Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her very interesting speech. Once again, I am grateful for the gains made by unemployed workers, whether they are seasonal or full-time workers. I have a great deal of sympathy for this woman and the ordeal she went through, but I am puzzled that she is telling me that an organization said 26 weeks was enough.
What is the financial impact of a change from 26 weeks to 50 weeks compared to the economic benefits when these people return to work? The benefits will be spent and will come back in the form of consumption taxes. These people do not simply put EI in the bank. They spend that money and consume.
I would like to know what the difference between 26 and 50 weeks is worth, compared to the difference it can make in the lives of people who are sick. This $400 million or $500 million is a drop in the bucket compared to the $57 billion we have already seen.