Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments but I cannot agree with the analysis here. If one had a horse missing one leg of course one would not buy a wooden leg or prosthesis for it. That is not going to fix it but that is what this government is trying to do. It is tinkering with the system.
It is making little changes here and there. It is like putting a wooden leg on a horse. It is not going to win any races and that is the same with the programs that it is trying to tinker with, trying to change. It is just like putting a wooden leg on a horse. We cannot do it that way. We have to establish some sound principles. We have to decide what is important. Is this an insurance program or is it a welfare program? That is the basis on which we should put our UI program.
I do not believe in penalizing people and hurting them. We have a welfare system in place. It has a certain job to do. Let us make sure it is doing the job and let us make sure the UI insurance program is doing its job.
I quoted the numbers. I do not see how anyone can argue with them. Employees contribute over $8 billion to this program. Employers contribute over $11 billion. Just think what we could do with that money if we left it in their hands and let them administer these things. We would not have the problems we have now. However, when government gets involved it takes $5 to do what someone in the private sector would only take $1 to do. That is the key thing we have to remember in all this. We can argue all these fine little details but we need to make some wholesale changes.