As regards economic development—and I'm merely floating the idea—I think the governments could be more proactive and opt for a secondary and tertiary processing industry. We've been talking about these things for a long time now. In regions with few resources left, in fisheries, for example, fish is currently being sold in markets. People come and work in the plants in the spring, but why couldn't they freeze the fish, carry out secondary and tertiary product processing rather than ship it to Japan? People in those countries are smart enough to do secondary and tertiary processing, then to come and sell us the processed product. That also applies to American markets.
Economic development doesn't just apply to fishing, but to forestry as well. Why wouldn't we proceed with secondary and tertiary processing of forest products rather than ship them elsewhere? Paper mills are currently shutting down. In our region, in eastern New Brunswick, UPM has closed in Miramichi. They've also closed the Smurfit-Stone and AbitibiBowater plants. With these forest resources, why wouldn't we create cooperatives so that that comes back to the workers? That's what happened in Sault Ste. Marie in the case of Algoma Steel. Today that business is so prosperous that the company would like to buy it back. We can create employment and promote economic development.
As regards people who have completed grade 8, I want to point out that the program wasn't abolished. In New Brunswick, for example, we started with $68 million a year, and that amount reached $78 million, then $100 million. The problem is that we didn't expect there would be so many clients. The funding allocated to that program was limited. People were encouraged to take part in a training program, but the door was closed. The door was closed to young people. These people are forcing 60-year-olds to go to school. I don't have any objection to that, but the fact remains that young 30-year-olds and 45-year-olds were not entitled to the program because they hadn't finished grade 8. They were told they didn't meet the program requirements. I think we're losing resources by acting this way.
In the plants and in the forest industry, youths could go to school—and that worked back home—and decide at some point to pick up a power saw and go to work in the woods. No diploma is necessary to do that kind of activity. Those young people took advantage of a considerable literacy rate. That was also the case with the fish plant. I propose that greater investment be made in training, but that doesn't concern my bill. I have others. As I told you, I have 10 bills. We should at least try to pass this one, which concerns eligibility and ensure that the amounts received are acceptable.
As regards the independent fund, I think we've already talked about it enough. I think it should be withdrawn from the government's Consolidated Revenue Fund. Mr. Lessard talked about the 28 recommendations that were made. The record shows that the Conservatives suggested at the time that the $54 billion be returned to the fund. Eight recommendations that they supported stated that the $54 billion did not belong to the government and that it should be returned to the fund. Now they're talking about returning $2 billion.
I hope that the employment insurance system is improved in future so that it is adequate for the people who contribute to it and so they can benefit from it. In the fishing industry in 1982, people worked as many as 35 weeks a year. Go and check it. Those people worked seven days a week. In the fish plants, the women started working at 8:00 a.m. and finished at 2:00 a.m., seven days a week. People worked like that as long as the fish came in. Fish is perishable, but it never rotted on the docks. People did what there was to do in terms of production, but the industry collapsed.
We can improve the situation by offering training, but not by reducing employment insurance. People phone my office every day to say they would like to enrol in a community college program. They say they want to raise their education level, learn more and contribute to society like everyone else.
They say they want to work and get training. In spite of that, the government offers training to people 60 or 63 years of age, with all due respect to them, and refuses to offer it to others, on the pretext that they haven't completed grade 8. I think another study should be conducted precisely on that subject, so as to improve payroll and help people who need to work.