Evidence of meeting #53 for Finance in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A video is available from Parliament.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
If it's a separate accounting, how could the ruling be that this has an impact on the consolidated revenue account?
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
It's because the consolidated revenue fund either owes EI money or EI owes it.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
Mr. Chair, I think this actually exposes a deep, dark secret that I'm not sure the government wanted to expose. It's very clear that either the employment insurance account has been merged, despite the government protests to the contrary, or the employment insurance account continues to be administered separately.
If it's administered separately, your ruling, of course, does not stand. If it's been merged together, I think it's important that the public know that. I think the best way for the public to be better informed would be for the committee to overturn your ruling, so I will challenge it.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Thank you for your explanation, Mr. Rae.
Mr. Clerk, it's over to you for a polling of the committee.
(Ruling of the chair sustained: yeas 9; nays 2)
5:20 p.m.
Legislative Clerk
Mr. Chair, the amendment was to create new clause 308.1. Since it was inadmissible, we go to clause 309.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
That's right. You are correct. Thank you.
(On clause 309)
Is there an explanation here?
5:20 p.m.
Executive Director, Employment Insurance Policy, Skills and Employment Branch, Department of Employment and Social Development
Yes, Mr. Chair. It's similar to other subclauses that I've spoken about. The objective is simply to ensure that all qualified claimants with at least 420 hours of insurable employment can receive sickness benefits for a one-year period as of September 26, 2021. Subclause 309(2) would return the sections of the EI Act just mentioned to their original language and operations.
It's rather cumbersome, but this is the way the drafting process had to work.
That's it for clause 309.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Okay. Is there any discussion?
(Clause 309 agreed to on division)
(On clauses 310 to 316)
5:20 p.m.
Executive Director, Employment Insurance Policy, Skills and Employment Branch, Department of Employment and Social Development
Mr. Chair, if you would prefer, clauses 310 to 316 are all consequential amendments with the same intent of ensuring that those who are eligible for sickness benefits can receive sickness benefits with 420 hours, with the definitions of major and minor attachment claimant being removed from the act.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
I think we can get agreement on that.
Are there any questions on clauses 310 to 316? I see none.
(Clauses 310 to 316 inclusive agreed to on division)
(On clause 317)
Ms. Nandy or whomever.
5:20 p.m.
Executive Director, Employment Insurance Policy, Skills and Employment Branch, Department of Employment and Social Development
It's going to be me, Mr. Chair.
I think we're on clause 316, if I'm not mistaken. Subclause 316(1) amends the definition of “employment” in paragraph 29(a) of the EI Act, which is used to deal with the qualification and disentitlement roles set out in sections 30 to 33, to a definition that will now only include the claimant's most recent employment or any employment in the benefit period. The objective of subclause 316(1) is to temporarily ensure that a claimant cannot be disqualified or disentitled under sections 30 to 33 based on employment that does not meet this new definition for a one-year period as of September 26, 2021.
Subclause 316(2) again reverts to the original language and operations after the end of the one-year period.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Are there any questions?
(Clause 317 agreed to on division)
We're on 318.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.
I note that Ms. May does have one amendment, and I believe.... Is that the only one that we're left with?
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
No, we do have NDP-22, which is on clause 324. Ms. May's is on schedule 3.
5:20 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.
I think we've already dealt with NDP-22 because that was coupled with NDP-20.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Okay, but we will have to.... We will get to it, and we will ignore it. We'll just make a statement when we're going by it. That's not hard to do.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
A drive-by is great, Mr. Chair, given the fact that I think we had hoped to have this done by 5:30.
If you could use your discretion to lump together all of those clauses that don't have amendments so that we could pass them on division, then we could deal with the remaining amendments. I guess there are two left then.
5:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
We can do that. I do have to remind committee, though, that with the agreement we have with the translators, we do have to suspend at 5:30 for 30 minutes. That's the agreement with the translators—to go to 7:00 Ottawa time, I guess, is it? I'm looking at my clock.
Okay, let's deal with clauses 318 to 323. I'll mention on clause 324 the chair's ruling so that we do that properly. Then we will try to block the rest until we get to division 37.
(Clauses 318 to 323 inclusive agreed to on division)
(On clause 324)
On clause 324, there is an NDP amendment already spoken to, and I've ruled it inadmissible. I believe that's been agreed to, so it's inadmissible.
5:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Okay.
(Clause 324 agreed to on division)
(Clauses 325 to 361 inclusive agreed to on division)
(On clauses 362 and 363)
Now we'll bring in folks on division 37, which is on the Canada Elections Act.
Ms. Paquet.
June 3rd, 2021 / 5:25 p.m.
Manon Paquet Director, Special Projects, Democratic Institutions Secretariat, Privy Council Office
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My name is Manon Paquet, and I'm the director of special projects in the PCO's democratic institutions secretariat.
Clause 362 relates to section 91 of the Canada Elections Act, which prohibits specific types of false statements made to affect the election results. The amendment would add the word “knowingly” to the associated offences to clarify that for that provision to apply, the individual or entity needed to know that the statement was false. It responds to a recent court decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice.
5:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Are there any questions on this that relate to clause 362? Is there any discussion?
Ms. Dzerowicz.