is crazy, as you know. I think that we should go even further and say "Why not?", if the solvency is over 125%, so that these people get the picture.
The purpose of this 110% or 125% was to avoid tax loopholes. By attempting to resolve a tax problem, I believe that we created this gigantic pit in which you find yourselves. Yes, your claims are quite valid, but I think that we should be going even further. Not paying contributions is precisely comparable to what the federal government did, for instance, when it put its hands on the employment insurance fund. It is more or less the same type of theft.
Going back to what you said about bankruptcy, unpaid salaries are generally paid at the start. We talked about preferred creditors, and I believe that pensioners should be deemed to be this type of creditor, as they have not been paid earned salary, and should be treated just like the employees who were there working during the last two weeks. These people are given first consideration, at the same time as the revenue departments.
As far as the financing aspect is concerned, I agree with Ms. Urquhart. Let us not have any illusions. I worked in finance for nearly my entire life, and I can tell you that financiers basically have one responsibility and that is risk assessment. A company on the verge of bankruptcy obviously cannot find any financing. Let us take the example of Nortel. At one point a share cost $1,260, and that was when the shares were split into 10. Today, these shares are worth nothing. However, I am sure that all of the bankers in the world would have loaned Nortel money without adding one red cent to the interest rate because of the pension plan.
Having pensioners deemed to be preferred creditors would no doubt encourage financiers and shareholders to study the pension plans more closely and to make provisions should the managers—which you weren't—do something crazy.
You have come to us, but we are not the government. In fact, the only one here representing the government is the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance. I hope that this situation will encourage him to stop doing analyses and studies, to stop travelling around Canada. I believe that your request is clear. On page 9 of your document, you state that these changes will not cost the taxpayers any money. This is what we need to retain.
I would like to ask Mr. Fréchette, Mr. Langlois, Ms. Blanchard and Mr. St-Michel a question. What happened to the other programs that you were entitled to, such as the health insurance program?