Mr. Speaker, first we should put this matter in context. Just
over a decade ago about 15 per cent of UI claimants were those who used the system on a regular basis. Today that number is well over 40 per cent. There has been an incredible expansion or explosion. That was one of the reasons the cost of the system had gone from $8 billion to $17 billion when we inherited it in 1993.
As the hon. member should know, the system was no longer being used to assist people who are unemployed or to enable people to get back to work. It was being used increasingly as a form of supplement to wage packages by a wide variety of industries.
A very strong recommendation came out of the public hearings that were held. The seasonal workers report established that it did not agree with the notion of a two-tier system. It talked about a graduated response that would apply the principles of experience rating. As with any insurance policy, a different premium level is applied the more we use it. That is the kind of principle we have applied here.
It is a very modest one. It is there to provide a certain deterrent to increased use. It is not discriminatory. It is simply to recognize and evaluate the very serious cost of the program as a result of the incredible expansion in use over the past 10 years.