Government Operations committee  Absolutely. As you know, I used to be the chair of CRTC. Those are the lines we were discussing in our task force, saying that it could be not strictly to regulate the pricing of stamps, but to regulate all the players in the parcel business. Rather than having a price cap or a ceiling cap, you can have a floor cap.

Government Operations committee  We didn't push as far as how it can be realigned, but definitely those analyses and studies have to be done in terms of, if you do this, what does it impair? It has to be pushed and—

Government Operations committee  We came to an early conclusion that we've come into the digital age, so, first, we have to recognize the fact that it has changed—not strictly for postal services. It has changed for many other areas of our lives, not only business. That recognition is very important, because then we can, as we are bringing for consideration, do some gestures in the short and mid-term such as pursuit of community mailboxes—excluding, of course, people with mobility problems and dense downtown populations—but even that will not really ensure the future.

Government Operations committee  I'll let my friend Marena answer, because she is our expert in HR issues. If you are referring to the latest terms that were negotiated, they were negotiated towards the end of our work. What we think is more central to the analysis we've done is the average age of all the workers and the possibility to work the transformation with the decline of workers going on retirement —

Government Operations committee  Definitely, we worked with Oliver Wyman, who have international expertise, especially in pricing. I don't know what you've heard in your consultations, but I know what we read from our surveys. From the surveys we have read that maybe Canadians are prepared to have a smaller increase, according to inflation.

Government Operations committee  We heard that.

Government Operations committee  No.

Government Operations committee  No, it belongs to government to raise those, because when you consider this, it has a negative impact on other considerations, and we didn't feel we had the liberty to really entertain that idea.

Government Operations committee  But we stated it in our report.

Government Operations committee  Good morning. Good morning everyone. It's our pleasure to be back to meet the parliamentary committee that has been working very hard, from what we've heard. We're quite pleased to hear that, because it means that you'll come up with good recommendations. On my right is Marena McLaughlin, who you know already; and Mr.

Government Operations committee  On the contrary. Overall, the people who came to see us sometimes presented a report and sometimes we just had a conversation. Some brought us their brief later on, but the information we gathered was very relevant.

Government Operations committee  As to Canada Post, I didn't mention it earlier but I should have. Mr. Chair, I should have mentioned that we had full collaboration, because the context and the institution are complex. So that was very important to us. We also met with the four unions. Absolutely, we had their full cooperation.

Government Operations committee  Actually, no one likes change too much. However, after we explain how and why, and we do it with the appropriate nuances, we are convinced that Canadians can adapt to these changes.

Government Operations committee  As in a lot of labour-intensive businesses, reality takes precedence. Despite all the distinctions that there might be in terms of leave or absences, the fact still remains that, in total, labour costs represent a fixed equivalent of about 70% of Canada Post's total expenses. Ms.

Government Operations committee  It is like the $90 million amount. It's a long-term projection. We are going to have to wait for the other quarters to see how everything is really going to work out. The fact is that the basic equation that makes costs very high in the business, which is essentially in delivering parcels, cannot be sustainable, shall we say.