Okay, Mr. Chair. Thank you.
This amendment is very appropriate. It would also have been very opportune if our colleagues opposite had been able to hear from Mr. Bédard because they would then have understood how pertinent this amendment is.
Mr. Chair, I feel that I have to say that Mr. Taillon's claim that the documents I have that list the costs are comparing apples and oranges is unfortunate. That just shows contempt, as the conservatives do when someone has an opinion different from theirs. That is destroying people who hold different views. This is what Mr. Taillon is doing when he says that a career official who has given Canada 32 years of service, including 12 as Chief Actuary, is incompetent, at the same time as he refuses to have his own documents in hand.
I find that offensive. I find it irresponsible and unacceptable, because, in those documents, we are going to discover an annual deficit of $100 million whereas there will be a $30 million surplus in Quebec.
What will happen then? That deficit will have to be made up. Quebec will have paid twice because there will be a $30 million surplus precisely because fewer people are eligible. We must remember that everyone in Quebec who takes parental or maternity leave is not eligible. That just leaves the people on compassionate or sick leave, and that is a minority.
That is why the amendment we are proposing here provides a balance. It is totally false to claim that there is fair treatment here. And, all through this present exercise, we have been prevented from showing this. This is even clearer today, because the only person who could provide us with an objective opinion about all this, a generous contribution on his part that does absolutely nothing for him, has been dismissed out of hand. They have rejected the advice and are doing what they have done in other committees: treat the person who wanted to testify with disrespect and not even give him the opportunity to be heard. I find this quite deplorable. It would have provided the clarification that our colleagues require in order for them to vote with us in favour of this amendment and to clearly understand what it is about.
We had other documents to present, Mr. Chair. We have a very basic one here that sums up the situation very well. But there are other documents that show the excessive contributions, the surpluses in Quebec and the deficits in the rest of Canada.
Let me tell our colleagues in the Liberal Party this right away. I feel that the intent to make up any deficit from the public purse is very good. But even that is going to add to Quebec's financial responsibilities, since there is no funding for it. Our taxes are going to be used to pay for a benefit that Quebec is already paying for itself, Mr. Chair.
That is why I feel that, in order for us to vote in favour of Bill C-56, this amendment must be passed. If not, people will accept it based on a misunderstanding of its costs, which will have been falsified, Mr. Chair. And we cannot give our support to that.
I hope that colleagues will vote with us to support this amendment.