Raynald, I am sure you remember that starting in about 1990, the Employment Insurance program began to be cut back. The Employment Insurance fund began to record a surplus around 1994. The surplus went as high as $55 billion. At that point, the money started to be rolled into the government's Consolidated Revenue Fund and was used for all kinds of other things.
At the same time, access to Employment Insurance started to become a lot more difficult. We went from weeks to hours. Penalties are now much tougher. An offence that previously resulted in a three-week penalty now leads to total disqualification. Obviously, in regions where employment sources are extremely limited and where there is no major industry generating jobs all year long, gaining access to employment insurance is nothing short of heroic, if I can put it that way. The fact is that for several years now, only about 45% of the people contributing to employment insurance can access benefits, whereas between 85% and 90% of contributors had access in the 1990s. It is becoming increasingly difficult. Our demands over time have been aimed at bringing down the number of hours required to qualify, obviously. Everything we are hearing this morning clearly indicates just how difficult it is to compensate for lost income in the industry.
The government has an obligation to balance regional economies and support people throughout the regions, rather than forcing them to leave home to earn a decent income, so they can feed their families. Stakeholders are all asking for the same thing with respect to employment insurance: a reduction in the number of hours, and extended benefit periods so that people can cover the complete cycle when there is no work in the region.
Of course, if the unemployment rate is around 8% or 10%, there is a greater possibility of finding work. But here, where the unemployment rate has always hovered between 17% and 21%, there clearly are very few opportunities to find work outside of the tourist season, which has become very short. That is the reason why we have consistently been asking that the Employment Insurance Act be adjusted.
It is not a question of money. There is plenty of money in the Employment Insurance Fund. Every year it generates a surplus of $3 or $4 billion. Our demands could easily be met with the money currently being paid into the fund through contributions by both employers and employees.