Human Resources Committee on Oct. 18th, 2012

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Komarnicki]

Good morning, everyone. I'd like to call the meeting to order.

I have a couple of preliminary comments.

First, we're pleased to see both ministers appearing here this morning with respect to Bill C-44.

On the bill itself, we'll have witnesses called, and of course we'll have technical issues when we deal with the clause-by-clause. The bill provides for an amendment to the Canada Labour Code to provide an employee with the right to take leave when the child of the employee is critically ill, or dies, or disappears as a probable result of a crime. It also makes some technical amendments to the act.

The bill also amends the Employment Insurance Act to provide benefits to claimants who are providing care or support to their critically ill child and to facilitate access to sickness benefits for claimants who are in receipt of parental benefits. There are then amendments to the Income Tax Act and the income tax regulations.

We'll be hearing this morning from both ministers with respect to the bill. There will be opening statements from the ministers, and then we'll have alternating questions from each of the parties.

Having said that, I'll invite Honourable Minister Diane Finley to commence with her opening statement.

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thanks for inviting me to talk about Bill C-44, which is our government's latest initiative to help Canadian workers and their families.

Our government is very proud of the Helping Families in Need Act. It delivers on our 2011 election commitment to provide income support for Canadian families when they need it most.

We can all sympathize with a mother or a father who is stricken with illness while taking care of a baby. And we can only imagine what it's like to watch over a child who is critically ill or to cope with the anguish of a child who is missing or murdered.

Our hearts go out to all of these people.

No matter what jobs we hold or what titles we may have, when tragedy strikes, our highest priority is always to take care of our families. Everything else comes second. That's why our government makes the well-being of families a priority.

Our proposed legislation, Bill C-44, will amend the Employment Insurance Act to facilitate access to sickness benefits for parents should they fall ill while receiving employment insurance parental benefits.

Currently, in order to receive EI sickness benefits, a claimant would have to be available for work, if not for his or her illness or injury. As a result, a claimant would not be able to receive sickness benefits during a claim for parental benefits as he or she is not available for work.

With Bill C-44, our government is proposing to waive this requirement for claimants receiving parental benefits. This new measure, which would come into effect in early 2013, would benefit approximately 6,000 Canadians per year and would be available to insured workers and self-employed workers who have opted into the EI program.

Let me speak to you now of terrible circumstances that no parent should ever have to face, one in which a child becomes critically injured or ill. For many Canadian families, this is a terrible reality. But our government is taking action to make life just a little bit easier in such a challenging time. We've stepped up to support the families of children with life-threatening diseases or injuries to ensure that parents in that situation don't suffer undue financial hardship while caring for a critically ill or injured child.

This new EI benefit will be available for up to 35 weeks and can be shared between parents. The benefit is in addition to the 6 weeks of compassionate care benefits for which parents may also be eligible should their child face a significant risk of death within 26 weeks.

The Helping Families in Need Act will also amend the Canada Labour Code to provide job protection for parents who take a leave of absence from their work while they care for their critically ill child. Children with life-threatening conditions need more than just round-the-clock medical care to get better. They need the comfort of their parents. This new benefit will help to reduce some of the financial pressure that parents experience, as they take time away from work to focus on their family.

The third component of this legislation involves providing support to parents of missing or murdered children—indeed one of the most terrifying experiences a parent could ever possibly endure. In April 2012, the Prime Minister announced a new grant to provide these parents with 35 weeks of income support. Parents who must cope with the death or disappearance of their child as a result of a suspected criminal act are also dealing with unimaginable stressful situations, including dealing with the judiciary system.

Amendments are also being made to the Canada Labour Code for these parents, to provide job protection for those under federal jurisdiction.

My honourable colleague Lisa Raitt will speak to those measures in greater detail.

All of these measures, unfortunately, will be providing assistance during some of the most trying or tragic times that a family could ever endure, yet they also represent our government's steadfast commitment to fulfilling our promises, listening to Canadians, and making life better for hard-working families in this country.

As Dan Demers of the Canadian Cancer Society said:

I think it's critically important that we acknowledge that in the last election, this government made a commitment to parents and families who are caring for children in the most difficult situations we can imagine. And today, we're not only seeing the government take action to fulfill that commitment, but they're moving in this town at lightning speed…and they're exceeding our expectations.

He also said:

These programs will strengthen Canadian families and provide them the flexibility and the security they need to help keep their lives as normal as possible through a very, very difficult time.

I'd now like to turn to my honourable colleague, the Minister of Labour, who will speak to you about job protection for these parents through the Canada Labour Code.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Minister of Labour]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Chair, thank you. Thank you, committee, for inviting me here today.

I echo Minister Finley's comments. As she has already stated, there are few things that matter more in this life than making sure our government supports and serves Canadians when they need our help the most.

There's no doubt that Bill C-44 fulfills the need. Few people are in greater need of assistance than the families with children facing catastrophic illness or the parents whose daughter or son has disappeared or has been murdered. There can also be no doubt about our government's determination to help Canadian families who have the misfortune of finding themselves in these circumstances.

Now, while our government focuses on strengthening the economy and creating jobs—our overarching objective—we also recognize that there are times when Canadian families need support to deal with exceptional circumstances. Families coping with stress and grief over the illness or loss of a child don't need to add worrying about their work to their list of woes.

Supporting working families is a priority for our government, which is clear from the many progressive measures we have introduced in Bill C-44.

In addition to the latest improvements to the EI program and the new income support grant, which has been outlined by Minister Finley, we're making significant changes as well to the Canada Labour Code to further assist families in crisis.

As a reminder, the federal jurisdiction within the Government of Canada's labour program serves about 128,000 workplaces and about a million people across the country. It's the federally regulated sectors of the economy: transportation, communications, banking, and crown corporations.

The Helping Families in Need Act amends part III of the code to give these federally regulated workers the right to take unpaid leave if they find themselves in one of these tragic situations. In sum, the jobs of parents of a critically ill child will be protected for up to 37 weeks. The parents of a missing child can count on 52 weeks of job protection. And for parents of murdered children, the amendments will provide job protection for up to 104 weeks, which is two years.

Of course, employees are not required to take this kind of leave, and indeed they're not expected to take the maximum time allowed, but they will know that it will be there if they need it.

For other employees not covered by this legislation, labour code protection varies from one jurisdiction to another. The Province of Quebec already provides generous support, and that enables parents to be absent from work in the event of a child being murdered or missing.

I'm optimistic that other provincial and territorial governments will follow our lead and that they will amend their respective labour laws to protect the jobs of parents of murdered or missing children or of children who are critically ill, because that ensures that the affected parents' jobs are protected in their specific jurisdiction. The parents could also benefit, then, from the new Government of Canada income support measures while on unpaid leave, knowing their jobs are protected in their specific jurisdiction.

Mr. Chair, enlightened employers understand that employees may very well need to take time off work to cope with psychological pressure and relentless demands associated with a critically ill, missing, or murdered child. They do recognize that workers who are simply exhausted from this, or who are under extreme stress, are less likely to be attentive, and certainly less productive.

Quite frankly, compassion is never a bad investment. Invariably it will work to the employer's benefit as well, because workers who can get the time they need to recover from a crisis are more likely to eventually return to work and to return in a better state of mind.

I'm proud to say that the Government of Canada and the federal industries that we regulate are offering this support to their employees. As we promised during election 2011, we'll be there to help Canadian parents through some of the most difficult days that they are likely to ever encounter. They look to us for leadership, and that is what it's all about.

Thank you very much. I'm happy to answer any questions the committee may have.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Komarnicki]

Ministers, thank you very much for those presentations.

I'd also like to acknowledge the presence today of Madame Mounier, Madame Laroche, and of course Mr. Giles.

Members, we will move to seven-minute rounds. I'll be watching your time on that.

We'll start with Madame Boutin-Sweet.

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Madam Ministers, thank you for being here.

I supported the bill at second reading. I think it's a piece of legislation that we need. In fact, I have met parents who wish they could have benefited from such a measure in the past. That being said, I did support the bill, and part of the reason was that I wanted it referred to this committee so we could make some amendments I consider important.

Minister Finley, you said that this measure delivers on your 2011 campaign promise to help the parents of missing, murdered or sick children. You also promised that the money for this benefit would come from the government's general revenues, not the EI fund. Yet here we see that the EI fund will be used to cover the cost of providing these benefits to the parents of critically ill children.

As we all know, the fund is currently in deficit because money was taken out to prop up the government's main budget. But that money was put there by employers and workers to build the social safety net people need when they are unemployed. By the way, I believe the program should still be referred to as the “unemployment insurance” system, instead of the “employment insurance” system, since the very reason it was created was to help unemployed workers.

You promised that the money would not come from the EI fund. And yet a huge chunk of money is being pulled out. Why the about-face?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

That's a good question.

We looked at the best way to make these changes. After examining the situation, we came to the conclusion that it would be much easier for claimants if we offered these benefits to the parents of critically ill children through the EI system. That makes it easier to combine other types of benefits, stacking, as we call it. This approach makes it possible to stack two types of benefits, where applicable. Not including this measure in the EI program would make stacking a lot more difficult.

What's more, the EI program includes special benefits to help people when they are unable to work. For those two reasons, we offered these benefits for the parents of critically ill children under the EI umbrella.

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

I have to press the matter. We have a financial problem here. The fund is intended for unemployed workers. And here it is being used for anything and everything.

Cuts were made at Service Canada. Generally speaking, staff are already struggling to process EI claims. Adding some 6,000 claims by parents with critically ill children to the yearly pile will only make the situation worse. If you break it down daily, it comes out to 15 to 20 additional cases a day. Staff will have heavier workloads.

How many people do you intend to hire at Service Canada to deal with these special cases?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Forgive me, but I don't have the exact numbers. Allow me to put the problem in context.

Every year, approximately 1.5 million people apply for EI and special benefits. We anticipate that 6,000 families will apply for parental benefits as a result of critically children.

So we should not need a lot more people to swiftly process 6,000 claims out of 1.5 million.

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

When you say you “should not need a lot more people”, does that mean you intend to do some hiring or none at all?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

The number of staff hired always varies because the number of claims varies from month to month. So the system is flexible enough to accommodate the fluctuation in claims. We're talking about 6,000 claims out of 1.5 million. That doesn't increase the case load by very much. I am confident that Service Canada staff will be able to process the claims of parents in need efficiently.

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

I am not quite as confident as you.

Staff members processing the claims of parents with critically ill children will be speaking to individuals in serious distress. The situation is not the same as that of someone who has lost their job. Losing a job is also difficult, of course. But when someone's child is critically ill, the parent is dealing with stress and all kinds of other issues. Will the staff processing these cases receive any special training, and if so, what type?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

We already handle claims for compassionate care benefits, which are intended for families going through a very difficult time. Service Canada staff are well-trained and accustomed to dealing with claimants in difficult circumstances.

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

Could you elaborate a bit more on the kind of training they receive?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

The kind of training they receive?

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

Yes.

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Ms. Laroche, could you speak to that question, please?

[Mireille Laroche, Director General, Employment Insurance Policy, Department of Human Resources and Skills Development]

As the minister mentioned, our public servants receive ongoing training on how to deal with the public in a variety of situations. Some people are traumatized by the loss of a job and have a terrible time. So staff receive training on an ongoing basis. They are taught how to interact with these individuals appropriately, compassionately and carefully.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Komarnicki]

Thank you, Madame Boutin-Sweet. Your time is up.

We'll now move to Mr. Shory.

[Devinder Shory, Conservative, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ministers, both of you, thank you very much on behalf of Canadians and of my constituents specifically. Thank you so much for working so hard with great passion in your respective departments.

As time has shown, this chair will not extend my time, so I will focus my questions on Bill C-44 specifically for Minister Finley.

Minister, I remember working on this file with you initially, when we were talking about how we determine this, how it will be determined and how to define critical illness, etc., and I believe there was some talk about consultation within the medical profession to figure out how to define it. Was there any consultation? If there was, what were the outcomes?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Well, there was a great deal of consultation. There are, within the medical community, different definitions of different conditions. As you may recall, the terms for compassionate care leave require that someone being taken care of—a friend or a family member—is expected to die within 26 weeks. That is a very dire circumstance, but what we wanted to do with this particular bill was make sure that parents could have access even if their child wasn't expected to die within 26 weeks.

We wanted to make sure that whatever criteria we put in place for eligibility encompassed those children who are facing critically ill diseases, where they need their parents present but where they may not be facing imminent death. There are young children with cancer, for example, who may be going through treatment, but fortunately their life expectancy is more than 26 weeks. We wanted to provide assistance to those parents, so we consulted the medical community.

There's a very long list of stakeholders, and I'd like to thank my parliamentary secretary for her expertise in this area. She raised several issues, and she consulted with the industry, along with others, to make sure that the terms we used, both in English and in French, which are very different, were appropriate to the circumstances and would provide the benefits to those parents we were trying to reach. Now, as a result, we've made sure that...a medical certificate is required for parents of critically ill children, and the terms of that are very specific. That was done in consultation with the medical community.

[Devinder Shory, Conservative, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Thank you, Minister.

I'm sure you know that my time is very short.

Do we have any figures on how many parents we expect would or could benefit from these measures?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Yes. In fact, we expect that approximately a thousand families will apply for the benefits for murdered and missing children. We also expect approximately 6,000 for the critically ill; the number varies from 6,000 to 7,000 per year. In terms of the EI sickness benefits and being able to stack that with parental leave, we expect that another 6,000 families could benefit from that each year.

[Devinder Shory, Conservative, Calgary Northeast, AB]

I have a question on your third component in the legislation, where the benefits will be available for the parents of missing or murdered children. Minister, we all know that sometimes it's so unfortunate that the parents are involved in those crimes. Will this legislation benefit those parents as well, or are they out of the list?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Absolutely not. To qualify, parents will have to receive written confirmation from a police authority that the situation is probably as a result of a criminal act, in the case of missing children. If at some point a parent is found to be culpable, then the benefits will have to be repaid by that parent.

[Devinder Shory, Conservative, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Minister, from the last four years I can see that our government is very, very good at consultations before we table any legislation. After tabling this legislation specifically, did you have any feedback from Canadians on this legislation and whether they like it or dislike it?

Where do we stand on that?