An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act and the Employment Insurance (Fishing) Regulations

This bill was last introduced in the 37th Parliament, 1st Session, which ended in September 2002.

Sponsor

Jane Stewart  Liberal

Status

This bill has received Royal Assent and is now law.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Employment InsuranceOral Question Period

June 13th, 2001 / 2:40 p.m.
See context

Liberal

André Harvey Liberal Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development.

The government made significant changes to the employment insurance program with Bill C-2. Yesterday, the Bloc Quebecois said that the minister did not want to make any changes beyond Bill C-2.

Can the minister assure the members of this House and all Canadians that she firmly intends to monitor and assess the employment insurance program and will continue to make whatever changes are necessary?

Employment InsuranceOral Question Period

June 13th, 2001 / 2:35 p.m.
See context

Brant Ontario

Liberal

Jane Stewart LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development

Mr. Speaker, two things should be clear to the House by now.

First, the government is prepared to monitor and assess the impact of employment insurance and to make changes when changes are necessary.

Second, Bloc members have finally realized their serious error in voting with the Alliance against the government on the amendments to Bill C-2, which now supports their constituents, seasonal workers and parents.

It will be a long hot summer for Bloc members who go back to their ridings and try to explain to their constituents why they did not support the government.

Employment InsuranceOral Question Period

June 12th, 2001 / 2:20 p.m.
See context

Brant Ontario

Liberal

Jane Stewart LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development

Mr. Speaker, let us look at what some people said about the amendments in Bill C-2. For example, the building and construction trades department of the AFL-CIO stated “Generally we are supportive of the reforms that are suggested in Bill C-2”.

The Canadian Federation of Labour said “The positive collective measures contained in this bill should be adopted rapidly”. We adopted those amendments rapidly but with no help from that party.

Employment InsuranceOral Question Period

June 12th, 2001 / 2:20 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Paul Crête Bloc Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC

Mr. Speaker, the government took advantage of people by promising, in the middle of an election campaign, substantial changes to the Employment Insurance Act, when it never intended to do more than was contained in Bill C-2, which everyone, even the Liberal members, found fell far short of the mark.

Does the Secretary of State for Amateur Sport deny that he promised unemployed workers and unions much more substantial amendments than those contained in Bill C-2 and that he did so to calm the rumble of discontent threatening to upset the Liberal campaign? Could he not rise today and remind the Minister of Human Resources Development that this was the case?

Employment InsuranceOral Question Period

June 12th, 2001 / 2:20 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, this morning at a press conference, Richard Goyette of FTQ-Construction said that the Secretary of State for Amateur Sport promised during the campaign to deliver an indepth reform of employment insurance that would go well beyond the present Bill C-2.

Will the Secretary of State for Amateur Sport, the one who made a promise on behalf of the government to unemployed workers on the North Shore, have the courage to rise in his place today and tell the House whether his election promises were limited to getting Bill C-2 passed?

Employment InsuranceOral Question Period

June 12th, 2001 / 2:20 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, during oral question period, the Minister of Human Resources Development gave her version of the election promises made by the Liberals to unemployed workers in Quebec.

The minister said, and I quote, “we promised to deliver the amendments that have now been passed in the context of Bill C-2”.

Is the minister telling unemployed workers that the Liberals' election promises were limited to getting Bill C-2 passed?

Employment InsuranceOral Question Period

June 11th, 2001 / 2:30 p.m.
See context

Brant Ontario

Liberal

Jane Stewart LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development

Mr. Speaker, the continuing attempt of hon. members to cover up their political error in voting against Bill C-2 gives me an opportunity to remind the House of the many things we have done to change employment insurance.

We have gone to an hourly basis, which is very good for seasonal workers because every hour counts. We are working with provinces and territories to build pilot programs in support of older workers. We have doubled parental benefits. We have repealed the intensity rule. We are committed to continuing to monitor the Employment Insurance Act.

Employment InsuranceOral Question Period

June 11th, 2001 / 2:25 p.m.
See context

Brant Ontario

Liberal

Jane Stewart LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development

Mr. Speaker, we promised to deliver the amendments that have now been passed in the context of Bill C-2. We are working in communities in the provinces of Quebec and New Brunswick with workers and employers because for us it is not only about providing benefits through employment insurance but it is also about finding real jobs. When will members of that party figure that out?

Employment InsuranceOral Question Period

June 11th, 2001 / 2:20 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, it was not even voted on, they pulled it. But we stand against organized crime.

The unanimous Human Resources Development Canada report bears the title “Beyond Bill C-2” which means, in case the minister does not understand, that the government must go beyond it so that young people, women and seasonal workers are no longer penalized by the eligibility rules; so that older workers may be retrained; so that the self-employed, who are not covered at present, may benefit from it.

Are we to conclude that she has just turned a blind eye to all the recommendations of the standing committee on human resources development, recommendations—

Employment InsuranceOral Question Period

June 11th, 2001 / 2:20 p.m.
See context

Brant Ontario

Liberal

Jane Stewart LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development

Mr. Speaker, I again remind the hon. member that it is this government that has on many occasions updated the Employment Insurance Act to reflect the specific needs of Canadians.

By asking these questions over and over again, as the hon. member has, it is becoming clear that what all the Bloc members are trying to do is cover up for the fact that they made a mistake last fall in voting against Bill C-44 and again this spring by voting against Bill C-2.

Employment InsuranceOral Question Period

June 11th, 2001 / 2:20 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, since the tabling of the unanimous report by the standing committee on human resources two weeks ago, the Bloc Quebecois has been asking day after day for the government to follow up on the committee's recommendations before the end of this session.

On each occasion, the government has refused to commit, when Bill C-2, which has just been passed, is clearly insufficient for the unemployed.

Can this government explain its unwillingness to help the unemployed by following up now on the unanimous report by the standing committee on human resources?

Employment InsuranceOral Question Period

June 7th, 2001 / 2:35 p.m.
See context

Brant Ontario

Liberal

Jane Stewart LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development

Mr. Speaker, Canadians, especially Canadians living in the province of Quebec, know that the Bloc has no credibility on the issue of employment insurance.

When we asked Bloc members to co-operate with us last fall and make the changes in Bill C-2, they denied it. When they had the opportunity to vote on these important amendments in support of seasonal workers this spring, they voted against them. They voted with the Alliance.

The questions they ask day after day are nothing more than a smoke screen. They might as well admit that they were wrong and that they should have supported the government on these important changes.

Employment InsuranceOral Question Period

June 7th, 2001 / 2:25 p.m.
See context

Brant Ontario

Liberal

Jane Stewart LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development

Mr. Speaker, absolutely I know the attitude of my colleagues. The attitude of my colleagues is one that works with the government to pass amendments like those in Bill C-2 that will reduce the number of hours required to receive special benefits and that will double parental benefits; and to meet with me and members with their communities to talk about economic development.

On this side of the House we know that employment insurance is important but we also believe in a balanced approach, which means diversifying economies in those regions of Canada that need our help.

Employment InsuranceOral Question Period

June 7th, 2001 / 2:25 p.m.
See context

Brant Ontario

Liberal

Jane Stewart LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development

Mr. Speaker, it is clear that the government is prepared to make adjustments to employment insurance based on conversations with Canadians and the information that we received from reports, including our annual monitoring and assessment reports. Bill C-2 is a clear example of this approach.

What is not clear is how the Bloc matches its rhetoric with its voting pattern here in the House. When it is given the option to change the employment insurance program in support of seasonal workers and families, it chooses to vote against it.

Employment InsuranceOral Question Period

June 7th, 2001 / 2:25 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, that is totally false. The government was the one that did not want to debate the matter, failed to introduce the bill, and preferred to call an election.

The election promises made went far beyond what was included in Bill C-2. The bill was passed. We are talking about something else. The situation is clear: the unemployed need help, but the political will to help is lacking.

Why is the government not in as much of a hurry to do something for the unemployed as it was to do something for the billionaires with their family trusts and to raise MPs' salaries? Why this double standard?