Thank you.
It's clear on this side of the table that we all feel very clearly that the government's reaction to this crisis has been inadequate, to say the least.
Ms. Sgro mentioned earlier that we can't tell the government how much, and I certainly don't have those numbers at hand either, but Mr. Savage made the comment before making his motion that there is no surplus from employment insurance because it goes to general revenue. I guess that's technically correct, so it's basically a virtual fund, in a sense.
What is true that no one can deny is that fewer and fewer people have become eligible. That way government has protected itself from the economic changes; fewer people have become eligible, and more women have suffered. Even fewer women than men have become eligible, and more people have been left without skills.
Mr. Lake mentioned I think a reference to the C.D. Howe Institute's report on poverty. It must be the only think tank in Canada saying that, because certainly the TD economic forum report did not concur, and any other serious analysis does not suggest that we're going in the right direction. Yes, we are living in good economic times at the moment. There are many things that are happening around us that could change that radically.
I think it's unfortunate that we have lost the reference to creating a special fund from employment insurance. It would have given a commitment to the people of Canada that we do recognize that workers, employers, and small business contribute to that, and that it can be there in time of need, which isn't the case now. It's like buying insurance for your house and the house burns and you can never collect it. That's the situation people find themselves in, in Canada.
Having said that, I think this is a motion, the way it reads now, that clearly recognizes that the government's reaction is inadequate. It's a motion that blames the government for not responding in a more humane way to this crisis, which, as has been mentioned, is much more pronounced in Quebec and Ontario, and I have to say in British Columbia as well, certainly in the forestry sector with mills closing. I think there are a lot of causes for that, with the softwood lumber agreement. Nevertheless, I think it is a serious crisis, and it does require a stronger response than the government offered in its $1 billion over a number of years spread across Canada.
So I will be supporting the amendment.