Evidence of meeting #22 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was apprentices.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Annette Ryan  Director General, Employment Insurance Policy, Department of Employment and Social Development
Nathalie Martel  Director, Old Age Security Policy, Department of Employment and Social Development
Atiq Rahman  Director, Operational Policy and Research–Canada Student Loan Program, Department of Employment and Social Development
Laurent Quintal  Assistant Director, Strategic Policy, Labour Program, Department of Employment and Social Development
Kevin Lee  Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Home Builders' Association
Serge Buy  Chief Operating Officer, National Association of Career Colleges
James Loder  Chair, National Association of Career Colleges

8:45 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Phil McColeman

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to meeting 22 of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities.

Today is Thursday, May 8, 2014, and we're here to study the subject matter of clauses 242 to 251, 371 to 374, and 483 to 486 of BillC-31.

For our first hour we have a number of officials from the Department of Employment and Social Development with us. We have Ms. Annette Ryan, director general of employment insurance policy; Mr. Jean-François Roussy, director of employment insurance policy in the skills and employment branch; Mr. Laurent Quintal, assistant director of strategic policy from the labour program; Mr. Atiq Rahman, director of operational policy and research from the Canada student loan program; and Ms. Nathalie Martel, director of old age security policy.

Did I miss anyone?

We welcome you. As I understand it, there is a speaking order. I believe it is Ms. Ryan who will go first, and two other speakers will follow her.

Please commence your presentation.

8:45 a.m.

Annette Ryan Director General, Employment Insurance Policy, Department of Employment and Social Development

Thank you very much.

Mr. Chair, honourable members of the committee, good morning.

I am pleased to appear here today to speak to you about division 17 of part 6 of Bill C-31, which provides enhanced flexibility for Canadians taking care of ill family members to access employment insurance sickness benefits.

To provide context for the amendments proposed in Bill C-31, I'll briefly start by reviewing the Helping Families in Need Act, which was tabled in September 2012 and which did three important things to improve special benefits and support the families that are relevant for the section reviewed this morning.

First, the Helping Families in Need Act established a new benefit for parents of critically ill children, who are referred to as PCIC, of up to 35 weeks to support parents who are taking time away from work to provide care to support a critically ill child of less than 18 years of age.

Second, it provided a new flexibility to Canadians receiving parental benefits, allowing them to suspend those benefits and to access sickness benefits, if they are ill or injured themselves, and subsequently to reactivate their remaining parental benefits, if applicable.

Third, the act that was tabled in 2012 amended the Canada Labour Code to protect the jobs of parents who were taking leave of absence to care for these children, or also for children who were murdered or missing, which was another grant introduced at the time outside of the EI program.

With the coming into force of the provisions of the Helping Families in Need Act on March 24, 2013, the government effectively changed the rules for Canadians receiving EI parental benefits so that they can now qualify for sickness benefits if they fall ill and then can subsequently draw the parental benefits. The government, then, was essentially bringing new flexibility and responsiveness to the EI program for parents caring for children.

The new measures under discussion this morning in division 17 of BIll C-31 further extend this type of flexibility to access sickness benefits for EI claimants who are receiving the parents of critically ill children, PCIC, benefits, or compassionate care benefits, CCB, which are benefits that are extended for up to six weeks for Canadians who are taking care of an ill family member, whether parents, spouse, or members of the extended family—sisters, siblings, that type of thing. These benefits are similar in nature to parental benefits in that the claimant receives temporary income support to take care of vulnerable family members.

The proposed change would allow parents in receipt of PCIC or compassionate care benefits to interrupt their claim and draw up to 15 additional weeks of sickness benefits under the EI program. Based on our estimates, this change might benefit approximately 300 claimants per year. It's a bit difficult to put a firm number on it with the new flexibility, but we cost it at roughly $1.2 million per year. There are administrative costs on the order of $109,000 per year that will be absorbed within existing reference levels of the department. The proposed legislative amendments would not cost a lot of money but would provide additional income support and flexibility during essentially very difficult periods of family life.

I will note this morning that women receiving EI maternity benefits cannot suspend benefits in the same way. Maternity benefits provide income support for a 15-week period surrounding childbirth to allow recovery from physical or emotional effects of the pregnancy and childbirth. The logic is that because sickness and maternity benefits both essentially provide income support related to physical or emotional recovery, there is not that same logic to allow women who are receiving maternity benefits to suspend and to go on sickness. That is a core logic to table for you.

That said, the Helping Families in Need Act was structured so that, should a new mother's illness continue beyond the 15 weeks of her maternity benefits, she can now switch to sickness benefits when she starts parental benefits, which gives her the possibility of collecting up to 65 weeks in total of special benefits—15 weeks of maternity, 15 weeks of sickness, and 35 weeks of parental benefits—if that's the amount of time she wishes to take. This ability to combine benefits for maternity claimants was not available to birth mothers prior to the Helping Families in Need Act.

Finally, in addition to the changes to the Employment Insurance Act, amendments to part III of the Canada Labour Code are also being proposed in order to fully align existing leave provisions, particularly those regarding compassionate care leave and leave related to critical illness, with the associated EI special benefits. Changing the benefit policy means changing the Labour Code.

More specifically, these amendments would clarify that compassionate care leave and leave related to critical illness can be interrupted to allow employees to take sick leave and work-related illness and injury leave and then return to work.

I'll also mention that these legislative amendments, once approved, will need to be followed by changes to the EI regulations and the EI fishing regulations, so that we can ensure equal treatment among claimants across economic regions and types of claimants. All legislative and regulatory amendments would come into force on the same day, which has been targeted for the fall of 2014.

Finally, I will note that in division 17, a very limited technical amendment is also proposed to the Employment Insurance Act. This amendment adds a reference to the PCIC benefit in an instance where it was inadvertently overlooked when the EI legislation was first introduced to bring in this bill.

Let me conclude by thanking you again for the opportunity to contribute to your study. This brings an enhanced flexibility to accessing the EI sickness benefit, which is essentially targeted to enhancing the fairness of the program and strengthening the support provided to Canadians who are away from work taking care of family members when those people giving the care become ill or injured themselves. That's the core of the measure before you.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

8:50 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Phil McColeman

Thank you very much.

We'll move on to the next presenter.

Ms. Martel.

8:50 a.m.

Nathalie Martel Director, Old Age Security Policy, Department of Employment and Social Development

Good morning, everyone.

The Old Age Security Act currently prevents the payment of income-tested benefits to sponsored immigrants. I am mostly talking about the guaranteed income supplement, but also about the allowances.

However, the current provisions limit these payments only until the individual has reached 10 years of residence in Canada. This was in line with the length of sponsorship agreements for seniors. On January 1, 2014, an amendment was made to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations to extend the sponsorship period of the individuals landing in Canada under the parents and grandparents category from 10 years to 20 years.

An amendment to the Old Age Security Act is needed to align with the new sponsorship period of 20 years, so that old age security income-tested benefits would not be paid for the entire length of the sponsorship period. The amendment will come into force through an order-in-council, likely in 2017, once the current backlog of applications for parents and grandparents has been eliminated.

Guaranteed income supplement benefits are meant to provide assistance to seniors most in need. The rationale for not paying the guaranteed income supplement during a period of sponsorship is that sponsors, and not taxpayers, are financially responsible for family members they sponsor.

The impact of this change on sponsored immigrants and on program costs will not be seen before 2027, as parents and grandparents subject to the new 20-year sponsorship rules will not start to arrive in Canada until 2017, and eligibility to old age security benefits under the current rules would have begun in 2027.

It is estimated that these amendments will affect 2,700 individuals in 2027, and 40,000 by 2036. Annual guaranteed income supplement savings are expected to amount to $23 million in 2027, to reach $700 million by 2036.

Of note, the amendment does not apply to the old age security pension. As this benefit is not based on income but solely on age, legal status and residence in Canada, sponsored immigrants will continue to be eligible for the old age security pension once they reach 10 years of residence in Canada.

The Old Age Security Act currently ensures the protection of sponsored individuals in situations of a sponsorship breakdown, such as a death, conviction, bankruptcy or incarceration of a sponsor for a period exceeding six months. The current protection provided in the legislation, in case of a sponsorship breakdown, will remain.

Thank you.

8:55 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Phil McColeman

Mr. Rahman.

8:55 a.m.

Atiq Rahman Director, Operational Policy and Research–Canada Student Loan Program, Department of Employment and Social Development

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning. It is a pleasure to be here today to discuss the work that is currently under way with respect to the Canada apprentice loan program.

In the 2013 Speech from the Throne, the Government of Canada committed to ensure that Canadians are aware of the opportunities offered by skilled trades and to assist apprentices with the cost of their training.

As part of this commitment, economic action plan 2014 proposed the creation of the Canada apprentice loan program as an expansion of the Canada student loan program to provide apprentices registered in Red Seal trades with interest-free loans of up to $4,000 per period of their technical training. These loans will be interest free until the apprentices complete or terminate their apprenticeship training, at which point interest will start accruing and the loans will go into repayment.

The apprentice loans act, established as the legal framework for the Canada apprentice loan program, basically authorizes the making of regulations for the administration of the act. It provides the Minister of Employment and Social Development the authority to enter into loan agreements with apprentices, and provides for the establishment of a contract with a third party service provider for the administration of the Canada apprentice loan program.

The new act also provides for the making of regulations pertaining to certain benefits that are currently available to Canada student loan borrowers. In addition to these loans being interest free, the benefits include assistance for borrowers who face financial difficulty during repayment, and also the loans would be forgiven if the borrower becomes severely permanently disabled or in the case of the borrower's death.

In addition to the introduction of the apprentice loans act, consequential amendments have also been proposed to the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and to the Department of Employment and Social Development Act. The amendment to the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act will ensure that apprentice loan borrowers are treated the same way as other student loan borrowers. The amendment to the Department of Employment and Social Development Act will allow for electronic administration of the apprentice loans.

The new Canada apprentice loan program will complement other Government of Canada initiatives, such as the apprenticeship incentive grant program and the apprenticeship completion grant program that were introduced in 2007 to encourage apprentices in Red Seal trades to complete their training.

As some of you may know, the Red Seal program is an interprovincial standard of excellence for the skilled trades, which aims to encourage harmonization of apprenticeship training and certification programs, foster mobility across Canada, and more rapidly connect skilled trades workers with available jobs in high demand regions. Today, Red Seal trades account for approximately 80% of all registered apprentices in Canada.

Despite existing measures to support apprentices in Red Seal trades, completion rates have been rather low, with only about half of apprentices completing their training. This represents a potential loss to the economy as well as to the individual, as apprentices who obtain certification have greater job stability and earn, on average, 25% more per hour.

A key factor that has been reported as contributing to low apprenticeship completion is the financial cost of attending periods of blocked technical training. During these blocks, which last between four and twelve weeks, apprentices face significant costs, including forgone wages, educational fees, tools, equipment, and sometimes relocation and living expenses if they have to move elsewhere to attend the training. For some apprentices, particularly those with families, these costs can be quite onerous.

Furthermore, unlike other post-secondary students, apprentices are not eligible for student loans because their training doesn't fall within existing program parameters of the student loan programs.

Over the last few months, officials with the Canada student loans program have held discussions with national apprenticeship stakeholders and provincial and territorial apprenticeship authorities to discuss program design and delivery issues. These discussions will serve as the basis for new regulations, and once those regulations are approved, the Canada apprentice loans will be available to apprentices in January 2015.

Thank you.

9 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Phil McColeman

Thank you very much.

Thank you to all three of you for your presentations.

We'll move on to five-minute rounds of questions.

Madam Sims.

9 a.m.

NDP

Jinny Sims NDP Newton—North Delta, BC

Thank you to all of you for coming here this morning, and for your presentations.

The Canadian Museum of History notes that old age security in this country was founded and expanded on the principle of universality. It was viewed at the time, and in every time since, until this government, as a right. Would you agree that the changes to OAS do not conform to the principle of universality, the one on which it was founded?

9 a.m.

Director, Old Age Security Policy, Department of Employment and Social Development

Nathalie Martel

Thank you for your question.

The changes that are being brought to the Old Age Security Act do not change those principles at all. There is currently a provision that prevents the payment of the guaranteed income supplement to seniors who are sponsored.

The only thing the amendment is doing is because the sponsorship period went from 10 years to 20 years for the parents and grandparents category, we need to also align the Old Age Security Act so that the restriction doesn't stop after 10 years. It continues for the entire length of the sponsorship period. The principles of universality, etc., are not being compromised.

May 8th, 2014 / 9 a.m.

NDP

Jinny Sims NDP Newton—North Delta, BC

The move from 10 to 20 years does open the possibility of a greater number of seniors then living in poverty.

In our library briefing notes we learn that clauses 244 and 245 would require a parent of a critically ill child, or a child who has died or disappeared as a probable result of crime, to give at least four weeks' notice if she or he, as the employee, needed to take more than four weeks off. I'm hoping this is an error, because I'm having trouble understanding the logistics of that. I hope I've understood it correctly.

How would one know four weeks out if one needed to take more than four weeks off for any of these scenarios?

9:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Phil McColeman

Who are you directing the question to?

9:05 a.m.

NDP

Jinny Sims NDP Newton—North Delta, BC

Whoever wants to answer it.

9:05 a.m.

Laurent Quintal Assistant Director, Strategic Policy, Labour Program, Department of Employment and Social Development

Thank you, Ms. Sims. I will answer in French.

The amendments made to the Canada Labour Code aim to protect the jobs of individuals who are on leave and are receiving benefits. As far as I understand, the required four weeks' notice for compassionate care leave comes under that.

If a federal public servant takes compassionate leave only, they do not need to give notice. However, if someone decides to take compassionate care leave and interrupts it to go on sick leave, they will be asked to let their employer know as soon as possible, so that the employer would be aware of their absence and of the fact that their leave status is changing.

It's important to understand that this measure has to do with employee-employer relations. The goal of the notice is to help the employer better manage their company and plan for absences.

9:05 a.m.

NDP

Jinny Sims NDP Newton—North Delta, BC

If I understand correctly, and please correct me if I'm wrong, what you're saying is that the leave would continue, but it's really looking at the different types of leave, whether it's going to be EI leave or sick leave. It's compassionate leave, and we're looking at scenarios of somebody whose child is critically ill, or a child who has died or disappeared as a result of crime, to give at least four weeks' notice.

It's that four weeks' notice I'm still struggling with, so if you could, please explain it.

9:05 a.m.

Assistant Director, Strategic Policy, Labour Program, Department of Employment and Social Development

Laurent Quintal

I just want to clarify something first. The Canada Labour Code mainly protects the jobs of individuals who are receiving employment insurance benefits. The objective of this bill is to protect individuals who are on compassionate leave or leave to take care of an ill child and decide to switch to sick leave.

In the bill, the goal of the notice is to help the employer better manage their company. So, yes, four weeks' notice is required.

9:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Phil McColeman

That's five minutes.

9:05 a.m.

NDP

Jinny Sims NDP Newton—North Delta, BC

I'm sorry. We'll have to come back to that.

9:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Phil McColeman

No problem.

Mr. Armstrong.

9:05 a.m.

Conservative

Scott Armstrong Conservative Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS

I want to thank the witnesses for being here.

On the GIS supplement, it's my understanding the GIS supplement is provided to worthy beneficiaries. That money comes from the taxpayer, right? CPP benefits come from employers and employees. They contribute. But the OAS and the GIS are totally funded by the taxpayers.

9:05 a.m.

Director, Old Age Security Policy, Department of Employment and Social Development

Nathalie Martel

That's correct.

9:05 a.m.

Conservative

Scott Armstrong Conservative Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS

When you're bringing someone in from a different country, as a grandparent or a parent, you've agreed to sponsor them. As part of that immigration policy, you're agreeing to actually provide the financial support for them. For now it will be 20 years. Is that accurate?

9:05 a.m.

Director, Old Age Security Policy, Department of Employment and Social Development

Nathalie Martel

That's correct, yes.

9:05 a.m.

Conservative

Scott Armstrong Conservative Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS

Right. Canadians who are born here and have lived here their entire lives have contributed all their lives through their taxes, through the GST. In the end, if you need money when you're a senior citizen in Canada, from all those years of contributions ,you're eligible for OAS or GIS, depending on your level of income. Is that correct?

9:05 a.m.

Director, Old Age Security Policy, Department of Employment and Social Development

Nathalie Martel

That's correct.

The pension is based on the number of years of residence in Canada. To receive the full pension, which is currently $551 per month, you need to have resided in Canada for at least 40 years since the age of 18. If you have less than 40 years of residence in Canada, then the pension is pro-rated. It is for this reason. We pay the pension based on the contribution to the social fabric of the country.

9:05 a.m.

Conservative

Scott Armstrong Conservative Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS

So anyone who comes here for a shorter period of time hasn't contributed. They haven't spent as much time in Canada paying into that social fabric, so they're compensated basically for the number of years they actually reside in Canada. Is that how the system is set up?