Human Resources Committee on Feb. 28th, 2007

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

Thank you.

Ms. Deschamps, thank you for coming in. I appreciate the opportunity to talk to you about your private member's bill.

I want to address something right from the start. I believe I heard that over half the unemployed don't have access to EI. Numbers I've seen refer more to 83%, I believe, of the unemployed who have paid into the program and had recent job separation and qualified were eligible to receive benefits. So obviously there's a big difference between 50% and 17%.

Can you tell me specifically who fits into that 50% that you're saying don't receive employment insurance?

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

One moment, please, if you don't mind, Mr. Chair.

I do not wish to interfere with my colleague's question, but I must say that he is working on an assumption that is inaccurate. The 83% is not based on the number of people who pay into EI, rather, it is based on the number of people who are eligible under the new rules.

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

This is actually not the issue.

Could the witness answer?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

We'll let the witness answer the question.

Ms. Deschamps.

[Johanne Deschamps, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

You are finished speaking?

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

Is my clock running right now?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

I'll restart it.

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

Thank you.

Again, you had said that over half of unemployed people don't have access to benefits. The numbers I've seen show that over 83% of the unemployed who had paid into the program and had recent job separation, who qualified, were eligible to receive benefits.

Obviously there's a big difference in the two numbers. I would like you to tell me specifically who you are counting in that 50% who you're saying don't qualify or don't receive benefits.

[Johanne Deschamps, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

I have no idea what your sources are or where you are getting that. We are probably coming at this differently.

However, this is what we learned from HRDC, and our figures are very accurate. Out of everyone who contributes to the EI fund, and under the system's current eligibility rules, approximately four out of every ten workers are eligible for EI at this time.

I have not invented any of this. We visited all regions. It was also following the committee work—

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

I only have a little bit of time, so I want to ask you a specific question.

In the situation where my wife taught for five years, paid into EI, got pregnant, we had a child, she went through her maternity benefits and then decided to stay home, would she fit into your numbers as far as being an unemployed person who's not receiving EI?

[Johanne Deschamps, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

I suppose so, because the system is probably meant to provide regular benefits. There are also special benefits, as we know.

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

Clearly some people would have no expectation. We didn't have any expectation that we should be receiving EI beyond that period. So there would be people within that number who would really have no expectation of the benefits, but you would say they should be receiving them anyway, I guess.

My wife stayed home for several years after that. How long would she continue to be counted in your numbers, the 50%?

[Johanne Deschamps, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Right now, Mr. Lake, we are talking about special benefits, while Bill C-269 aims to improve the current system. That is, it aims to make the EI system accessible to every worker who pays into it.

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

Fair enough. I take it that you're not sure.

I'm curious about the specifics of the program—for example, the two-week waiting period. I'm sure you've costed that out. Could you tell us what it would cost to wipe out the two-week waiting period?

[Johanne Deschamps, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

I do not have the figures in front of me. Perhaps my colleague, Yves Lessard, can elaborate on this.

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

With all due respect, we have five minutes, and you're the sponsor of the bill. I assume you have the research that you've done in front of you. So I'll ask you about the rationale behind the proposal to extend the maximum range of benefits from 45 to 50 weeks. Can you give me the costing out that you've done on that? And also, could you give me the evidence that adding five more weeks will significantly meet the needs of the unemployed people it would affect?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

There are just 30 seconds left.

[Johanne Deschamps, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

If you listened carefully during my testimony, you will recall that I already talked about this. The five additional weeks aim to eliminate the gap increasingly faced by seasonal workers.

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

How many? You say increasing numbers.

[Johanne Deschamps, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

As I said earlier, in my region, 43% of workers receive EI benefits.

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

What's the cost nationwide?

[Johanne Deschamps, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

That means that 43% of the workers in my region run out of benefits before they return to work. The gap can be as long as ten weeks.

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

I asked about the cost, though. That was the first part of my question, the costing of that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

That's all the time we have, Mr. Lake.

We're going to have to move to our next round of four minutes. I apologize for the shortness of questions. It's so we get the second round in.

Ms. Dhalla, four minutes please.

[Ruby Dhalla, Liberal, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

Thank you very much to Ms. Deschamps for coming forward and for your interest on this particular issue.

In the view of time, I'm going to actually ask all of my three questions at once. I would also follow up on Mr. Lake's question in regard to costing for the five-week period. I know you've told us a percentage, but it would be beneficial for the committee to have a costing.

I want to touch upon two other questions that are perhaps in a similar area. As a health care provider prior to becoming elected, I worked with a number of individuals who were on employment insurance, and one of the main goals during their treatment plan was to ensure that they returned to their pre-injury status. We were able to have rehabilitation done and ensure that they went back, hopefully better, into the workforce, and had proper integration.

With your proposal here of extending the benefits from 15 to 50 weeks, there are probably about 10 million Canadians, from the figure that I have, who actually access private disability income-replacement plans. With the extension from 15 to 50 weeks, with some of these private plans that are in place right now there is an opportunity for early intervention, there is an opportunity to ensure that individuals are rehabilitated.

So how would the increase from the 15—