Ms. Lee, could you stick to the motion please? To the motion.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This motion just came in front of me and I am thinking aloud. My apologies. I am trying to explain why merits of making this come into effect at the end of this Assembly...I am trying to state the pros and cons of that. I can see the merits in this in the interest of the public. Since I disagree with the principle of the bill, I have to vote against it. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. To the motion. Mr. Handley.

I would like to speak to the motion. Yesterday, I listened carefully to everything that everyone had to say, and certainly a number of Members did make a good point in that we cannot be seen to be providing something to ourselves that we were not aware of when we ran for election. Clearly we understood what the pension was when each of us ran.

I do not want to be seen to be abusing my power, as someone said yesterday. That is not my intention. At the same time, as I mentioned yesterday, we have a surplus in our pension plan. This is not money that is coming out of the public purse. I support the proposed amendment. I think it makes sense that we vote this and have it come in with the next Legislative Assembly. That way, the voters can choose whether or not they like what we have done here. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

-- Applause

Thank you, Mr. Handley. To the motion. Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I know what the intent of the motion is, but like I stated earlier, coming from the 13th Assembly and then being here dealing with this Supplementary Retiring Allowances Act, it is pretty hard to sit here and be told by Members who have a full pension and basically have it made, and for Members who have served, in my case, once I finish with the 14th Assembly, it will be eight years with no pension. I find it self-serving that we are sitting here with a few individuals around us who have the full pension, have received the retirement assistance pension from another supplementary.

I have thought long and hard about what has happened in the 13th Assembly and then being here today, the same people who had a pension last time were giving us advice, and bad advice, in regard to how we dealt with it. I am not going to get burned twice on something that I feel that I have served, if not more than what is needed, to get the pension in the previous process, which was two terms or six years.

I am succeeding my six years and my two terms presently in the 14th Assembly. For someone who got the pension under that term to put this type of amendment or motion forth, I find it deplorable that they have a full pension, but for Members who basically should, under the rules that were previously established under the previous supplementary, have been able to qualify because of having two terms.

I for one will be voting against this on the principle that I do not think it is right for people who are eligible for a full pension, who basically got the golden handshake, telling us "Sorry, your quality of service in the Legislature is less important than prior Members." I for one take offense to that and I for one will be voting against this.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. To the motion. Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is defeated. Clause 5, page 3. Mr. Krutko.

Mr. Chairman,

I MOVE that clause 5 of Bill 7 be amended by deleting subsections 6(5) and (6) and by substituting the following:

(5) A Member who files an election under paragraph 5.2(2)(a) of the Supplementary Retiring Allowances Act shall contribute to the fund, for each month or portion of a month during the period of service commencing December 7, 1999 and ending immediately before the day on which a Member files the election, 2.5 percent of 1/12 of the lesser of:

1. (a) the pensionable remuneration and earnings paid to the Member in the year in which the month occurs; and
2. (b) the defined benefit limit divided by two percent.

(6) A Member who files elections under both paragraph 5.2(2)(a) and subsection 5.3(2) of the Supplementary Retiring Allowances Act shall contribute to the fund for each month or portion of a month during the period of credited service described in subsection 5.3(1) of the Supplementary Retiring Allowances Act, 2.5 percent of 1/12 of the lesser of:

1. (a) the pensionable remuneration and earnings paid to the Member in the year in which the month occurs; and
2. (b) the defined benefit limit divided by two percent.

(7) A contribution by a Member under subsection (5) or (6) must be made by way of deduction in accordance with subsection 6.1 during the 14th Legislative Assembly.

The motion has been circulated. There is a motion on the floor. The motion is in order. To the motion. Mr. Dent.

Mr. Chairman, I was wondering if we might have some explanation about what this amendment would accomplish. Perhaps the Law Clerk or somebody, Ms. Buckland, could put it in plain English for us please?

Ms. Buckland, could you provide some information on that? Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Buckland. Mr. Dent.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Ms. Buckland.

Thank you, Ms. Buckland. To the motion. Mr. Dent.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess, obviously if I was proposing that the pension not start until the 15th Assembly, I would have to just be on record as opposing this amendment, which would allow it to go back to the 13th Assembly even more easily.

I think the Members of the 13th Assembly voted democratically to remove that pension. I just was reviewing Hansard and I noticed that neither Mr. Krutko nor I were in the House when that vote took place. It was a recorded vote and neither of us were there.

I think the vote was made. It was a decision made by the 13th Assembly and we have to respect that. As I said, I do not have a problem with modifying the pension, but I think it is important that we not be seen to be doing it for ourselves and have it come in for the 15th Assembly and let them decide whether or not they are going to keep it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. To the motion. Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a question as well on the meaning of this clause. I wonder if either the Law Clerk, Clerk of the House or the legal counsel could provide me with the information as to approximate value of the contribution that would come out of the surplus budget to reinstate this, for the average salary of a Member for the last Assembly?

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Hamilton.

Thank you, Mr. Hamilton. Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Am I correct in thinking then that $86,000, or whatever figure we have here, is 2.5 percent of the salary over four years? Is that what it works out to?