Thank you, Madam Chair.
I think my question is both very important and very difficult.
I'd like to say, though, that Monsieur Mulcair is playing a dangerous game with the truth when he talks about statistics, and I must take some time to make a few comments to correct what I think are some inaccuracies.
The statistics clearly show that of those who pay into employment insurance and subsequently lose a job without cause, about 80% to 82% are actually entitled to receive benefits. Now, we need to do better, but those are the statistical facts we get from reliable authorities.
There may be a disagreement on that, and that's fair, but I don't think it's right to play the game that Mr. Mulcair would like to play.
Secondly, I'd like to talk a little bit about the universal child tax credit. I know that when I stopped in a small community at a coffee shop and asked some moms what they were receiving for their children under six, it was interesting that around that little coffee table there was $9,600 being received in that very small community that they found very useful.
Unlike the musings of Mr. Mulcair in terms of taking that right away, as you would suggest, many young moms have approached me and are appreciative of it. I think we may need to do more, and I'll accept that, but taking away things from people is not something I would prefer to do.
In terms of child care spaces, I think that's a fair comment. We need to do more there. We are transferring $250 million annually to the provinces toward child care spaces. Indeed, in my province of Saskatchewan, the budget recently indicated 1,000 new spaces, and we heard in Halifax, Nova Scotia, that their province was going to create 1,050 additional spaces. I think those are good forward steps and we need to continue in that direction, perhaps increase them, but I would be loath to take any benefits away from anyone.
With respect to the Canada social transfer and education, it's true. It's fair to say that back in the Martin years, $25 billion was cut to the transfers to the provinces, to the Canada social transfer. There's no question that the most vulnerable would be affected by that transfer cut. But I can tell you that since we've taken government we have increased transfer payments to the provinces year to year. We've provided $350 million per year in new funding in 2009-10, increasing to $430 million in 2012-13, with respect to education. In fact, the post-secondary education portion of the Canada social transfer went up by 40%. It's not an insignificant amount. I agree that we may be able to do more, but those are the facts on the ground.
Of course, there were a number of grants for low-income and middle-income Canadians of $250 per month and $150 respectively, which is non-repayable, and there have been other groups that have been targeted. I think education is important and therefore we need to do that.
There may be some question of whether the transfers to the provinces should be more conditional or not. I know we heard a lot about that, with people asking, when we transfer the moneys over an increase year over year, is it going to where it should? That's probably a fair question. I know there are agreements between provinces and the federal government, and maybe those can be pursued as well.
Another statement I want to take some issue with is that nothing is being done with respect to older workers, because there are things being done for them. I want to go through them somewhat, and the employment insurance--