I don't want to come back to the moving of employees mentioned by Mr. D'Amours. I've been sitting on this committee for two days now and I feel as if I were in the National Hockey League where employers make higher bids to obtain qualified employees whereas others are deprived of their workers.
For example, in the neighbouring district, there is the Olymel company which employed experienced, skilled people. It shut down to go and settle in Winnipeg. Something is wrong; there was an industry in place, with skilled employees. The company moved to Winnipeg, knowing full well that there was a shortage of labour there. I don't sit on the board so I cannot tell whether the company is well managed or not. I think this decision lacks logic. Those people are 48 years old, 49 years old, 50 years old or 52 years old. Women work. I don't think they will go, they will leave their families to move to Winnipeg. Mexicans won't do it, why should Quebeckers or Canadians do it?
I have some difficulty with your proposal. Why do industries that employ qualified people close their doors to move to Alberta although there is a labour shortage in the West? Alberta and British Columbia are not the only provinces in the country. There are eight other provinces and three territories that must also survive. We don't wish our schools to shut down because of the exodus of young people and because workers moved.
The former liberal government engaged massively in regional rural and industrial development. In this case, it is rural development.
I understand that you don't have a solution but I think that immigration would be one. I think we should work on it.
I would like to hear your comments on this, Ms. Reynolds.