Human Resources committee  The positions that the Canadian Bar Association takes are consensus positions. They are all vetted by the different law sections, in this case the privacy law, constitutional law, and pension benefits law sections. They are then vetted by the branch chairs in each province, and then by the executive of the Canadian Bar Association, as well as the Legal and Law Reform Committee.

Human Resources committee  It's not a likelihood, but I think a certainty. We know that it was already being challenged; I believe that was in Alberta. I think that if Bill C-4 were not moving forward, there would be a number of other challenges. A number of provinces had also let it be known that they would potentially challenge it as well.

Human Resources committee  Registered pension plans were exempt through some amendments, but they were one of the very few instances of an exemption. Other items, such as retirement compensation arrangements, training benefits—all of those—were not exempt. The definition of a labour trust under Bill C-377 was broad enough to include any fund that had union members in it.

Human Resources committee  All I can say is that we made our submissions. We made our appearances. Nobody then spoke to us about why some suggestions were not being heeded. I don't know what actually transpired. All I know is what submissions we made.

Human Resources committee  I appeared with former Justice Bastarache at the Senate hearings and I heard, first hand, his opinion. What I also know, as a lawyer, is that even amongst judges there are oftentimes dissenting opinions, and not all judges, even on the Supreme Court of Canada, are always in agreement.

Human Resources committee  Only a court is ever going to render a decision on that.

Human Resources committee  I certainly can't speak to what their intentions were. What I can say is that we made submissions to the House committee and appeared before the Senate twice. In fact, we gave very detailed submissions in opposition to the bill. We also stated that if the bill were to proceed, here was a list of the types of labour trusts that should be exempt to make sure that the ambit of the bill was curtailed.

Human Resources committee  There are about 36,000.

Human Resources committee  Well, we primarily felt that it was a violation of the freedom of association and freedom of expression because it required an inordinate amount of disclosure from unions regarding their political activity, which we've heard a fair bit about. Also, the unions operate in a bargaining situation, and if one side in the bargaining process has to disclose a lot more information than the other, it certainly puts one side at a disadvantage in that bargaining.

Human Resources committee  Given the detailed type of disclosure that Bill C-377 would require, certainly a lot of commercial and possibly commercially sensitive information would have been disclosed on a public website. Service providers to trade unions and probably more so to the so-called labour trusts would have had to think twice before entering into those kinds of commercial transactions if they knew that things such as their billing process, their billing amounts, and hourly rates would all be publicly disclosed.

Human Resources committee  I can respond, first of all, to the public aspect. It's true that the federal government and several provinces have disclosure of salary legislation, but Bill C-377 was the first instance of legislation requiring a private organization to disclose salaries. No other private industry is subject to that kind of disclosure.

Human Resources committee  Thank you. Mr. Chair, vice-chairs, and honourable committee members, I'm pleased to be here today on behalf of the Canadian Bar Association. The Canadian Bar Association is a national association representing approximately 36,000 members of the legal profession. Our primary objectives include improvements in the law and the administration of justice.

Finance committee  What it would have to address is ensuring that registered pension plans are exempt, health and welfare trusts are exempt, training trust funds are exempt, supplementary unemployment benefits are exempt, and deferred profit-sharing plans are exempt.

Finance committee  Yes, and group RRSPs. I also mentioned the provincial workers compensation funds. There's such a myriad of funds that are captured by the current definition of trust funds that once we start exempting all of these entities I've started to list—and it's certainly not an exhaustive list—what's the purpose of that definition any longer?

Finance committee  I don't understand—