Ms. Cutler, my husband is 60 years old and he just retired. He was quite happy about it.
You wrote in your brief that you do not want people to be forced to retire at the age of 70. I for one is against that. As I said earlier, some small towns have only one or two industries. There are people who have worked all their life, who are working hard, in the construction industry or any other sector, and who are getting tired.
If there are lay-offs in an industry and if we let go the younger people aged 22, 23 or 24 instead of letting go older workers aged 60, 62 or 63, these young people will not stay in town. They will move and go find work elsewhere. When the older people reach the age of 63, 64 or 65, that is in two or three years, they will leave and the younger ones will no longer be there to take over, which will create a second shortage. There will no longer be any relief.
I believe that a person who has the opportunity to retire at 60, as my husband has just done, can give some training. He is a professional buyer with 35 years experience. He does not want to work anymore, because he has had enough, but he is prepared to contribute a day or two and give some training to the younger generation.
We hear people talk about the lack of relief. It is not by keeping the people at work until the age of 70 and by laying-off the 22 or 23 year old that we will solve this problem. That is my opinion. What is your opinion on this matter?