Finance committee  I think Canada's job creation record is far better than that of some other countries in the world, and it would be ridiculous to deny that. At the same time, the rate of unemployment is still significantly higher than it was before the recession. Twenty per cent of young people in Canada are out of work or underemployed.

Finance committee  I am.

Finance committee  If you look at the figures, our employment rate is still well below where it was before the recession. We're about two percentage points down. Even the Bank of Canada, if you read their latest monetary policy report, says there's still a significant degree of slack in the Canadian job market.

Finance committee  —but are not back to where they used to be.

Finance committee  I hate to put it in a framework where people are fighting for jobs, that it's an intergenerational struggle, but to some degree that's true when you are in a high-unemployment context. When you look at Ontario, for example, we obviously experienced very large layoffs during the recession in 2008-09.

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.

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 report that they took the retirement decision by reason of ill health or to care for another person.

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 raising the age of eligibility for OAS.

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

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 were working in Corner Brook.

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 major concern is with people at the lower end.

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, huge numbers of workers from rural Atlantic Canada, the high unemployment regions, have moved west in search of—

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 the cost of the program.