Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I thought long and hard about this motion. I appreciate the intent of it. I can't support it for a couple of reasons, which I think are important to put on the record. I think the intent is genuine.
First of all, I would prefer a system like the one the United States has had over the last several decades. It's called an earned income tax credit. It returns the contributions to workers and their families directly. Small, medium-sized and independently owned businesses get a repertoire of tax breaks that are geared towards various government services, policies and supports. This is actually a 50-year-old legislation. It was originally introduced in the United States by Richard Nixon, of all people. The workers get that money back directly.
I'm also concerned about employees still paying. Obviously, the Canada pension affects the long-term earnings for families.
I'm much more sympathetic towards a small business for something like this, versus a medium-sized one. I know there's a big difference between what they're each going through, right now.
Additionally, with the labour shortage, this is an issue related to wage suppression that could take place against workers with regard to their capital in the free market economy.
Lastly, it would affect the surplus. As New Democrats, we have advocated for changing the EI system quite extensively, for decades. I know it's under review now, but even recently, in my riding, we had severance taken away from workers because of the broken system. We think people who have already paid into...those types of services should be expanded, especially when you have marginalized workers who can't get employment insurance. That includes women, who are overrepresented among those who cannot get EI right now. I would rather expand the EI that people have already paid into...for those workers, versus reducing those opportunities, later on.