I can respond to that question.
As far as I know, there are currently two proposals to expand the CPP, one of which you heard from the FTQ. It has been spearheaded by Bernard Dussault, who was a former chief actuary of the CPP. He's referring to it as a universal pension plan. It would involve expanding the replacement rate of the CPP over a 40-year period, which, of course, as you correctly point out, would not benefit those who are close to retirement now. His proposal is based on the fact that the CPP Act requires any changes to the plan to be fully funded. It would phase in increases in contribution rates over a very long period of time and would eventually provide a benefit that is approximately 70% or so of the person's pre-retirement earnings.
The option that I would personally favour is the one that's being proposed by the CLC, which is to double the replacement rate of the CPP from 25% of average annual earnings to 50%. They're suggesting it be phased in over a seven-year period. People who are currently retired would not benefit, of course, but it would provide a better pension much more quickly than the longer-term version.
CLC argues that people would be prepared to pay a little more into the plan. The contribution rates would have to increase, of course, but the increase would be phased in over time. I think it would be mandatory by definition, because the CPP is a mandatory plan. That's the option I would favour.