Bonnie Brown

[Speech From The Throne, November 1st, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I want to comment on the speeches from the previous two speakers who shared their time.

[The Economy, November 1st, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.

The minister recently appeared before the Standing Committee on Finance to present his 1996 fiscal and economic update. Now that the minister is working on the 1997 budget, can he tell the House how Canadians can get involved and have their views represented in the content of the next budget?

[Social Programs, October 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, we are proud of the equality of opportunity that our social programs in health, education and welfare have provided to all Canadians. We must be vigilant to ensure that equality of opportunity continues to prevail.

In Toronto, Ontario's teachers were being vigilant when they marched to warn parents about the erosion of Ontario's education system. In Ottawa, Liberal Party delegates were being vigilant when they addressed the phenomenon of child poverty in the country. They are recommending a national child benefit to lift children out of poverty and to restore equality of opportunity as a hallmark of Canadian citizenship.

As parliamentarians we too must be vigilant so that during our watch we strengthen equality of opportunity for Canadian children. By doing so, we will ensure the future of our nation.

[1997 Francophone Games, September 25th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I want to correct a false impression that was left in the minds of Canadians as a result of an article that appeared in a national newspaper on July 23. The article implied that the government is spending more on the Francophone Games of 1997 than we spent on the Olympics in Atlanta. This is false.

In fact Sports Canada provided $615,000 to send our team to Atlanta, but it also provides $20 million annually toward the athletes' preparation programs and more than $7 million in direct assistance to our carded athletes.

Since 1992 the government has spent almost $115 million aimed at Olympic sports organizations and their athletes. That is over 40 times the amount we are spending on the Francophone Games.

The upcoming games in Madagascar are also an opportunity for our athletes to start preparing for the next Olympics. That is what happened in 1994 in Paris where Bruny Surin won the gold medal in the 100 metres and Donovan Bailey won the silver.

[Olympic Athletes, September 20th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow, September 21, will be a great day in Oakville when my constituents will welcome home and honour our four Olympic athletes: our boxer Domenic Filane, our cyclist Eric Wohlberg, our paddler Gavin Maxwell, and our sprinter Donovan Bailey.

After a breakfast with a representative group of children, the four Olympians will proceed through town in a motorcade to a big rally in a waterfront park. CBC Newsworld will cover the rally live at 12 noon.

I want to invite you, Mr. Speaker, my colleagues in the House, and indeed all Canadians to share the joy and pride that will explode in Oakville tomorrow. Join us by watching CBC Newsworld at noon.

[Mexico, September 17th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, there has been considerable confusion about the Minister of Foreign Affairs' recent advisory about travel to Mexico. Is he advising Canadians not to travel to Mexico at all? Could the minister explain the situation and clarify it for the House?

[Small Business, June 10th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Industry.

In response to a request from the Standing Committee on Industry, the Canadian Bankers Association has now provided a report on the relationship between the banks and small and medium size enterprises.

How will this report assist our government to make sure small businesses have the financial services they need in order to flourish, to grow and to create new jobs?

[Employment, June 3rd, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, for a long time provincial governments have been requesting greater responsibility in labour market development. The government has now responded.

Last week it sent the provinces and territories a proposal that offers them responsibility for active employment measures funded through the employment insurance account. It offers them the opportunity to deliver measures such as wage subsidies, income supplements and partnerships for job creation, and the chance to provide labour market services such as screening for employment programs and employment counselling.

About $2 billion worth of programs and services have been put on the table. Canadians will benefit from the new labour market arrangements because they will more closely reflect local and regional labour needs and will eliminate unnecessary duplication between governments.

No issue matters more to the government than helping unemployed people get back to work. We believe that co-operation with the provinces and the-

[Employment Insurance Act, May 10th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, in addressing Bill C-12, I want to emphasize the positive impact this legislation will have on the creation of jobs in the country. The government calculates that the change from unemployment insurance to employment insurance should create between 100,000 and 150,000 new job opportunities.

I would like to take a minute or two to describe how these figures were arrived at. First, the modernization of the system will have an impact. The central change in the EI system is in the way individuals qualify for benefits. Under the old system, an individual had to work a certain number of weeks, called a fixed period, at a minimum of 15 hours per week and had to earn a minimum amount per week in each one of those weeks to qualify. In high unemployment areas the minimum was 12 weeks and in low unemployment areas the minimum was 20 weeks.

Once workers had the minimum number of weeks they could apply for benefits and the benefit was calculated at 55 per cent of the average weekly earnings up to a maximum amount. It was also

based on an average of the weekly earnings in the last 12 to 20 weeks worked over a 52 week period.

The problem was there was a built in disincentive to take any other work beyond the minimum weeks required to qualify, particularly if the extra work paid anything less than the person was earning in the previous 12 to 20 weeks. Taking any short term job that paid less would cut UI benefits if a claim was made. It would lower the average weekly earnings and, therefore, the benefit cheque would be less.

If a person was laid off after having worked the minimum period at the rate of $600 per week, why would a person take a short term job for maybe two or three weeks that paid only $450 per week? Or why would the person search out a part time job or any other work if it meant that in the end he or she would receive lower benefits?

I should also mention the amount of work that goes unreported in the underground economy. Some people who are unemployed and on claims take on informal work on which no premium is paid and no tax collected. This costs other workers in higher premiums and higher taxes. It also distorts the true picture of the amount of work that is actually available.

These are some of the major disincentives to work in the old system. And not just for workers. Many employers also built their hiring and layoff practices around the rigid weeks worked component of the old system rather than basing their decisions on the needs of their marketplace.

Also, in several areas many employers have real difficulty finding people to work because the unemployment insurance benefit payment is higher than the employer can afford to pay.

To eliminate these disincentives the new employment insurance system is based on hours worked, not weeks. Under the new system every hour worked in the last 52 weeks counts in determining entry. Therefore, all work is insurable and all earnings over the last 26 weeks count in calculating benefits.

The disincentive to work for longer periods or to take on jobs that may pay less or to avoid reporting work and earnings will be reduced. To maximize benefit under the new system workers will require two more weeks of work beyond the minimum entrance requirement in each region.

Since part time hours are now insurable, declaring them is to the claimant's advantage. It is especially advantageous for people with multiple jobs to declare earnings from each of them. Under the new system individuals can now count back 26 weeks to find the required hours of work when calculating average earnings for benefit purposes. The average is then divided by what is called the divisor which as a minimum is two weeks plus the minimum number of weeks required in an individual's region. That figure is now lower in high unemployment areas and higher in lower unemployment areas compared to Bill C-12. The two weeks are added to ensure that there is a continuing incentive for people to work the full period if work is available but at the same time to ensure that it is not overly harsh on those who have limited work opportunities.

Another modernization feature of the new system which helps to create jobs is that people on benefits will be able to earn up to $50 per week, or 25 per cent of their benefit, whichever is higher, without paying a penalty.

Other features which encourage work are, one, the intensity rule, whereby repeat claimants receive slightly lower benefits and, two, higher hours for eligibility for new entrants and those who have been out of the workforce force for several years.

All of these measures add up to about 150,000 more jobs. In addition, employment offices will have a greatly enhanced ability to link up people looking for work with job opportunities. Up to two million Canadians a year use information and advisory services available through the national employment service in the job search. A new computerized job matching system is now in place. It is called the electronic labour exchange. Located on the Internet, it matches jobs to people and people to jobs faster than any traditional method.

People looking for work are also going to have access to a great deal more information on the qualifications required for different jobs, as well as things like group information sessions, job search clubs and other initiatives which will help them get back into the workforce.

For example, in my riding of Oakville-Milton we have had the job search club for a year or so and we now have the statistics reported back as to the success rate. It is 80 percent. That is, 80 per cent who attended the job search club have now found work.

There will also be appropriate counselling for people who need help finding work. People will get the kind of direct help they need to locate employment.

A second change which is going to help create more jobs is the reduction in premiums and the reduction in the maximum allowable earnings. The combination of these two measures means that both employees and employers are going to save a considerable amount of money. For employers who have complained that payroll taxes hinder job creation, a modest reduction means that they will have money to invest in hiring more people. These

changes will reduce premiums by $1.25 billion in 1996 and are predicted to create up to 20,000 new job opportunities.

The third area of change which is going to create more jobs is the new active employment benefits. The government intends to work in concert with the provinces to help get people back to work. That means harmonizing the new employment benefits with provincial programs and making new delivery arrangements which could see provincial governments delivering federal programs. A series of federal-provincial agreements will be negotiated to work out the options.

In reducing overlap and duplication, the government will be building a more efficient system that will provide better and more thorough support to unemployed Canadians. While the approaches may vary from province to province, the primary focus is on getting results, that is more people back into the workforce.

The government is open to discussions on how best this can be put into place. It will be investing some $800 million of the savings that will be achieved with this legislation into active employment benefits. With the current $1.9 billion already budgeted for employment services this means now a total of $2.7 billion to actively help unemployed people get back to work.

Upwards of 400,000 unemployed workers every year will qualify for a very flexible and innovative series of re-employment measures.

Instead of getting off the shelf programs, people looking for work will be getting the kind of direct, personalized support tailored to get them into a job as quickly as possible. These methods have been tested and proven. We know they work because we have seen the results.

Wage subsidies, for example, will encourage hiring and provide on the job experience. A claimant could arrange for a wage subsidy with a selected employer who will provide a job that will lead to long term employment or re-employment somewhere else. The wage subsidy will help thousands of people move into the workforce.

For many people, getting off social assistance and unemployment benefits can be daunting, particularly when getting a job could mean a less secure income. There are also older workers facing the switch to a new industry and finding difficulty adjusting to it. That is why there will also be wage supplements to temporarily increase income for those who would otherwise find it difficult to take a lower paying job.

People with the initiative and drive to start up their own businesses will be eligible for self-employment assistance. In most cases these new businesses employ the person starting up the business as well as one or two new employees.

Skills loans and grants will be available for people who need to upgrade their employment qualifications. These will only be run in provinces which agree to have federal involvement. A series of community job partnerships will be undertaken to directly help people find work and experience while serving in their own communities.

All these new measures will be in effect nationwide. As the components of the new EI system begin to serve workers across the country, the enthusiasm for the new program will grow.

[Petitions, May 10th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure today to present a petition from British Columbia with 751 names collected in order to ask the government to begin to act on chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia and multiple chemical sensitivities, and to take care of these people, have treatment for them and to assure them dignity when they are afflicted with these illnesses.