Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his speech, which I must admit was quite a successful piece of marketing. I feel that if my only angle of analysis of the federal budget was that of my colleague, I would almost want to applaud, it was that good. However, the reality is something altogether different.
The Liberals are used to give us window dressing or half-measures. For example, in his speech, my colleague talked about how important it was for workers who had lost their jobs to have access to training to expand their opportunities, without necessarily losing their benefits. We can only applaud the idea. However, we must realize that training is a provincial responsibility. Since that has to be negotiated with the provinces, it is not likely to happen tomorrow.
In addition, employment insurance is strictly a federal jurisdiction. As we speak, 6 out of 10 Canadians who lose their jobs are unable to qualify for EI benefits. The budget is totally silent on this matter.
Does my hon. colleague not think that it would have been preferable to first ensure that workers are eligible for EI benefits before they can expand their training?