I'd like to jump in, if I may.
On the issue of choice, of course I agree with the constrained choices that people face, especially on the caregiving responsibilities. There's another aspect of the choice, which is the demand side of the labour market. Everything we've heard about choice so far is the supply side of the labour market. When I look at how the work incentives in EI get responded to, in my region it's the employers who are trying to work with the system in order to be able to find workers. It's not just a supply-side response of the individual worker.
On the issue of whether part-time should be equally protected to full-time, even if somebody chose part-time because they wanted to be home with their children, if that job then disappears in the recession, like a full-time job might disappear or a part-time job might disappear, is there any reason why that part-time person should have less likelihood of qualifying for income replacement? Granted it would be at a lower rate that reflects that they work less time, but they still can be in a position of losing a job the same as a full-time person, and the parameters of the program should not favour the person who was working in a full-time context.