Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague, the member for Repentigny, on his excellent analysis of the throne speech and on the amendments we put forward, making the throne speech presentable.
This is the fourth time the member for Repentigny has been elected, with a bigger majority each time. He has been re-elected because he knows what he is doing and works very hard for his constituents.
He talked about employment insurance. We will try to bring about changes that will improve the EI scheme forever. It will be fairer for workers and for those who contribute to it.
I have a question for the member. As we know the EI surplus is somewhere between $40 billion and $45 billion. It is about that. The Liberal government took the surplus to pay down the debt. They say the amount put towards the debt is approximately the same as the EI surplus plus $3 billion that was supposed to go to seniors.
Something puzzles me and I would like to hear what the member has to say about it. Workers earning $39,000 and less are contributing to the EI fund. When you take that money to pay down the national debt it means that those who earn the least are paying down a good part of the debt. Accordingly, if I earn $25,000, I contribute fully to the EI fund, and the EI surplus goes to repay the debt of the country.
I would like to have his take on that. In my mind, it is not that worker who put the country into debt. I would like to have his opinion on that.