Madam Speaker, I believe that my colleague clearly explained, a few moments ago, that changes to the EI system have been needed for a long time. It was foreseeable that they would be needed by the time the CERB came to an end.
Why then did the government prorogue Parliament? And why did it set so little time between the end of the CERB and the start of new EI provisions?
In other words, why did the government choose once again to put Parliament in such an untenable position?
In his speech, I heard my colleague talk about the support provided by the government to Canadians. It ensured that Parliament would be of very little help to Canadians.
Why has the government once again put Parliament in an untenable position, as it is doing now?