Evidence of meeting #50 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was commission.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:50 a.m.
An hon. member
I'm sorry, could I—?
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
11:50 a.m.
NDP
Tony Martin NDP Sault Ste. Marie, ON
I don't know what's happening here, but I was asking some questions. I was making a point.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Candice Bergen
I know, and here's the problem. I tried to deal it with it directly.
Possibly you are leading up to a question that does deal directly with the topic we're discussing. If you are, obviously I want to give you that opportunity. I just reminded you, and I know you took my reminder--
11:50 a.m.
NDP
Tony Martin NDP Sault Ste. Marie, ON
Could I take my opportunity, and you'll get your opportunity in a couple of seconds--
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Candice Bergen
Can I have some order right now? Thank you.
Mr. Komarnicki, you need to wrap up your point of order very quickly.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
It's a point of order that has to be established so that Mr. Martin understands what I'm saying.
It's about the decisions of the board of referees that are appealed to the umpires. Those appointments are made by whomever, because they come under a judicial process that has a process all of its own. That is a fair question, but you're asking about political appointments to the board of referees, and that's not anywhere near the motion. It's out of order. It's out of scope, and it shouldn't be allowed.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Candice Bergen
All right. According to your point of order, you think it's out of scope to talk about how the board of referees is appointed, as opposed to how the board of umpires is appointed.
Mr. Martin, you heard that, and hopefully you're leading up to that point. I trust you are. You still have--
Did you have a point of order, Mr. Lessard, or can we carry on with Mr. Martin's question? He still has over three minutes left, which I'd like to give to him.
You would like to speak? All right.
11:50 a.m.
Bloc
Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC
Yes, I will be brief.
Our colleague Mr. Komarnicki is right about one thing: we don't study the way in which chairs of boards or umpires are appointed. We should at least see whether those who are appointed were part of the machine and whether we should be reviewing this at the same time. Indeed, this can have repercussions on the work of the tribunals. This is something that has to be examined with Mr. Martin.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Candice Bergen
That's correct. I think it is confusing for all of us. I know I've had to look several times. We have the board of referees and we have the umpires. Those are two distinctly separate entities, so even in my own mind, sometimes I have to make sure that I'm not confusing referees with umpires. Right now that's probably where we're having a little bit of contention, because we're talking about the umpires.
Anyway, you have just over three minutes left, Mr. Martin.
11:55 a.m.
NDP
Tony Martin NDP Sault Ste. Marie, ON
Thank you.
It might be like referees in hockey and umpires in baseball.
I'll come to my point, but thank you for your intervention and your direction and help, Mr. Komarnicki; I always appreciate it.
You have to understand that we have some real concern here, because this is one of the biggest files in my office. As we move people through the system, we have to be confident that they're actually going to get a fair shake. What I said was that so far in my experience--and I'll see if I can get this right--the only consistent qualification of the referees, both under the Liberals first and now under the Conservatives, is their political affiliation, so what's--
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Candice Bergen
I'm sorry. We have a point of order, which I have to listen to.
Go ahead, Mr. Komarnicki.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
The point of order is that appointments to either of the boards--and forget the confusion as to whether it's the board of referees or the umpire--are not part of the study, so discussion about appointments being political or not political is not germane to this study and shouldn't be allowed.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
11:55 a.m.
NDP
Tony Martin NDP Sault Ste. Marie, ON
Well, I frankly think the qualifications of the referees and ultimately of the umpires are relevant.
From my experience I know what the qualifications are for the referees, but how are the umpires appointed, and what are the qualifications? In your experience, are those appointments as politically directed or motivated as the appointments of the referees?
11:55 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Processing and Payment Services Branch, Service Canada
I'm not here to speak to the appointments process, and it wouldn't be within my purview to do that. I would just highlight, though, that the board of referees is a layperson panel, whereas the umpires are an arm's-length judicial tribunal of people who are former judges from the various levels of courts. So there are indeed differences between the competencies and background requirements for umpires and for referees.
11:55 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Processing and Payment Services Branch, Service Canada
They are former judges of the different levels of court--county, provincial, or federal.
11:55 a.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Processing and Payment Services Branch, Service Canada
Generally they are.
11:55 a.m.
NDP
Tony Martin NDP Sault Ste. Marie, ON
So there is some room there for the appointment of judges who lean politically one way as opposed to another.
My concern is that the people we run through the system get a fair shake when they finally get to the referees and then the umpires. Are you confident that they will in fact get a fair shake, and that it won't be somewhat or even slightly politically motivated or tainted in order to give you better statistics? I'm thinking of the type of statistics you gave earlier to Mr. Savage.
11:55 a.m.
Director, Employment Insurance Appeal Division, Service Canada
Well, we have no reason to believe that they're not appointed properly. In part, it's because the office of the umpire is an arm's-length organization. The chief umpire is the one who, with the chief justice, appoints the umpires. We're not involved as part of that process, so I wouldn't be able to speak to any political affiliation or anything like that.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative