Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would also like to thank my colleague Mr. Ouellet, the member from Brome-Missisquoi, who is doing quite exceptional work. I am pleased that he has sponsored this bill. This is a bill that deals with employment insurance, and my colleague, Ms. Beaudin, and I are the critics on this topic.
I would also like to say how pleased I am that Mr. Céré is here. For those watching us, I would like to point out the extraordinary but also essential work that you are doing in order to advocate for those people who have been so unfortunate as to lose their jobs. You have been steadfast, and your analysis has been very relevant, as have your comments.
One of the issues you raise, and which I totally agree with, is the fact that employment insurance would not be improved were it not for a consensus here, were it not for at least the majority of MPs coming to an agreement that improvements be made.
You heard Mr. Savage. Although I have been very critical of the Liberal party's policies in the past, I must also say that I am very encouraged to see an individual like Mr. Savage fight for those people who have lost their jobs and share this opinion with his colleagues. I felt that it was important to say that because it explains why parliamentarians must make an effort to ensure that a majority agrees to reform employment insurance.
I have two questions. One is for Mr. Ouellet, and the other is for Mr. Céré.
Mr. Ouellet, you said that this measure was not profitable from an economic standpoint, in the sense that its profitability was not apparent. Moreover, as you went on, we could see that economically speaking, in regions where families or people are losing their jobs, this is very profitable in that the money will continue to feed the local economy and prevent situations where people have to turn to other avenues, to the province or to charities, in order to get help. They are using their own money. I would like to hear you speak further on that matter.
Mr. Céré, in regard to your testimony on Bill C-50 and today on Bill C-241, there are certain things to keep in mind. All things being equal, Bill C-50 will cost $930 million, or $1 billion according to the NDP's calculations -- this is a bill from the NDP and the Conservative party -- and will affect 6% of the unemployed.
Moreover, Bill C-241 covers all of the unemployed, at an equal cost. Did I understand your opinion correctly that further to all of the evaluations, of the two bills, preference should be given to C-241?