Mr. Speaker, this is one of the problem with the government's arguments. It refers to circumstances like these, to ask if we are against that on an individual level. Finally, we have to admit that, for instance, some women who could not benefit from UI before might benefit from it now. It is possible.
But what is more likely is that we will see again the inequity condemned by the parliamentary secretary. I would like to quote, for instance, a document from the department which says: "In 2001-2002, the decrease in women's benefits will reach 9 per cent and will represent a $560 million loss". In my answer, I refer to government's figures.
Here, the government admits that women will lose $560 million in benefits. It is in black and white, and the parliamentary secretary would want me to say that this is an improvement.
I invite him to read the reports of his own department; he will find the answer there. It is detrimental to women, to everybody, but mainly to women. I hope that this answer will satisfy you. I invite you to have a look at the document, on page 8, and in particular at Part A which deals with the effects on governments.