Finance committee  Briefly, I would reiterate that finding efficiencies in government is part of managing the government well, but finding efficiencies in order to balance the books as quickly as possible and then expanding TFSAs and income splitting as an outcome two or three years down the road is not necessarily the best or the most economically sound decision.

Finance committee  Yes. There are different ways to make our country more productive, of course, such as providing help to the manufacturing sector, as I said earlier, and investment credits, for instance, as I've said, for research and development, not only within corporations, but across the country through the university sector, for instance, as well as worker training.

Finance committee  There are issues, such as the trade imbalance between countries and the way we've been trading, that have impacted us. Those have to do with the way we interact with other countries, so it's not entirely beyond our borders.

Finance committee  Very briefly, we also could focus on the manufacturing sector and provide income tax credits to companies investing in new machinery and equipment and research and development, as well as the training of workers. This is a sector in need. It has been deeply affected in the last ten years and it needs help.

Finance committee  Yes, I will give them quickly. We have to think about the short term, but also about the long term and about building up capacity in order to retire in decent living conditions. Maintaining your purchasing power is something we are concerned about, and we should take a look at it right now, because in order to build up that saving, you have to take a look at it right now.

Finance committee  The answer to your question is no. This is not the way to go because those tax cuts are essentially for the benefit of companies that make profits. The less taxes these companies pay, the more profits they make. Are the profits then reinvested to create jobs? We are now seeing that these businesses are not really doing that.

Finance committee  I agree with that analysis. I would even take it a step further. First, what is behind the federal government's situation in terms of balancing its books? There is a drop in revenue not only because there is a drop in economic activity, but also because there is a drop in tax rates.

Finance committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. On behalf of the 3.2 million members of the Canadian Labour Congress, I want to thank you for affording us the opportunity to present our views on the Canadian and world economy, and the next federal budget. Economists—including bank, OECD, International Monetary Fund and ILO economists—are increasingly gloomy about the economic prospects of all the advanced economies, including Canada.

Human Resources committee  Well, in order to estimate a cost, you'd have to find out how much there is and a lot of it is actually volunteer work. How much would you pay someone who volunteers in order to help brothers and sisters find another job, or where they are involved in their local unions or in the reclassification working group or whatever?

Human Resources committee  No, I'm not dying to get in, and I hope I'll survive it. The first thing, of course, is that in order to find a job you need resources. You need...[Technical Difficulty--Editor]...to pay for your phone bill. You need to be able to go to the public library to get access to the Internet to find out what's available.

Human Resources committee  --going to be factored in, in that calculation?

Human Resources committee  No, I wouldn't agree with that. Despite the fact that there are parts of the information missing, when we factor in the level of contributions made over the last 10 years, before the crisis, with the accumulated $57 billion, we think that over time, with the stimulus it would bring to communities in creating jobs, it would contribute to reducing the unemployment rate and the usage of that system, providing jobs for workers to work at, not to collect unemployment insurance.

Human Resources committee  I wouldn't agree with that, actually, right now. If you take a look at what was paid into the system since 1996, and even factoring in the fact that we just went through one of the biggest economic recessions, the balance is still positive. There are still surpluses even when you factor in the current cost of the crisis, considering the huge surplus that came out of this overpayment into the EI system.

Human Resources committee  Yes.

Human Resources committee  The CLC position has always been to reduce it to 360 hours to qualify, up to 50 weeks. That was our position and is still our position. This bill is improving access in terms of access to benefits by reducing it to 360 hours, but it doesn't provide for increasing it up to 50 weeks.