You asked two questions. First of all, regarding the civilian and regular members, civilian pensions are roughly equivalent to those for the public service. My understanding is that although they are still contributors under the RCMP SA, their entitlements are similar to those of public service employees. That's the reason I made the point at the outset. To us, it's not proper. It's not correct. These people, although they're in a different category of employees under the RCMP, are still members of the RCMP, currently under the same code of conduct, currently under the same administration manual, guidance, or anything we have to do as regular members.
They are subject to shift schedules. They are subject to ordered transfer. Therefore, to us, that population, which represents approximately 2,000 people--and I'm saying approximately, because it fluctuates--those civilian members are and should be recognized as being the same for the purposes of pension benefits under the RCMP SA, particularly because they are contributors to it. Why have a different way of calculating their benefits when in all fairness they're subject to the same RCMP Act?
The other aspect you spoke about, and which is very important to me, is how we must behave in representing our members. The speakers who preceded me suggested that the act doesn't permit that. However, if you carefully read the documents that were distributed to all committee members, you'll see that a number of practices, which were previously used by the RCMP, had not been consented to either. However, to be fair and equitable toward members, we proceeded with some calculations and buy-backs all the same. I accept that from the outset. That's a very good initiative on the RCMP's part.
However, while it was possible, in some cases, to do those calculations, which were not entirely consistent with the procedure, I humbly submit to you that you have the opportunity to do it in the same kind of environment, not only for a few, but for more than 10,000 cadets who are currently employed by the RCMP. They were all trained without pay or without allowances. They have therefore suffered twofold, if you compare them with the 8,000 current cadets, of whom I am one and whose division or representatives are here, who were paid during training.
To make it fair and equitable for those people, they must be recognized, even if it means subsequently making changes to accommodate them. Today you're going to make changes to adjust to actions that were not entirely regular, but that were valid for certain members. Those pension calculations were done with good intentions.
I claim that you can do the same thing for at least 10,000 of those people who are serving Canadians from day to day. That's my position.