Mr. Speaker, a few short weeks ago, I had to ask the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development a question about a media release from the International Monetary Fund concerning the austerity measures implemented in Canada.
The International Monetary Fund, which is not exactly a left-leaning economic organization, is well known for its sometimes extreme rhetoric promoting fiscal austerity to get world economies back on track after a recession.
However, this same organization, which recently publicly admitted that its most renowned economists were wrong about their global budget forecasts and the impact of austerity policies, reversed its position on Canada's policies. Indeed, the IMF stated that it had called on governments to implement austerity plans with caution.
The IMF added that overly sharp budget-balancing could increase risks and also said that decreasing debt is a marathon, not a sprint, and that going too fast will kill growth and further derail the recovery.
The IMF also said that the decline in global growth would slow Canada's economic growth. It anticipates the Canadian economy to grow by 1.7% this year and 2% next year. These predictions reflect drops of two-tenths of a percentage point and one-half of a percentage point, respectively, based on predictions from September. This downward revision leads us to believe that the Canadian economy is and will be dragged down by various global economic problems, such as the weak economy recovery in Europe, decreased commodity prices and economic growth in emerging countries that is not meeting our expectations.
The IMF points out that Canada does not need to be overly zealous in getting its finances in order. The main short-term challenge is to sustain its weak growth and to reduce other economic vulnerabilities, such as decreased commodity prices and the fact that the Conservative government is putting all of its eggs in one basket by focusing almost exclusively on our natural resources instead of ensuring that our country maintain a strong and diversified economy.
Based on this information, I would like to ask the minister why her government is moving forward with EI reform, when this reform is being widely criticized even by her own provinces. If such draconian austerity measures are not unnecessary, why is the government going after middle-class families who expect to get the services they are entitled to, since they made their contributions?
All this proves is that the reform unnecessarily guts the system and does nothing to improve our economy. On the contrary, these new policies weaken our regional economies, which rely on seasonal industries.
Could the minister explain why she is moving forward with gutting the EI system without any changes or consultation, if it is not in the name of Conservative ideology?