Raymond Bonin

[Petitions, October 9th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I have the pleasure to present a petition on behalf of members of the Nickel Centre Seniors Club in Falconbridge, Ontario.

The petitioners draw to the attention of the House and request that Parliament regulate the longstanding Canadian practice of marketing generic drugs in a size, shape and colour which is similar to that of its brand name equivalent.

[Committees Of The House, October 9th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I have two reports.

I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the fourth report of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development.

Pursuant to order of reference made Monday, June 17, 1996 your committee has considered Bill C-39, an act respecting the York Factory First Nation and the settlement of matters arising from an agreement relating to the flooding of lands and has agreed to report it with an amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the fifth report of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Monday, June 17, 1996 your committee has considered Bill C-40, an act respecting the Nelson House First Nation and the settlement of matters arising from an agreement relating to the flooding of land and has agreed to report it with an amendment.

[Inter-Parliamentary Delegations, June 13th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34, I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the report of the Canadian section of the International Assembly of French-Speaking Parliamentarians, as well as the financial report regarding the meeting of the co-operation and development commission of this organization, held in Ouagadougou, in Burkina Faso, on March 22 and 23, 1996.

[Petitions, June 3rd, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I have other petitions requesting that Parliament refrain from passing into law any bill extending family status or spousal benefits to same sex partners.

[Petitions, June 3rd, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to present a 43-page petition and another one, which is 30 pages long. The petitioners pray and urge Parliament not to amend the Constitution as requested by the Government of Newfoundland and to refer the problem of educational reform in that province back to the Government of Newfoundland for resolution by some other non-constitutional procedure, without touching the Canadian Constitution.

[Interparliamentary Delegations, June 3rd, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34, I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the report of the Canadian section of the International Association of French-Speaking Parliamentarians and the financial report of the meeting of the political and general administration committee of the IAFSP and its Paris bureau, held March 18 and 19, 1996.

[Inco Limited, May 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I stand today to offer my congratulations to Inco Limited for its recent $250,000 contribution for the construction of a special needs centre at Cambrian College. The donation adds to a longstanding tradition of Inco supporting communities across Canada.

The special needs centre will offer 1,200 students with physical and developmental disabilities the opportunity to develop the skills needed in today's economy and to access cutting edge technology that challenges the very notion of barriers.

Cambrian College, the community, Inco, all donors and the people behind the scenes who have made the centre a reality merit special recognition. The federal and Ontario governments also deserve mention for their contributions to the centre through the national infrastructure program.

[Employment Insurance Act, May 6th, 1996]

Madam Speaker, the members of this House should take their responsibility to meet Canadians' real needs very seriously.

During the election campaign, people told us of real needs, of the hardship, the suffering people face when there is no more money coming in. Those of us in this House who took part in local debates know what suffering is all about. This is why it is important that all members of this House take the proposed improvement to these people's lives seriously.

I was a member of the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development, and we have been debating this subject for a long time. I want to congratulate the members of this committee for the great job they have done, particularly those who made suggestions. The way members of the opposition talk about it, it is as though they are making people's suffering a political matter, which it is not.

It is tragic and most unfortunate to see people so preoccupied with their political future that they put the future of people in serious trouble at risk.

The purpose of sending Bill C-12 to committee after first reading was to create an effective opportunity to look for areas of improvement that would still be consistent with the goals of the bill. The committee has done an excellent job and has focused on one key concern: impact on workers in communities that are dependent on seasonal industries.

The minister and committee members saw the many benefits for seasonal workers in the move to an hours based system instead of a weeks based system, the use of tools such as the family income supplement to better assist low income workers supporting families and a range of innovative employment benefits. These alone will bring 45,000 people benefits they could not get under the old UI. It will extend benefits for another 270,000 workers. Many of these people are in seasonal industries.

They also identified three issues at the heart of the concerns felt by many Canadians about this big step forward: treatment of gaps in earnings; the divisor used to calculate benefits; and the impact of the intensity rule on people with low incomes. They listened, they looked for solutions and they found workable ideas that will increase the fairness of this new program for workers in seasonal industries.

Now people will be allowed to use income within the 26 week period prior to filing a claim when calculating average income for employment insurance benefits. That will increase benefits by about $246 million, much of it to seasonal workers.

The divisor that is used to calculate benefits will be two weeks above the regional minimum entrance requirement. That will increase benefits by about $95 million for workers in seasonal industries in high unemployment regions.

The intensity rule will not apply to people who are receiving the family income supplement. Other workers who can pick up some work while on claim will be able to earn credits that will reduce the impact of the intensity rule on them too. Those steps will increase benefits by about $24 million for low income workers.

Government members have listened to seasonal workers and they have responded with fair and balanced changes that will make this new legislation work even better.

Employment insurance reform is not a once and for all step. It is an ongoing process of feedback and adjustments. We will assess the impact on people, not just measure whether or not they are adjusting to the system.

The government will use a series of objective tools to monitor the impact of measures in the new act on individuals, employers and communities. It will monitor the performance of the economy and the job markets. It will monitor the ways in which workers, employers, industries and communities adjust.

About a dozen communities across Canada will be selected for an in depth study. They will be chosen to represent different types of labour markets. Some will be urban, others will be smaller cities and towns. Some will be rural and some will be seasonal economies.

The employment insurance commission will monitor and assess how individuals, communities and the economy are being impacted by the changes and what type of adjustments they are making. The commission will report annually to Parliament. The monitoring process will assess the degree to which individuals are finding additional work in the new system and how much employers are providing more work. The Minister of Human Resources Development told the committee and Canadians that if the bill is not performing up to expectations we will see it clearly and take the necessary actions.

These monitoring steps will allow an assessment of how this new employment insurance system has resulted in changed behaviour by individuals, employers and communities. For example, we know the old system sometimes led people to refuse work that was available because the old UI rules could mean people could actually lose money from a claim they were going to file by working at less than their previous average weekly wage. We believe the new system will correct these problems. It will make work pay.

The department has provided us with a great deal of research that suggests this bill will achieve its goals. However the monitoring will ensure that what we sincerely believe will happen after Bill C-12 becomes law actually does. It will allow us to check our predictions against results.

In closing I commend and thank the members of the committee who contributed positively to the bill being presented today. This bill could have been presented to the House sooner had the government received co-operation from the opposition.

[Petitions, May 1st, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition is signed by constituents requesting that Parliament continue the lamprey control funding at the previous level and at no extra cost to the Canadian public.

I also agree with the petitioners.

[Petitions, May 1st, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions.

The first petition is from the residents of the regional municipality of Sudbury who object to the proposed legislation that would see boaters paying vessel licence fees of up to $1,000 every five years.

Therefore, your petitioners request that Parliament drop this proposal because it would put boating out of the reach of ordinary citizens.

I agree with the petitioners.