If I repeated myself I am sorry, but it is enormously insulting to have the issue of ''FIXING EI'' argued over by our politicos without finding the real issue of HOW IT GOT BROKEN or WHY a portfolio that had a 57 billion dollar surplus is now going to COST us A BILLION to fix . ARE WE CANADIANS THAT EASY TO BE HAD .

Can someone please explain to me,[ I keep asking but no one gives me an answer just denials] , how it,s going to ''COST '' 935 million to fix a system that was so self sufficient it amassed a surplus of 57 BILLION dollars and could easily have spent 935 million to tweak its self if there was any problems ?
It seems to me that what was expensive was what they spent the missing money on NOT EI .
The Liberals misappropriated 57 billion into General Coffers from the EI fund and the Conservative Reformers helped spend it . If the dam money had been left in the fund that it was collected FOR there would be more than enough to fix any problems that the recession had caused. I find it insulting to hear these people claim that a system that had a 57 billion dollar surplus now needs ''FIXING'' . Whether the people of Canada want to believe it or not it happened get your heads out of the sand because when you,re in that position you know whats sticking up in the air. .
The worst part is thet the deficit Flaherty has forecast is just about what went missing from EI . So actually the workers have to pay off out 114 Billion . 57 billion that they already paid into EI.

I find it shamefully ironic that the 2 parties that raped and pillaged a 57 billion dollar surplus in EI now say it needs fixing .
The Liberals misappropriated 57 billion into General Coffers and the Conservative Reformers helped spend it . If the dam money had been left in the fund that it was collected FOR there would be more than enough to fix any problems that the recession had caused. I find it insulting to hear these people claim that a system that had a 57 billion dollar surplus needed fixing in the first place , it seemed to be doing what it was supposed to be doing by accumulating money to help people in times of need. . Waiting periods could be done away with , more people could be hired to run EI , more money thats needed for increased money handed out in benefits . If the fund had not been raped there was more than enough there for it to be self sufficient and I find it equally insulting to hear the 2 Parties responsible arguing over and saying this or that would be too expensive . What was expensive was what they spent the money on NOT EI.
All they did was turn EI into a tax by squandering the surplus and using it for anything OTHER THAN WHAT IT WAS COLLECTED FOR.
SOMEONE SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THIS THEFT

Again,
I,ve said for a while Canada has vast areas where white men have not even yet set foot. There are minerals, oil , diamonds etc. With all the immigration we have why not make it a stipulation that immigrants MUST settle in the north and develop and explore the North lands as did our ancestors the French , Irish, British, Chinese developed lower Canada with farms , lumber, railroads and built roads to acsess such . We have overcrowded cities with unemployment rampant , and as a result too much crime . Give all existing Canadians a chance to go there first but it must be a stipulation for any immigrant to come to Canada. We could utilize Doctors and [ God help us ] Lawyers and all Tradespeople and labourers, Armed Forces , Law Enforcement, Fire Departments and every job there is. Not to mention the sales opportunities for heavy equipment manufacturers like Catterpillar[or their Canadian competitors] right down to companies who make chainsaws and the best boost IS THE STEEL INDUSTRY Everthing we build or use to build needs STEEL.Buildings , bridges , pipelines , culverts, siding EVERYTHING.
Why keep putting the burden on our already over populated cities.I know there are people who have immigrated to Canada and cant get work in their respective trades even Doctors for gosh sakes , well here is the chance. maybe even put a time limit of 5 years and I,ll bet there,s a line up to get at all the advantages Canada has to offer.

How about the one that the NDP have named in Parliment ''THE GREATEST THEFT IN CANADIAN HISTORY'' , and that is the misappropriation of 57 billion dollars that was the EI surplus ?? Just like they say down East '''There it Was ,Gone ''.
Shameful and blatant theft and misappropriation of funds and we have yet to be shown what the money was spent on . I do know what it WAS NOT spent on though and thats what it was collected FOR . When money is collected under a certain pretense and then moved from that fund and spent on everything or anything BUT what it was collected for THAT is misappropriation of funds and that is THEFT .

We were told by Leo Gerard, President of USWA and PROMISED by the President of the United States on February 19 /09 when he was in Ottawa that ''BUY AMERICAN '' would not hurt the Canadian workers or the Canadian Industry with ''PROTECTIONISM ''. Then 2 Dam weeks after he left Ottawa US Steel closes 2 Plants and puts 3000 CANADIAN Steelworkers on the street and moves orders to Alabama, Pittsburgh and Indiana .If that's not protectionism what the Hell is ??
He said that NAFTA would apply .Well thats an easy fix ,NAFTA only applies if we,re shipping steel across the border so they closed down Stelco , problem solved we cant ship what we dont make . Oh ya and any orders we had they moved to and produce in Pittsburgh , Alabama and Indiana . Last time I checked none of those places are in Canada . Now tell me how that dosent hurt ??

Sorry that web got cut off on the debate .
These are just some examples. You can read the full debate at http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publicat...

Here are some excerpts from Parliment on the greatest theft in Canadian History.

Ms. Chris Charlton (Hamilton Mountain, NDP)

moved:

That, in the opinion of this House, the government must address the alarming growth in the number of unemployed Canadians and the increasing number of Employment Insurance claimants; confirm its commitment to a social safety net to help regular Canadians through tough times and bring forward reforms to Employment Insurance rules to expand eligibility and improve benefits, including:

(a) eliminate the two-week waiting period;

(b) reduce the qualifying period to a minimum of 360 hours of work, regardless of the regional rate of unemployment;

(c) allow self-employed workers to participate in the plan;
(d) raise the rate of benefits to 60% and base benefits on the best 12 weeks in the qualifying period; and
(e) encourage training and re-training.

And here are some of the references to the EI fund made during the debate:

Ms. Chris Charlton (Hamilton Mountain, NDP)

For years, both Liberals and Conservatives have misused the then surpluses of the EI fund dedicating them to debt and deficit reduction. Last year's budget legalized that theft, but that does not make it moral.

The money was contributed by workers and employers to provide support during economic rainy days. Well, it is raining. In fact, the monsoon season has arrived. We have a moral obligation to restore the integrity of the Employment Insurance Act. I am counting on all members to join with us in the NDP today and support this motion on behalf of Canadian workers.

Mr. Yvon Godin (Acadie—Bathurst, NDP):

Our motion refers to 360 hours. Only 32% of Canadian women qualify for employment insurance, and only 38% of Canadian men qualify. We are in an economic crisis. We are all worried about the people who lose their jobs, because when they become unemployed, they do not even qualify for employment insurance, even though they paid for the system themselves.

The Liberals can laugh at the other end of the House, but they are the ones who voted against this, who made the changes to employment insurance and who allowed $57 billion to be stolen from the employment insurance fund.

The Conservatives can laugh on their side of the House. They are the ones who sanctioned the theft from the EI fund on the backs of unemployed workers, on the backs of families and on the backs of those most vulnerable. They now stand here and brag that they can balance the budget, and eliminate the deficit—on the backs of the poor, the unemployed workers and people who work in factories, in the forestry and manufacturing sectors and the auto industry in Ontario.

Mr. John Rafferty (Thunder Bay—Rainy River, NDP):

Yet for the last decade we have seen assistance for these workers become harder to obtain, to the point that only about 30% of the workers who pay into the employment insurance fund can draw from it when they need to. With an EI fund surplus in the tens of billions of dollars, this injustice must stop.

Mr. Claude Gravelle (Nickel Belt, NDP):

Madam Speaker, I think I heard the hon. member from across the aisle say that it would cost $1 billion a year to fund the extra two weeks. One billion dollars a year is a lot of money, but the government has stolen $57 billion from the EI fund. The amount of $57 billion equates to 57 years. That is a long time.

I would like to ask the hon. member how he expects families to survive that do not qualify for EI because the hours have not been reduced. They do not qualify for EI and they do not qualify for training. I would like the hon. member to tell me how these people are going to survive if they do not qualify for EI?

Mr. Claude Gravelle (Nickel Belt, NDP):

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for speaking so passionately about unemployment insurance.

There is the question of the $57 billion being taken from the EI fund and being put into a slush fund to be dispensed as the government sees fit. If the $57 billion were still in the EI fund, what does my hon. colleague think we could do today to help unemployed Canadians?

These are just some examples. You can read the full debate at http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publicat...

I have to say it again, as I,m disgusted.
I find it shamefully ironic that the 2 parties that raped and pillaged a 57 billion dollar surplus in EI now say it needs fixing .
The Liberals misappropriated 57 billion into General Coffers from the EI fund and the Conservative Reformers helped spend it . If the dam money had been left in the fund that it was collected FOR there would be more than enough to fix any problems that the recession had caused. I find it insulting to hear these people claim that a system that had a 57 billion dollar surplus needed fixing in the first place , it seemed to be doing what it was supposed to be doing by accumulating money to help people in times of need. . Waiting periods could be done away with , more people could be hired to run EI , more money thats needed for increased money could be handed out in benefits . If the fund had not been raped there was more than enough there for it to be self sufficient and I find it equally insulting to hear the 2 Parties responsible arguing over and saying this or that would be too expensive to fix . What was expensive was what they spent the missing money on NOT EI. The 57 billion misappropriated was more than the 50 billion they are estimating the deficit to be from the stimulus .
All they did was turn EI into a tax by squandering the surplus and using it for anything BUT WHAT IT WAS COLLECTED FOR.
SOMEONE SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THIS THEFT.

I find it shamefully ironic that the 2 parties that raped and pillaged a 57 billion dollar surplus in EI now say it needs fixing .
The Liberals misappropriated 57 billion into General Coffers from the EI fund and the Conservative Reformers helped spend it . If the dam money had been left in the fund that it was collected FOR there would be more than enough to fix any problems that the recession had caused. I find it insulting to hear these people claim that a system that had a 57 billion dollar surplus needed fixing in the first place , it seemed to be doing what it was supposed to be doing by accumulating money to help people in times of need. . Waiting periods could be done away with , more people could be hired to run EI , more money thats needed for increased money could be handed out in benefits . If the fund had not been raped there was more than enough there for it to be self sufficient and I find it equally insulting to hear the 2 Parties responsible arguing over and saying this or that would be too expensive to fix . What was expensive was what they spent the missing money on NOT EI. The Surplus they spent was bigger than the whole deficit they are predicting .
All they did was turn EI into a tax by squandering the surplus and using it for anything BUT WHAT IT WAS COLLECTED FOR.
SOMEONE SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THIS THEFT.