Evidence of meeting #27 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was surplus.
A recording is available from Parliament.
10:35 a.m.
Director General, Employment Insurance Policy, Department of Human Resources and Social Development Canada
It will always be up to the Canadian Employment Insurance Commission and the government to determine these things.
10:35 a.m.
Bloc
France Bonsant Bloc Compton—Stanstead, QC
Will Bill C-50 result in giving public servants and directors a role where they would act like cashiers, as in a bank or in a credit union? They will be taking in and handing out money. I find this difficult to understand.
Mr. Beauséjour, I understand that there is a consolidated $2 billion fund. All the surpluses will go back, as some kind of gift, to the government. In fact, all the surpluses will go back to the government.
10:35 a.m.
Director General, Employment Insurance Policy, Department of Human Resources and Social Development Canada
This is not so. The new board will not take in any money. As I said in my comments, Revenue Canada will continue gathering the money through the consolidated fund at the beginning. A consolidation will be made to find out how much surplus money there will be at the end of the year. The surplus will be transferred from the consolidated fund, credited to the employment insurance fund and transferred to the new board which will determine the premium rates for the following year while taking into account the money...
10:40 a.m.
Bloc
France Bonsant Bloc Compton—Stanstead, QC
This is what I am trying to understand. In fact, if there is a surplus, it will go back to the government. On the other hand, if there is a deficit, it will be treated as a loan that will go back to the employment insurance.
10:40 a.m.
Director, Social Policy, Federal-Provincial Relations and Social Policy Branch, Department of Finance
No, if there is a surplus, it will not go back to the government. If there is a surplus, the cashiers that you refer to will be managing $ 2 billion, and a surplus on top of that. These cashiers will certainly have an important role to play!
10:40 a.m.
Bloc
France Bonsant Bloc Compton—Stanstead, QC
This is only money. As they say in English, it will be pay and smile. They will manage the money from the premiums but nothing else. This is what I understand.
10:40 a.m.
Director, Social Policy, Federal-Provincial Relations and Social Policy Branch, Department of Finance
You think that managing $ 2 billion is not all that much ...
10:40 a.m.
Bloc
France Bonsant Bloc Compton—Stanstead, QC
I am not saying that it is not all that much, I am saying that this already exists within the government. This board is being set up simply to manage funds and premiums. I do not understand.
10:40 a.m.
Director, Social Policy, Federal-Provincial Relations and Social Policy Branch, Department of Finance
The board will manage an amount of $ 2 billion along with the surpluses, if any. It will also make sure that the surpluses are returned to those who paid the premiums.
10:40 a.m.
Director, Social Policy, Federal-Provincial Relations and Social Policy Branch, Department of Finance
They will be granted a reduction in the premiums over the subsequent years.
10:40 a.m.
Bloc
France Bonsant Bloc Compton—Stanstead, QC
This will give them about $10 a year, but no added protection.
10:40 a.m.
Director General, Employment Insurance Policy, Department of Human Resources and Social Development Canada
In fact, there are two aspects to the role of the board. Its primary role consists in managing monetary funds.
10:40 a.m.
Director General, Employment Insurance Policy, Department of Human Resources and Social Development Canada
There is also the role of determining the rates for the premiums which they will determine based on the information that it has and to the best of its knowledge. It will determine future rates.
10:40 a.m.
Bloc
Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC
Following what Mr. Lake said earlier, we feel that this weigh down the apparatus. A part of the commission's current mandate will be turned over to this board, which will be responsible for making recommendations to the minister regarding the balance between premium rates and the commitments made by the fund. This is clear. This happens automatically. Why not simply give this mandate to the commission by increasing the number of commissioners, for example? I think that this would have simplified matters and that it would have been in line with the unanimous recommendation made by this committee.
10:40 a.m.
Director, Social Policy, Federal-Provincial Relations and Social Policy Branch, Department of Finance
The underlying objective of creating a Crown corporation is to ensure greater transparency. Rather than leaving the decisions in the hands of the commission, we decided to create a Crown corporation, for the sake of greater transparency.
10:40 a.m.
Bloc
Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC
We are in favour of setting up an independent fund; we agree on that. However, I find it difficult to understand how this decision can ensure more transparency.
Let us look at this from another angle. How could the commission have failed to be transparent if it had some extra commissioners? The only difference is in the number of commissioners.
10:40 a.m.
Director, Social Policy, Federal-Provincial Relations and Social Policy Branch, Department of Finance
I believe the decision to create a Crown corporation belongs to the minister. Its objective is to increase transparency. That is the only answer I can give you. We have already made that point.
10:40 a.m.
Director General, Employment Insurance Policy, Department of Human Resources and Social Development Canada
The fact that it will guarantee that money is managed independently is also an factor that was considered.
10:40 a.m.
Bloc
Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC
Just because you are telling me that does not mean that it is a convincing argument. That is more or less what Ms. Sgro said earlier. It is all fine and well to tell us that the objective is to ensure transparency, but how did the commission, which already had this mandate, fail to provide this transparency? All they had to do was to entrust it with the fund.
10:40 a.m.
Director, Social Policy, Federal-Provincial Relations and Social Policy Branch, Department of Finance
If I may—
May 1st, 2008 / 10:40 a.m.
Director, Social Policy, Federal-Provincial Relations and Social Policy Branch, Department of Finance
Our role is not to convince you, but to explain the provisions of Bill C-50. I apologize if you expected me to convince you of something. I can do my best to explain it to you, but to convince you... That is why I am not in politics, I am not good at convincing people.
