Human Resources Committee on May 26th, 2010

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Thank you. That's my question.

Thank you very much. Thanks for being here today.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

Mr. Poilievre.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

I'd like to reiterate the gratitude that all the parties have shared with Major Duquette and his wife, Anne, for championing this cause originally.

Had you never brought this issue to my attention and had you not had the diligence to follow up with additional legislative research that you conducted independently, I'm not sure we would have gotten this far. Thanks also for being here today to help us to continue to push over the finish line.

If I could say one more thank you, it's to the committee members from all parties, who have been very supportive in making this happen. I'm hoping we can all work together to get it done as soon as possible.

First of all, Jim, I noticed that when you saw your wife for the first time in some months here on the screen, your face lit up. I know that the time I knocked on your door, I was interrupting you; you were about to head out on a date. I stopped you and nabbed about five or six minutes off your otherwise romantic dinner time. I apologize for that.

[LCol James Duquette]

That's okay.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

It's been weighing on my mind for a while now.

I'd like to give you the chance to expand further on the human impact that these changes would have for some of your comrades who might be contemplating having children in the years ahead. That's a question to both of you.

[LCol James Duquette]

Anne, do you want to go ahead?

[Anne Duquette]

The impact would be huge. Whether it's the mother or the father who is overseas, to give them the chance to bond with their child when they come home would be incredible. There's no other way to say it.

Would you comment, Jim?

[LCol James Duquette]

When I came home after that year, to be perfectly honest with you, one of the biggest fears I had was that Jacob would play strange—who's this weird guy who wants to hug me? We started from being strangers. I knew him through pictures. I knew him through Anne's stories on the phone. We needed time. I have no doubt in my mind that we needed time.

After seeing the benefits of that time together when I took leave for Megan, it absolutely solidified that on a personal level, as a father, as a member of our family, I needed that time. Luckily, now things are really great. I mostly credit that to the time I was able to get off with Megan when Jacob was still relatively young.

It really hit home that this will make a difference in people's lives when the Ottawa Sun ran an article not too long ago on this issue. Of course, I'm kind of curious, so I looked at the comments that readers made. The very first one that I read was from a guy in Kandahar who returned last month and his wife was due right when he returned. His benefits had been shortened due to his deployment. He personally thanked me on that posting. It felt amazing to know that we could make a difference for one family, for 100 families, for families who are affected by this from now on.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

I will just conclude by thanking you again. This is why we all come here to do this job. We're here to ensure that the rules are fair and to ensure that families like yours, who are sacrificing so much, are given the benefits you paid for. Thanks for sticking with it and working with me on it. I look forward to pushing it over the finish line.

I'll turn over my time to anybody on my end here who has an additional question.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

You have two minutes, Mr. Komarnicki.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

This will be just a comment.

We realize it's often difficult to balance the two duties that are required of you. If you can accomplish both by serving your country, as you have admirably done, and by ensuring that your family unit is together and that you can be part of it at that critical time, that is very important. I think you will make a lasting mark on your service career and your comrades, for sure. It's a laudable goal that we all stand behind as a group. So thank you very much.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

Mr. Casson, you have one minute.

[Rick Casson, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Major, if I can, I'd just like to thank you again from our neck of the woods for what you do. You've been deployed to Bosnia, the Golan Heights, and Afghanistan. You're due to come home, you said, or leave theatre in 10 days.

When you get back, there's a debriefing you go through, the time it takes to get back to a normal civilian life, if there is such a thing for a military family; then, if you are deployed again you have to go through training, so there's lots of time that you are away from home other than when you're actually deployed in theatre.

Can you comment on how much time a soldier like you, who goes through regular deployments, is away from his family?

[LCol James Duquette]

My deployments have been every five years thus far. I'm a senior officer within the communications branch. The number of positions for communicators at my rank level is limited, so I don't get deployed nearly as often as a soldier would, like an infanteer, a private, a master corporal, or even as much as within the limited trades, within the logistics world, or within even the communications world where we have limited numbers of linemen. A lineman can actually be away for the majority of his time, whether deployed within Canada or internationally. So it really varies depending on the rank level and the trade.

Honestly, for me it's every five years. I'm just coming up to the two-and-a-half year point that I've been away, since Anne and I have been together, but for other people it's much more.

[Rick Casson, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

We've come to the end of our session.

I'd like to say a few words.

First of all, Madam Duquette, I've already said how we admire you for the steadfastness and the courage that you show at home with two babies, two youngsters.

And Major Duquette, also, I'd like to add something to what my colleagues have said. When we first started looking at the Employment Insurance Act and trying to get it to be a lot more just to the different types of population within Canada, we omitted the armed forces, but I think it's about time we looked at the armed forces in a very serious way. And if there was a little levity around this table this afternoon, it's not because the subject is so funny, it's simply because I think everyone around this table agrees that something is going to be done and we're going to be pushing forward together, all parties will be pushing forward together.

As Canadians, we recognize how important the relationship between parents and their children is, how important that relationship is from the very beginning, and it's important for everyone.

You, Major, are doing such fantastic work out there in Afghanistan, and we respect and we have such pride in what you do, but there's work out there and there's work out here, as well.

So both of you, I really am speaking on behalf of my colleagues when I say that we admire you, we have pride in you. Please continue, both of you, to do the work that you've been doing so far.

And perhaps I can also add, Major, please tell your colleagues in Kabul how proud we are--all of us, all parties--of our Canadian armed forces.

Thank you so very much.

Thank you, Madam Duquette.

We'll just hold it for a couple of minutes before our next witnesses come in.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

I'd like to continue on until 5 p.m.

We have as our next witness, from the Department of Human Resources and Skills Development,

Louis Beauséjour, Director General, Employment Insurance Policy, Skills and Employment Branch. Mr. Beauséjour indicated that he did not have a presentation to give. He already handed out a clause-by-clause analysis of Bill C-13 in both official languages. It was handed out, and I believe everyone got a copy. So we will start with questions.

Mr. Savage, do you want to start off with the first seven minutes of questions?

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

So we're just questioning the officials about the bill. Okay.

I guess the obvious question, in light of what we just heard from Major Duquette, is this issue of why this couldn't be extended further. As he said, he thinks it should apply to all internationally serving police.

How much of a problem would it be to have this bill apply to other personnel beyond serving members of the Canadian Forces?

[Louis Beauséjour, Director General, Employment Insurance Policy, Skills and Employment Branch, Department of Human Resources and Skills Development]

The purpose of the amendment was to ensure that those who have to defer their parental leave or who are directed to return to duty can have their eligibility window for parental benefits extended. Military personnel do not have a choice; they have to obey. The purpose of the bill was to extend the period that individuals are eligible for parental benefits in cases where they cannot receive parental leave for reasons beyond their control.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

I understand that, but there is no reason why this couldn't be applied further to internationally serving police, perhaps to people with Corrections Canada, who might miss the window too, conceivably.

[Louis Beauséjour]

There was no reason other than to determine what the underlying reason for the amendment was. The employment insurance program works in a specific way. Currently, the eligibility window for parental benefits cannot be extended unless the person's children are sick and in the hospital. The current EI program does not set out any other exceptions.

All the reasons for which the eligibility window for parental benefits can be extended have to be related to the fact that they are beyond the individual's control. The current act in no way allows windows to be extended for reasons arising from the individual's decision. Making an amendment of that sort would significantly change the nature of extension measures.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Have you done any costing of extending it further? My understanding is that, as I recall, this bill will cost about $600,000 and will apply to 50 or 60 people a year. Considering the fact that you knew there was a possibility of amendments coming, has the department costed this?

[Louis Beauséjour]

We have not done any costing to see what it would cost to extend the measure to other people.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

I see.

Do you have any questions, Carolyn?

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Raymonde Folco]

Dr. Bennett.