Human Resources Committee on June 1st, 2006

[France Bonsant, Bloc, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

First of all, I must say I was surprised to hear you mention that 220,000 jobs had been created in Canada. That may sound good, but do you have a provincial breakdown of these statistics? In 2005, in my region alone, 5,400 people lost their jobs. There is a downside to this. I want to know whether this is possible, as it would seem counterintuitive to rob one province to the benefit of another. Each province needs its economy.

You also mentioned specialized work. Based on statistics, 12 million people 16 and over are illiterate. They will never become doctors nor surgeons. Has the government considered setting up a literacy system to help these people progress in life?

Finally, you didn't mention tourism. When it comes to specialized occupations, tourism is one of the most prosperous industries in Quebec and Canada. It doesn't seem to be part of your specialized jobs, but we must also have specialists in the field of tourism.

Those are my three questions.

[Cliff Halliwell]

I don't have a table with statistics. However, Statistics Canada publishes a lot of information about the working population and employment growth, not only by province, but also by region. We have employment insurance data by administrative region.

What has particularly struck us over the past five years is that every region in Canada, and every province, has benefited from the economic recovery and employment growth. The unemployment rate varies from province to province but when you look at unemployment rates from an historical perspective, they're actually very low in several provinces right now.

[Karen Jackson]

If I could add to that on literacy, our department does manage a national literacy program. I'm afraid that I'm not an expert on the program or on the current thinking of the future of that programming and new emphases or new things that we may be thinking about, but certainly when colleagues of ours return next week, on June 8, workplace literacy is on the list, and if you're interested in talking more generally about literacy, I'll be sure they come prepared to do so.

[France Bonsant, Bloc, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Chair, a report on literacy which the committee worked on for two years was supposed to be tabled on November 20, 2005. This was never done. I'll table it next week. It may be of assistance.

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

It is common knowledge that since 2002-2003, 35,000 people in the manufacturing sector lost their jobs in Quebec. There aren't enough jobs in this sector. It is true that the economy is doing well, but it is moving mainly to the west. I think you acknowledge that yourselves when you say that the labour shortage is substantially higher and persistent in western Canada. So that's basically an acknowledgement, particularly during the oil boom, etc. The fact remains that there are workers who don't have jobs and you can't get past that. This state of affairs isn't necessarily linked to workforce mobility or to anything in particular. There's just no work in their region and the situation is dragging on.

What surprises me is how you reached this conclusion. I'd like to understand. On page 4 of your document, you state that the unemployment rate which was 6.4% in April has almost reached its lowest level in three decades and that the long-term unemployment rate has continued to fall over the past decade, going from 18% to less than 10%.

How have you calculated the unemployment rate? Is it on the basis of the number of people looking for employment, those getting employment insurance benefits or those who want to work but are no longer looking because there is no work in the regions?

Also, if the two premises I put forward are true, this skews the data. We now know how the Canadian government uses the employment insurance program. In 1992, out of everyone paying into the employment insurance fund, 88% could hope to get benefits if they had the misfortune of losing their job. That figure has dropped to less than 40% today.

The United Nations strongly criticized the Canadian government last week over its restrictive employment insurance accessibility policy which contributes to making families poorer. I have trouble understanding how you can paint such a picture of unemployment, when we know full well how very dramatic the situation is. I'd like your opinion on that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

I'm going to ask for very quick responses. Mr. Lessard is over his time.

[Cliff Halliwell]

I'd like to point out that the unemployment rate we referred to was calculated by Statistics Canada. It has nothing to do with the way the employment insurance system works. These figures were based on a poll of Canadian households. There were asked if they were looking for employment or if they currently had employment. This is the percentage of the population in the labour market which didn't have employment the week of the poll. That has nothing to do with access to employment insurance.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

We're out of time.

Mr. Lake, please.

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Is it my turn next, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

No, it's the Conservatives, then back to you, Mr. Martin.

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

I thought we had agreed at the first meeting that it would be the same in the second round as the first.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Mr. Martin, I thought you and I had an understanding. We talked about the fact that we would give each party a chance to go twice. You're getting a chance to go twice, but the government hasn't gone twice yet. You're going to be first up in the third round.

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

I didn't think that was the agreement.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

This was something you and I had talked about off-line. If that's not the way you want to go, then we would be more than happy to hear you now.

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Okay.

I want to go back to my own experience in small rural northern communities and some of the difficulties we're having in getting our students into programs of training. In many instances, it's just too expensive. The tuition fees are almost overwhelming. I know of young people who would love to, and have the potential to, go on to learn, get into a trade, but because of personal circumstances at home and their own financial situation, it just looms as impossible.

For example, if you are in a situation where you have to go to a bank to borrow money to actually get to school because you can't get enough through the student loan program--you need collateral, you need somebody to sign for you--what if your parents are already stretched or you have a single parent situation?

I have kids myself, and I know their friends. I'm lucky in that I have a job that pays me well, so I can afford to go to the bank and sign lines of credit for my kids. These kids can't go to their parents and ask them to sign a line of credit so they can go to school--so they don't go to school.

Then there are others who actually do go to school. When they finish, they find they have this debt that is so humongous that they can't even think about coming back to northern rural areas because the jobs there pay so little. Paying down the debt becomes a huge challenge, so they don't come back. They find the best job possible, often in the area where they go to school, and they stay there. We don't get them back.

Have you done any analysis of the impact of the cost of education--whether it's tuition or otherwise--and at the end of the day, the impact of this debt load that students seem to be accumulating in their willingness to actually do the training so they can participate in the economy in the way that we know they have the potential to?

[Karen Jackson]

I'm going to let Cliff speak to a couple of things.

We do have data and information in the department that indicates that access to post-secondary education and training does differ by urban, rural, northern, and remote communities. Participation rates in post-secondary education and training are not as high for northern and rural areas. We do see in the facts and figures what you're describing to us as your own personal experience. Maybe Cliff might want to elaborate a bit on that.

The one thing I do know from my area of responsibility around trying to promote entry into the skilled trades and apprenticeship is that the provinces--at least some provinces--are beginning to understand the importance of trying to do more module training and finding ways to offer the training part, the educational part, the classroom part, in the community. They're beginning to take mobile training units into rural and remote areas to reduce the cost to the student of actually having to leave their community to do their classroom training. That's one example that comes to my mind.

Perhaps Cliff wants to elaborate.

[Cliff Halliwell]

I want to briefly say that we're quite cognizant of that issue. I know that in working with the learning branch, we have been doing some research into the effects of geography: how far you are from a college or university, what that means in accommodation cost, and whether that constitutes a significant barrier that we need to address more completely. We are looking at the issue, but I think it would be most appropriate if the learning branch were to talk to that issue at the subsequent meeting.

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

I have just a quick question on doctor shortages in rural and northern areas. Across the country we have this major challenge, and again I speak of my own community, where we're losing doctors. Each time we lose a doctor it's 2,000 more orphaned patients. We don't seem to be able to get them replaced.

That's becoming a problem in a number of different ways--first of all, in supporting the population that's there. Sault Ste. Marie is on the cusp of a bit of a growth spurt because of the way our industries are starting to perform. If we can't guarantee people who come to work that their families are going to be looked after in terms of a family doctor, they're not coming. That's a problem.

The question I have is on enrolment limits in medical school. Have you looked at that and how that's getting in the way of this problem? Have you any answers to what we might do about that?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Just a very quick response, as time is up.

[Karen Jackson]

It's probably a question more appropriately addressed to officials from Health Canada, who I would think are doing that kind of analysis and research.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you.

Let's move over to Mr. Lake, for five minutes, please.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

First, I just want to comment on a couple of comments that I've heard. It's been interesting. Obviously, some of the conversation here illustrates exactly why we need to travel across the country and actually visit other places.

I come from Alberta. This goes back to our last meeting. I live in Alberta and I have one experience that's very different from some of what I'm hearing here today. We have labour shortages not only in skilled labour, we have labour shortages in everything. You can't go to a Tim Hortons without seeing signs up, and they're paying a heck of a lot better than they paid when I was just out of high school.

Back to the disincentive question that I asked before, when you look at the macro level of Canada as a whole, my own belief is that there is a job for everybody who is able to work, and more, actually, if you were to look Canada-wide, across the country, at the number of jobs and the number of workers. Yet we continue to pay many people across the country not to work.

Being comfortable at home, you've mentioned, is a reason, an incentive, for people to stay at home, but if that comfort is coming from taxpayer-funded income, then in reality the government or the taxpayers of the country are creating a disincentive, if that is the incentive for staying.

So that was where I was going with my disincentive question.

I'll give you a minute to respond to that, if you want to. I have another question after that.

[Barbara Glover]

Your question is a number of questions.

There's always a certain unemployment rate, and that's because it takes time. Today there's a job available--

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Transition, right.

[Barbara Glover]

And to get the word out.... For example, I said that more people moved to Alberta—I have to go back and check if the “ever” part is right—in the last quarter, and the reason is that the word is getting out. Does that mean that every employer in Alberta has a person for the job today? No, and I'm sure there's an employer in Alberta today who is looking for someone and who is going to have to get the word out. That part of unemployment always exists. It's the unemployment that exists. Somewhere a plant is closed and somewhere a plant is expanding or opening up, and that turbulence or churn in the economy is normal and it is one of the reasons that the unemployment rate can never go to zero. It's a fact of reality.

Every year millions of people leave their jobs for one reason or another, and every year millions of people get a new job. That's something like 20% of the jobs out there every year. So there's a lot of churn, and a really important part of labour market policy or the functioning of a labour market is matching these people leaving jobs with--