Finance committee  I'll try to keep it to five minutes. It's a pretty big bill for five minutes. The first point I'd make is what we would have hoped for, which is that in our view the provisions in the bill relating to the changes to old age security and employment insurance should be removed fr

Finance committee  Somewhere there is going to be a cost to the provinces for that subgroup of people age 65 to 67. Now, the transition off provincial social assistance programs and other provincial programs onto OAS and GIS happens once they turn 65, so that transition is going to be delayed. I g

Finance committee  Well, the figures are there for everybody to look at in the report from the chief actuary. There's nothing about those figures that should come as a surprise to anybody. Why we suddenly thought it became unsustainable when the Prime Minister went to Davos I'm not sure, because th

Finance committee  I think that, if you increase the clawback, it would be a less bad way of going about doing things. On the sustainability thing, we're phasing in this increase in such a way that it really only applies when the cost of OAS peaks, so it doesn't really make that much difference to

Finance committee  I'm not sure I really understand the question. Presumably they wouldn't qualify for EI unless their employer in Fort McMurray laid them off. If they're—

Finance committee  I'm baulking slightly at the question. I don't object to the current rules. We haven't said workers who quit their jobs should be eligible for—

Finance committee  We accept the status quo: that workers should not be eligible for EI unless they have lost a job through no fault of their own. They have to be laid off by an employer. The vast majority of unemployed workers, given those circumstances, will seek another job. As you've suggested,

Finance committee  I think the great majority of unemployed workers would like to work 52 weeks a year like full-time, permanent workers. It's not a matter of the government saying—

Finance committee  I think we're talking past each other. I mean, under the current system, whether you're eligible for EI is going to depend on the local unemployment rate. If you're working in Fort McMurray and are laid off from your job, you have a much shorter eligibility for EI than if you wer

Finance committee  In terms of who's not very affected, certainly there are people who have good pension plans and who choose to retire at age 65 or may even choose to retire past the age of 65. What they're going to lose from OAS is not hugely significant to them in terms of their income. The majo

Finance committee  I think the assumption of the government is that, given adequate notice of this, people will adjust by working longer or conceivably saving more. But in terms of who works longer, when Statistics Canada surveys ask people aged 65 why they have retired, about a quarter of people

Finance committee  It's rather complex. Some employer pension plans do provide a bridge to old age security for workers who retire on a company pension before age 65. I don't have the figures on how common that is, but it's not uncommon. So there will be some cost to employer pension plans in raisi

Finance committee  Sorry, but I hope I answered the question.

Finance committee  I think employers create jobs. I think unions can help employers create jobs, and they can certainly turn jobs into good jobs, if I can put it that way.

Finance committee  Not particularly. We advocate for good jobs and good job creation policies, but I will concede your point that private sector employment is created by the hiring decisions of employers.