Evidence of meeting #16 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
On top of that $1.9 billion over five years, there is of course in the budget an additional $1 billion for renovations and energy retrofits. That would be a good thing.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
On housing for seniors, another $400 million over two years--that's a direct investment. That would be an appropriate investment of dollars. And of course for persons with disabilities it would be another positive aspect. For aboriginals and people living in the north, there's another $600 million, money going in the right direction, according to what I hear you say.
Then we come to employment insurance, which is really an insurance program funded by employers and employees, and as you expand the program, of course, the premiums would rise. Now, given the state of the economy, of course, and the fact that things are difficult to begin with, the government has chosen to freeze the premium rates to both employers and employees and allow for greater benefit coverage and extended benefit coverage to the tune of $4.5 billion. Would you agree with me that that's a positive step?
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
You may think it should be more than $4.5 billion, I gather, but, again, it's a question of how much money do you have and where do you put it. Now, you're saying $4.5 billion is good, but you'd like to see it doubled or tripled.
12:05 p.m.
Coordinator, Make Poverty History
There are a number of things that need to be done to fix the employment insurance. A few things got fixed, but I would say the most important things did not get fixed. The most important thing is that these benefits be available to more Canadians falling into unemployment.
The reason is, if you fall into unemployment and are not able to get employment insurance, you have to sell off all your assets and sink down to a really low level of supported welfare, from which it is much more difficult to climb back out.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Are you suggesting, then, that the premiums be increased or that the government inject additional billions of dollars?
12:05 p.m.
Coordinator, Make Poverty History
Well, there is still some room in the premiums. There was a large surplus. I know that's going to get eaten down pretty quickly in this current economic crisis, but yes, I think it's more important to ensure more people have access to employment insurance. That's the most urgent thing that needs to be done, and that was not fixed in the recent budget.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
The other one is getting a job, ensuring people get skilled and trained for new jobs. The total expenditure with the federal-provincial agreements is $8.3 billion. I take it you would say that's a good investment.
12:10 p.m.
Coordinator, Make Poverty History
Yes, the training part of the budget was actually quite good, quite welcome.
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
When the EI benefits were expanded to include an additional $1 billion to allow for extended training on top of $1.95 billion, was that a good initiative?
12:10 p.m.
Coordinator, Make Poverty History
Yes, I've already said the training components have been good.
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
From consulting with people across the country, they were indicating that if you were going to apply roughly $1 billion somewhere with respect to either eliminating the two-week waiting period or extending the benefits for those who have been off the job market for longer by adding five weeks, the preference seemed to be to add the $1 billion to extending the benefits by five weeks, as opposed to dealing with it in a two-week waiting period.
Do you agree with most Canadians on that?
12:10 p.m.
Coordinator, Make Poverty History
No, that's the one I would disagree with.
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Now, I have here a comment by our former Bank of Canada governor, David Dodge, who said, with respect to the two-week waiting period:
...there's a lot of churn in the labour market, just normal churn. ... That two weeks is there for a very good reason. ... Moreover, many of the people that are being laid off get some sort of bridge payment through that period. So that’s not where the real issue is. The real issue is that some of these people are going to be off work for a rather long period of time....
That's where the need is, and that's where it should be applied.
Do you disagree with him?
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Raymonde Folco
Perhaps you can use somebody else's time to answer my colleagues a little bit more fully on your disagreement.
We're on the second round now.
Mr. Savage, you have five minutes for the questions and answers.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Michael Savage Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
Thank you.
Thank you to the witnesses.
I want to reiterate how disappointing it is that this meeting isn't being publicly broadcast. We have some of the leaders in the anti-poverty movement in Canada appearing today, coming forward with very passionate presentations. This is really what this study is all about, and it's disappointing that it's not more widely seen.
Having said that, I want to thank you for coming. Groups like the CCPA have been a big part of our social policy landscape in Canada for a long time, and Make Poverty History, of course, both domestically and a quick tip of the hat to the work internationally. We'll keep the pressure on John McKay's bill on corporate social responsibility. You'll help us with that one, I hope. And of course there's Canada Without Poverty.
I want to go to the issue of taxes. You mentioned, Mr. Howlett, in your presentation about the 2006 tax cuts in the first budget of the Conservative government, how they don't necessarily assist those most in need. We had a budget in 2009 that was billed as a budget to provide stimulus and to particularly assist those who need help the most. According to the Caledon Institute, if somebody has $150,000 in income, which is most of the people around this table, a two-earner couple with two kids gets $483 in savings and a single parent with one child gets nothing out of this budget. So we still don't seem to quite be there. We're not getting it.
Sometimes you hear about people saying you reduced taxes. I used to hear, not so much recently, fortunately, from the Conservative side that reducing the GST was this great thing for poor people because they don't pay other taxes. But we have mechanisms. We have the GST rebate, which I think the CCPA had suggested doubling, as opposed to tax cuts that are widely spread out and assist people who make more money or certainly assist them equally. So you have that measure. You have the child tax benefit, to which you've referred. You've talked about the importance of that versus the child tax credit.
I want to get a comment from each of you about the idea that combatting poverty is complicated. It seems to me that a lot of mechanisms exist right now that just need to be fixed. They don't need to be reinvented. EI is one of them, the child tax benefit, the GIS. Do you agree with me that we have the mechanisms in Canada, and if we really wanted to combat poverty right now, a large part of that infrastructure exists, it just needs to be enabled?
April 28th, 2009 / 12:10 p.m.
Senior Economist, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
It's quite clear we have the mechanisms in place, because, as I mentioned to you, different jurisdictions have cut various rates of poverty in half. What we need is the federal government to step up to the plate and be a partner in this poverty reduction measure and take leadership in the areas in which they have unique jurisdiction. We've outlined some of those this morning.
I think, without question, absolutely, you can reduce poverty, even in this climate. The question is, will you?
12:15 p.m.
Coordinator, Make Poverty History
I would agree there are a whole range of measures.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Raymonde Folco
Excuse me, Mr. Howlett. I asked Dr. Courtneidge to speak, and then I'll give you some time.
12:15 p.m.
Outreach and Policy, Canada Without Poverty
Thank you. I'll be very brief.
I think the answer to your question is that you need a mix of reformist approaches and a mix of transformist approaches.
Along with your exactly accurate comments about making sure the present system works efficiently, I would add this point about making the public purse work efficiently for all Canadians.
I would introduce just one word that's evolving in policy circles, and that's the idea to complement the idea of redistribution, which is the idea of pre-distribution. In other words, if you get the distribution right from the get-go, you look at the mechanisms that cause a mal-distribution of incomes, and then go from there.
12:15 p.m.
Coordinator, Make Poverty History
Yes, I would agree a lot of measures already in place could be improved, and it would go a long way to achieving the results we would hope for. At the same time, I think longer term, some creative new proposals need to be looked at as well.
Ultimately, my wish would be that the federal government would sit down with other levels of government and develop a coordinated plan to reduce poverty, because there are very real differences in the nature of poverty according to the region. In the Maritimes, for example, there's a lot of seasonal work, and you need to shape the programs according to the regions. That's why it's important that the federal government work with the provinces and other levels of government to develop a comprehensive strategy. But certainly there's lots to start with, policy measures already in place, that you could use.