I'll try not to be too controversial, then.
The reason I was late coming this morning.... This is a very important topic and I did want to be here. I appreciated Mr. Savage moving a motion that we would study this new initiative by the government on EI. I have a number of questions.
I just came from a press conference, where we were looking at the results of a study released this morning by Statistics Canada that indicates that the top 5% of Canadians have gotten much richer over the last few years and yet the bottom 20% have lost ground. Their salaries have gone down; their purchasing power has gone down. What we're seeing in some parts—particularly in Ontario now with the big hit to the manufacturing sector—is that many, many people who paid into EI over the years don't qualify anymore for this insurance they thought would be there for them when they got themselves into some difficulty.
Many are falling off of the EI wagon a lot sooner than they expected or anticipated, and the economy isn't recovering sufficiently that they can get another job, particularly a job that reflects their skill, their experience, their knowledge, and their background. It seems there are lots of jobs beginning to evolve in the service sector, in call centres and that kind of thing, that pay anywhere from $10 to $15 an hour. But the $20 to $30 an hour jobs seem to be disappearing, and people are struggling.
I was just wondering, when this decision was made, if there was any analysis. Mr. Giroux said earlier—I was a little surprised that he would make such a loaded statement—that this is going to be good for Canadians. This move to this new system of managing the EI program and fund is going to be good for Canadians. I suggest that what we're doing is buying in ever more and more to a notion that if we simply allow the market...and use labour strategy initiatives to deal with unemployment, poverty, and social inequity, things will actually get better. The statistics are now showing that things are in fact not getting better, but that they're getting worse for a large group of people. The gap between the rich and the poor is growing.
In making this decision, was there any analysis done as to the social impact overall of this change that we're hearing about here this morning?