I'm suggesting that, for instance, if I were to keel over, my proposed widow would be in a bad situation. She would never have enjoyed the pension splitting. And you have to realize that pension splitting isn't a big cost item, for a very big reason: the situation for a person my age--because statistically speaking, I'm already dead--is that once one partner dies, pension splitting disappears. So it isn't a big item, I don't think. But the point is that the widow, my widow, would then never have enjoyed the efforts of my last four years, for instance. In other words, it seems unfair that death has terminated the benefits.
I've had many calls, and CARP has had many letters, from widows. We talk about unattached women. I don't know the statistics, but I think today most of them have been married, and quite often they're widowed. So it's not like the old days. There's the element of “let's look to the future”. And if you have pension splitting, you're going to level the playing field eventually, and that widow, at least, would benefit from the accrued collection or the reserve you can build up in the estate. Because that's what happens. When I die, my pension goes with me.