Mr. Horner (Crowfoot):

The Bishop will never be able to veto an application?

No.

Mr. Martin:

No.

Mr. Horner (Crowfoot):

In other words, each individual will make his own applications? Anyone can get an old age pension in Canada if they fill out a form.

I will pause there. I then went on to deal with another matter. So the individual would make his own application. But the bill says applications must be made in prescribed form for certification. The minister concerned is, I suppose, the Minister of National Revenue (Mr. Stanbury).

Clause six says the minister shall certify a religious sect or division for the purposes of exemption in certain circumstances. I should like the minister to answer this question. If the bishop of the Old Order of Mennonites, for example, were to apply for certification, would that application automatically include all his following, the whole flock among those wishing to opt out, or would each of the individuals concerned need to apply for certification? I go on to deal with this point in a series of questions reported at page 26 of the same committee proceedings.

Mr. Horner (Crowfoot):

Anyone can get an old age pension in Canada if they fill out a form. How do you know, Mr. Snyder, that absolutely none of your people, the people you are representing are getting an old age pension? There is no religious form. The Department of National Revenue has no way of knowing what a man's religion is when they send out his old age pension.

Our information is based on the circulating of the ministers who know who is in good standing. I think you can appreciate that when you live in a small community and you live so closely together as the Old Order Brethren do, and I am talking about close associations with persons, it is almost impossible for one person to be doing too much that other people do not know about. I know there have been cries in parliament about bugging and this, I suppose, is a form of bugging when you know what your neighbour is doing all the time.

What has this specifically to do with the old age pension? It has this to do with it. If the bishop could certify his whole flock, then any individual member of that flock could supply a social security number and pay premiums if he wanted to, because nowhere in the application is it specified that a person's religion need be mentioned. So, the department would not know whether he had been certified by the Bishop or not as desiring exemption. Mr. Snyder went on to say:

I am simply saying that on the circulation of the bishops we have this information. Now, if you want to press me to the wall and say there is not one person in the whole group who has ever made application, obviously, I could be tried, but I am . . .

Mr. Horner (Crowfoot):

In other words, nobody has proof.

Mr. Martin:

Personally, I know of such a situation in the brotherhood where an older man at the prison-

Canada Pension Plan

I think that must be a misprint; I think it should be "community".

-decided on his own behind the curtains, but the situation has been corrected. It is not tolerated.

Certainly, the bill is not clear. The clause provides that the minister shall certify a religious sect or a division of a religious sect. Do those words mean that each individual will have to be certified, or the whole sect? As I have said, before the committee the Old Order Mennonites stated that the bishop would not be able to veto any application. In other words, if an individual member wanted to get out of the Canada Pension Plan, then as I understand it he would apply to do so and the bishop would not have the power to veto his application. I suppose such an individual could also apply to join the Canada Pension Plan. If the bishop found out an application had been made, I suppose he could ask the applicant to leave his church or following; but that is beyond the purview of our study. That is their concern, not ours.

Under the provisions of the bill, any money collected since 1970 will be returned to the individuals concerned, I suppose on their application. I believe that it should be for the individual to declare whether he is in the Canada Pension Plan or out of the plan, rather than a whole group being certified. If it is left up to the individual, there is a certain degree of freedom. A member of the modern Men-nonite faith can apply to get out of the CPP, but leaving it to the bishop is directly opposed to the wishes of the Mennonites who appeared before the committee. Because Mr. Martin clearly said:

If this bill passes, the person's standing will determine it.

Then, I asked them whether the bishop would be able to veto, and both Mr. Snyder and Mr. Martin said no. The clause refers to a religious sect or a division of a religious sect, and I should like to know what that means. Is a division of a religious sect one-half of the following, one-quarter or one-tenth? Or is it just one person within the following?

For some strange reason, the Minister of National Revenue was not asked to appear before the committee which studied this bill to explain exactly how this money that has been collected from these people is going to be returned to them or how these people will be exempted. Surely, we should be able to ask the minister a couple of questions on that, particularly the question who can apply to get out of the plan, and whether if an individual applies the Department of National Revenue will automatically check off his name with the bishop, thereby giving power of veto to the bishop. Or is a person going to make an individual application to have himself and perhaps his family exempted? These questions make a major difference to the application of the act. If application is left to the individual with no power of veto given to the bishop, then anyone can apply to be exempt from the Canada Pension Plan on religious grounds providing they can convince the minister that their religious tenets and teachings are such that they wish to provide for themselves if they become disabled or retire.

I know my hon. friends in the NDP party-I always add the word "party"; they are just a group really and I should

Canada Pension Plan

call them the NDP group-will shudder at the thought that this is the beginning of the erosion of the compulsory aspects of the Canada Pension Plan. Four per cent of the Old Order Mennonites in Canada want to get out of the plan; the other 96 per cent may at some later date, if premiums rise and it is beneficial for them to do so.

I read the newspapers and am aware that this government follows very closely the teachings of Quebec. If Quebec says that the pension plan should be changed, then the government will change it. In Quebec, the premiums are now nearly double because of the amount of money collected, so without alarming anyone unduly we can rest assured that our contributions to the plan next year will be nearly double what they are this year, and that in the next session of parliament the Minister of National Health and Welfare will bring in another of these little bills and change the whole concept of the plan.

Taxes never go down, it seems; they just go up and up, and without a doubt the stage will come when many individuals want to get out of the plan and will ask for certification by the minister because they say their tenets and teachings are such as to enable them to provide for themselves when they become old or disabled, or for that matter widowed.

I hope the minister will clear up this question. I realize I can only speak once on any motion and this does handicap me to some extent because I should like to pursue a line of questioning with the minister on this point. As I say, the committee never called him before it, and this is part of my complaint about the way the committee handled the bill. They were slightly less than diligent in their examination of what may be the beginning of the erosion of the Canada Pension Plan if the minister readily certifies the exemption of too many people, or if he takes the bishop's word that his flock is really several times larger than it actually is. The plan, in other words, will fail to be universal in its application if we continue to allow people to get out of the plan. The principle on which the plan was founded was that of universality. This is why participation was compulsory. This aspect is now being eroded. This particular part will determine how great that erosion might be in years ahead.

Perhaps the minister could explain what is meant by "certificate" and who will apply for certification. Will it be the bishop of the church or a minister in charge of one single Hutterite community, or will the bishop of the Hutterite group in Canada apply for a certificate across the board? As I understand their religion, there are two groups of Hutterites in Canada and perhaps one from each group would be required to apply for certification. I think this is a matter that should be cleared up, and perhaps the minister could give us an explanation.

Hon. Robert Stanbury (Minister of National Revenue):

Mr. Speaker, if that is the only question I will try to answer it. There is a clear provision in the bill requiring certification by a spokesman for a sect or division, as well as application for exemption by the individual. The bill attempts to allow enough flexibility, recognizing that not every religion is monolithic, to administer the intention of parliament as it will be stated if we should pass this bill.

The amendment proposed would remove the need for religious groups to apply for certification. Of course, it is this information which would allow the minister to satisfy himself that the criteria had been met. I suggest it would be quite impractical to simply delete the lines proposed by this amendment. This would, in fact, deprive the minister of the means to exercise the controls I think parliament would expect him to exercise in order to see that the exemptions offered here are not abused.

Mr. Horner (Crowfoot):

Would the minister permit one question?

Mr. Deputy Speaker:

Would the minister permit a question by the hon. member for Crowfoot (Mr. Horner)?

Mr. Stanbury:

Yes, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Horner (Crowfoot):

May an individual apply for certification for himself and his family? Did I understand correctly that this is the minister's answer?

Mr. Stanbury:

Mr. Speaker, I referred to the provisions in the bill which require that not only may an individual apply for an exemption, but that there must be a certification obtained by the minister from a spokesman of the sect or division to which the individual belongs.

Mr. Horner (Crowfoot):

In other words, you are giving the bishop a veto?

Mr. Stanbury:

No.

Mr. Deputy Speaker:

Is the House ready for the question?

Question.

Mr. Deputy Speaker:

The question is on amendment No. 4 proposed by the hon. member for Crowfoot (Mr. Horner). All those in favour will please say yea.

Yea.