Senator Griffin: Thank you for the answer. That was information I had not previously been given, so I’m glad to receive that. In spite of my gladness in receiving it, I’m still concerned about the shortcoming. The government has given you information as to why it cannot do this. If the government chose to, it could apply additional conditions to make this happen. I’m still hopeful that the government will continue to review how it handles bankruptcies and these educational plans. My belief is that if the government wanted to do this, it could. That’s not a question but a statement; I’m sorry.

Hon. Diane F. Griffin introduced Bill S-236, An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act and the Employment Insurance Regulations (Prince Edward Island).

(Bill read first time.)

Hon. Diane F. Griffin: Honourable senators, this is a question for the Government Representative in the Senate. It’s going to sound familiar to him because I have asked it before, I believe in the last Parliament, and since I haven’t gotten an answer and since it’s important, I’m back.

My question is related to this: In 2003, the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce recommended that the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act be amended to exempt funds in a Registered Education Savings Plan from seizure in bankruptcy, provided that two conditions are met: that the plan is locked in and the contributions to the plan in the one year prior to the bankruptcy are paid by the trustee for distribution to creditors.

Registered Retirement Savings Plans, or RRSPs, were exempted from seizure in bankruptcy in 2009. Both the RRSPs and the RESPs are government-backed vehicles for financial planning, but only one is secure in the event of bankruptcy. I’m wondering why that is and does the government intend to change its policy related to Registered Education Savings Plans and bankruptcy? Thank you.