Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thanks to the witnesses as well.
It's interesting to hear two different views today. I have heard about rehabilitation from the witnesses today. Of course we all believe in it. We all want the criminals to be rehabilitated. But before that, we like them to pay for their crime as well. That's why they are convicted.
We all know one thing: they have numerous federal rehabilitation programs during the time they are in jail, and also after they pay for their crime. But the way I look at it, the truth of the fact is that the victims of the crime sometimes have to take time off as well. Their families have to take time off to deal with the lengthy court process or some emotional issues.
When this bill was tabled, the way I looked at this issue was that the thrust of this bill is the fairness. We all talk about the fairness. If you pay EI, then you should be entitled to that, even though you make some choices you should not make, as a law-abiding Canadian. That's where I think we are going.
I believe that there is no reason—this is my belief, and that's why I support this bill—that convicted felons should receive greater latitude in EI benefits. First of all, I have to admit that, before this bill was introduced, I had no idea that we had this exception in our EI system. Then I started to share this view with my constituents. Believe me, I haven't found one single constituent so far who didn't say “You must be joking”. That's the kind of feedback I get from my constituents.
How do you feel the public views the current system? If you bring it out, would the public feel that convicted felons have greater access to employment insurance this way, whatever way we have right now? What do you think the public will say about it?
Both of you can answer, because you have been working in societies helping victims and marginalized women, and other criminals as well.