Human Resources Committee on Oct. 8th, 2009

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

It is very simple. The people targeted by this bill are the long-tenured workers, both part-time and full-time. According to the polls, these are the people who have the greatest difficulty in finding a new job.

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

I know that you are targeting long-tenured workers. But we here are talking about people who have worked and who have not drawn employment insurance benefits for the past 7, 8 or 10 years. So this mainly includes workers in the automobile industry and in the oil industry. Laying people off in those sectors is something new.

Can we agree that they are the people to be specifically targeted?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Benefits will be available for everybody, in every sector. However, there are a few conditions. A person must have worked for seven years...

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

Excuse my reaction to your statements.

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Can I answer?

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

Yes, do not let me contradict you at all when you say that it is open to all sectors.

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

It is.

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

Agreed.

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

We spoke...

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

Nonetheless, the fact that it is open to all sectors does not mean that all sectors are eligible. The criteria exclude a whole set of sectors.

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

We spoke with representatives from various sectors and we asked them if it would work. Even the people from the forestry sector answered that it would. There is a provision whereby workers could have received benefits for an average of 7 weeks per year, which amounts to 35 weeks over 5 years. So workers from the forestry and the manufacturing sectors can have access to this program. This is why we set the threshold at 35 weeks of benefits over five years. We wanted to recognize the differences between sectors. In some, plants close down for the summer, every year.

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

I am sure that you have heard the opinion of...

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Mr. Lessard, that's all the time we have. We're going to try to get you back for one more round. I want to try to get as many rounds in as possible.

Mr. Godin, you have seven minutes.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Madam Minister, I would like to understand your point of view more clearly. Earlier, the Liberals claimed that the period allocated for studying the bill should be extended and that January 4 should be kept. This was one of the notices of motion that I proposed to the committee and that was supposed to be debated. Given the current content of the bill, I expect that, if the bill is not passed when we come back from the week's break, the committee will take a week to finish the study. We must be able to hear witnesses. It must also be presented to the Senate. At the beginning of your presentation, I thought that I understood that you are going to submit an amendment so that, on this coming January 4, people will not lose their opportunity to access the program.

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

We want all the people who lost their jobs in 2009 to have access to these benefits. Given the current form of the bill, the time that will be taken up by debate in the House of Commons, in this committee or in the Senate could turn out to be too long. We want to make sure that the unemployed can receive benefits, maximum benefits, in fact. That is why we will submit an amendment under which benefits will begin on January 4 of this year and not, as currently stipulated, nine months in advance. The second amendment is very technical. It seeks to make sure that there will not be any interruptions.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

I just want the people who are listening to us to understand this very clearly. I read in the paper today that the motion that I tabled earlier this week was not passed because the Liberals, the Conservatives and the Bloc voted against it. That was exactly what my motion proposed: to make that the bill is adopted in time so that, in January, people will not lose the benefits to which they could be entitled.

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

I am not talking about...

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Hold on. There is a point of order.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Yes, I have a point of order. At the last meeting we indicated very clearly that we would propose an amendment very similar to what Mr. Godin is talking about. That's in the record. It's the same thing; we don't want anybody to lose the benefit from this either. Nor did we.... I'm not sure whether he said this, if I correctly heard him, originally, but we did not want to extend the meetings or anything to that effect, either.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

I'll clarify. We all agreed that we needed to hear some witnesses. We wanted to make sure it wasn't delayed. This issue has been dealt with.

I'm going to add the time back. You're still not going to get 15 minutes, but I'll give you a couple of extra seconds.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

I would not have done that if somebody was trying to brag, to take it away from....

But anyway....

I would like to ask a second question. You know that a study was done by one of your former colleagues, Monte Solberg. That study dealt with long-tenured workers and specifically recommended that, for a person eligible for employment insurance, severance pay must not affect the employment insurance benefits. At the beginning of this week, once again, we asked your representatives if this would affect the benefits, and they did not know the answer.

If the answer is yes, are you prepared to study that position? As you said, some people have worked hard for a long time and, all of a sudden, they have to face an economic crisis that is not of their making. Negotiations with employers gave them the right to severance pay. But the severance pay must not be affected because they have paid into benefits plans all their lives.

As you said, Madam Minister, some people have worked for many years—you did not specify how many years—let us say 25 or 30, without having to resort to employment insurance, apart from the times when the plant closed down for two weeks in the summer to repair their mills or things like that. We experienced that in our riding, in the mine. We had the same sort of experience at the Belledune foundry: the foundry was closed for a few weeks while the mill was being repaired.

Why should these people be penalized now by going after their severance pay? I would like to know what you think, Madam Minister.

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

We are aware of the challenges facing workers, especially long-tenured workers. This is why we made two provisions for them in the Economic Action Plan.

The first one is that if they choose to invest some or part of their severance in furthering their own education, then they will be allowed to do that and will be able to claim benefits for a longer period of time while they go out on their own initiative to develop new skills for a new job market.

The second aspect is that they would be able to access employment insurance sooner, if they made such a move, because we recognize that a lot of the jobs among the long-tenured workers are not going to be replaced in a hurry.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Yes, but I would like to come back to my question about Bill C-50.

With the amendments to this bill, will severance pay have any effect on the extra weeks of employment insurance?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

We have already done that. We have already recognized that we must give them some breaks if they use their severance pay to invest in themselves.

The other aspect of this is that we recognize also that it takes longer for long-tenured workers. The report to which you referred stated that it can take up to 35% longer for long-tenured workers, older workers, to find new employment than it does for other workers. That's why we have extended the benefits already for them, by investing. And that's why we're proposing this projet de loi maintenant.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

You are still not answering my question. Let me ask it again: under Bill C-50, and given the extra weeks, will employment insurance claimants have to use up their severance pay before they can receive employment insurance benefits?