Finance committee  That's right, and if you would like to hit all the bullets, as far as I'm concerned I would love to test to see how many people would be happy and how many people would be angry—but I'd be very happy.

Finance committee  I do agree with that, but I think I have also mentioned to you in the past that the security of the pension plan should not and must not be dependent on the security of the sponsor. In other words, if the sponsor were to become unsecured and go into bankruptcy and cease to operat

Finance committee  It isn't just that, although that does play a role. There's more than one reason. Currently, and it will change under these new proposed rules, pension plan sponsors are required to evaluate their plans only every three years if they're already fully funded. They don't have to do

Finance committee  The contributions would be made according to the previous evaluation, which could be two or three years old. So they would say, well, it looks like you only have to contribute whatever, say $10 million, but because the market is underperforming at the time, maybe they really shou

Finance committee  I can be very brief. The answer would be yes. I think it's a good option. I would only quibble with the word “solution”. It's something that would be very helpful, I think, because the QPP would be able to invest the money and the plan might grow along with the rest of the funds

Finance committee  Well, there's nothing I like more than encouraging a sponsor to go to 105%. One has to recognize the incentives for sponsors. It may be the case that on a voluntary basis they'd be prepared to do it, and perhaps some would. I was delighted to see, for instance, that the rule in t

Finance committee  That's correct.

Finance committee  It would be the 20% a year rule. That's correct, and there would be no conditions.

Finance committee  I can only speculate about that. Undoubtedly, there have been discussions on both sides, pensioners versus sponsors. Of course, sponsors are looking for some flexibility in their obligations from a financial point of view. I suspect that might have something to do with it, but I

Finance committee  Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Bell Pensioners' Group represents the interests of some 31,000 retirees from Bell Canada. We're also a founding member of the Canadian Federation of Pensioners, and, collectively, these two member organizations represent some 150,000 Canadians across