Thank you, Madam Chair.
The Confédération des syndicats nationaux would like to thank the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities for this opportunity to propose solutions for the fight against poverty in Canada.
The CSN, the second largest labour confederation in Canada, represents 2,800 unions in Quebec and 300,000 members, most of whom are Francophone. Even though the Standing Committee began its study of the federal government's contribution to reducing poverty in Canada in the spring of 2008, we believe it is appropriate to state, right from the beginning, that this study is extremely timely.
Whatever people may say, the political crisis in recent months has brought home the importance of establishing mechanisms which will no longer be unacceptable and unfair to the jobless, older workers, women and Quebec, and which make them highly vulnerable. Why do we refer specifically to Quebec? Well, because we believe that the changes announced to the equalization formula last fall, which were confirmed in the most recent budget, will result in a loss for Quebec of $1 billion, this year, and up to $2 billion, next year. This will essentially deprive Quebec of the means to address the current crisis and will undoubtedly deprive large segments of the population of the necessary spinoffs, which could have been invested in health care or post-secondary education. To weaken Quebec, particularly in those two areas, is to deprive Quebeckers of the opportunity to raise their standard of living.
As regards employment insurance, given that more than 129,000 jobs have been lost since January—something that has not been seen in 32 years—it is abundantly clear that our safety net is quickly unravelling. Employment insurance is a frontline economic lever and family support. The money is spent immediately and locally to feed a family, pay bills and buy clothing for children. It is also the local economy as a whole, and even that of an entire region, that will feel the effects of either access, or no access, to EI benefits for laid-off workers.
Quebec has already been hit hard by the forest industry crisis, as we all know. The Government of Quebec's investment in that industry has been significant. However, one cannot help but notice that the federal government has not stepped up to the plate to address that crisis.
In the Mauricie Region, 2,500 people lost their jobs in the forest industry in one year. We are therefore asking for significant improvements to be made as regards access to the EI system. We are suggesting that there be a single requirement of 360 hours, an increased benefit rate—based on 60 % of an individual's wages over the 12 best weeks—and that the two-week waiting period be abolished. Why should workers be penalized for two weeks? Since when do people work for free? Furthermore, the CSN has long been demanding a financial support program that would allow older workers who have lost their jobs to bridge the gap between the end of their employment insurance benefits and the beginning of their retirement benefits.
Since POWA was cancelled in March of 1997, nothing has been done to help a whole category of workers who are more severely affected than young people during periods of unemployment. Indeed, you heard from witnesses a little earlier, including representatives of the CSD, who told you exactly the same thing. In fact, several years ago, the four main central labour bodies formed a coalition to address this question. We made representations to the Government of Quebec which were acted on. Unfortunately, there has been no response from the federal government.
As you were probably told a little earlier, the CSN believes that, in order to be eligible for the income support program, an individual should be over the age of 55, have been subject to a mass lay-off or company shutdown, have at least 10 years of labour market attachment over the last 30 years, be in a situation where the gap between acquired skills and those required by the labour market is significant, be unable to find truly gainful employment and find a job in his or her region.
With respect to women—I mentioned this in my introduction—we consider Bill C-10 to be an affront to the fundamental rights of women and to recognition of the value of their work.
This legislation attacks women's rights by preventing them from accessing equal pay for work of equal value, in particular, and by adding to generally-acknowledged job assessment criteria, additional elements that reflect the needs of employers in terms of recruitment and labour retention. In other words, wage discrimination is allowed if it can be justified by market conditions—something which is completely unacceptable.
We are therefore recommending that proactive legislation be introduced to help women escape poverty and ensure that women workers will no longer be considered second class. I would also be remiss if I did not emphasize the importance of investing in social housing and the need for a federal contribution in that regard.
That completes my presentation.