Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Ms. Hughes, for bringing this bill as far as you have. Congratulations on that.
I have been to Manitoulin Island, and I can tell you that outside of Nova Scotia it is as beautiful a place as exists in Canada. I've also been to Elliot Lake. I used to work in Sudbury, so I've seen that rather remarkable community as well.
My question is for anybody who wants to comment, but specifically Ms. Hughes, and Ms. Byers, who referenced in her brief the costing of a 360-hour national standard of eligibility. She mentioned that the cost is about $1.1 billion. The government, when they produced their cost on this, you may recall, costed it at about $4.4 billion—which, I think it's understood now, is ridiculous. One of the reasons they costed it at $4.4 billion was that in putting their costing together they suggested there would be a ballpark cost of around $2 billion per year based on what they called the labour market impact, which would create a 2% increase in unemployment. In other words, to go to a 360-hour national standard, they suggested, would increase unemployment by 2% because people would be fleeing their jobs to jump onto, as the minister referred to it, this lucrative system.
I want to ask you about that. Many people don't seem to understand that you cannot collect EI if you voluntarily leave your job. You have to be fired or laid off. Do you believe there are many Canadians out there who are looking for the opportunity to jump out of their jobs, find a way to get fired, so that they can collect 55% of their previous income for somewhere between 19 and 45 weeks?
Anybody...?