Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would first like to remind my esteemed colleagues that the historic compromise of the federation was to establish a federation, not a legislative union. It was decided that the provinces would manage certain powers, and the delivery of health care is one of them. I want us to have better health care in Quebec. When I vote in National Assembly elections, I make sure that I vote for a party that will work towards that.
According to the Constitution, the federal government's role here when it comes to health care, the historic compromise, is to properly fund it. That's not happening right now; it's a matter of fiscal imbalance. That's why my party is fighting tooth and nail to resolve this issue. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Having said that, I want to thank my colleagues for letting us have a few meetings like this to hear from witnesses, who are raising very important issues. At the end of parliamentary sessions, I always get the impression that the government is in a bit of an ivory tower. It's good to face reality and the heart-wrenching testimony we're hearing today. I'd like to thank the witnesses for accepting our invitation on such short notice. I also tip my hat to the clerk, who organized all of this. It's a remarkable job done in an incredibly short amount of time. I'd also like to thank the whips of the various parties for clearing up the schedule so that we could hear from the witnesses, as we are doing this afternoon.
My questions will be for Mr. Céré.
Thank you for accepting our invitation on short notice, for running to get a headset and for being here with us. Your testimony was very much appreciated.
I'd like to discuss four topics with you. I'm going to have more than one round; I don't think we're going to get to all four in one round.
First, I'd like to come back to the long-awaited and much-promised reform that's not happening. That was the purpose of your testimony.
Second, there were significant deficits during the pandemic. The government was there and paid down the deficits, except for the deficits in the EI fund. Because the law requires that the EI fund be balanced every seven years, the workers who pay into it are being forced to eliminate the deficit. The government is taking $17 billion out of their pockets. In my opinion, if that doesn't change, it will be impossible to reform the system. Something should have been included in Bill C‑47 to deal with that. However, there's nothing there.
So I'd like to hear your comments on those two things, but I want you to know that I'll be asking you later about two things in Bill C‑47. First of all, it's just an extension of the EI spring gap pilot project, which you talked about. That's in part 4, division 35. Next is part 4, division 38. I don't know if you've had time to look at the reform of the Social Security Tribunal, but it's essentially what had already been proposed and what's being repeated here.
However, first, let's talk first about the obligation to balance the EI fund and the government's refusal to pay down the deficit resulting from the pandemic, and then about the long-awaited reform that's not happening.
I'm listening.