Human Resources Committee on Oct. 8th, 2009

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Could we get any analysis you did on gender by the week we get back?

[Paul Thompson]

There's some information we can provide around the determination of the parameters.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

And I'd like to see any data you have within the department on the overall employment rate for women in this economy. That would be interesting.

Madam Minister, your first level is seven out of 10 years. You have said a great deal today about those who deserve, and that it's harder for them to get back into the workforce, and so on. I have immigrants in my riding who have been here and have worked maybe five or six years--or at least the length of time they've been here. They have a very difficult time getting back into the labour force; they have a very difficult time getting into the labour force in the first place. They have worked for six consecutive years but cannot benefit from this. So how do you choose who wins and who loses in what seems to be almost a Russian roulette game, with all due respect? If you work six consecutive years you're not covered; you don't get the extensions.

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

This initiative is very specifically targeted at a large group that is identifiable and has gone through a common experience with structural changes in their workplaces and industries. In a report done under the guidance of my predecessor, it was identified that it takes them 35% longer to find work than others.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

I understand that, but what I'm saying to you is that recent immigrants who've worked steadily for five or six years have an even harder time getting back into the labour force than those who have skills and have been here for a long time. So I don't understand this arbitrary cut.

And just to clarify, according to the blues we have here, the officials told us that a gender analysis was done.

I understand the difficulty, but it is just as difficult if not more difficult for these people who lost their jobs--probably from some of the same companies--as the ones who are now going to benefit. I'm not saying they shouldn't benefit, but why cut it off and provide it only to that group when others are going to be left behind?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Minister, you have 30 seconds left.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

There are two parts to that. One, we did recognize that everyone was going to have a tougher time. That's why in the economic action plan we brought in an additional five weeks and raised the maximum. If we had just brought in the five weeks for everyone, a lot of people would have capped out in the high unemployment areas. We wanted to make sure everyone got an additional five weeks, so that's why we provided that for them.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

It's not up to the government to choose and favour. It should be responsible for everyone.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Ms. Minna.

We'll move back to the Conservatives for five minutes. I guess we've got Mr. Komarnicki again.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll refer to a quote from Mr. Drummond, TD Bank chief economist. He said in the Canadian Press on August 25, 2009:

I think time is going to prove that the debate we're having on the employment insurance system is focusing on the wrong thing. I think this recession will prove it has been less about an access problem than a duration problem.

He focuses on duration. The career transition assistance program deals with training in the long term and defines long-tenured worker. You've taken the definition and expanded it to this program. How do the two bridge and tie together, and how do they deal with the issue of duration of benefits for those who find themselves without work?

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

That ties in with the previous question in some ways. In the career transition assistance program we recognized long-tenured workers. There were specific targeted measures for them, in terms of extra EI benefits. They invested in their own re-education and retraining. There were also retraining opportunities available for all unemployed--those long-tenured workers, but even those who were off EI, whether they had exhausted their benefits or hadn't been in the workforce for many years.

In that career transition initiative we identified the definition of long-tenured workers, and to make sure we were consistent we used the same definition for this bill. Once we had identified that group and defined it, we wanted to make sure we kept that definition. We recognized even last January that this was going to be a challenge, given the makeup of the layoffs we'd seen across the country.

So we made a commitment last January to track how the labour market was working or not; who was being most harshly affected; who was having the biggest challenges; and how we could best help them. This initiative has those things in mind.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

As I understand it then, this is for those who have worked and paid premiums for a long period of time, have not used the system very much, have exhausted the benefits that would normally exist, and find themselves without jobs. This will give them the extra help they need. It will be based on the five to 20 weeks, depending on their contributions. Is that how it would work?

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

That's exactly the way it would work. Those who have been in the workplace for seven out of the last 10 years and have made limited EI claims will get an extra five weeks. For each year after that it will go up by three weeks to a maximum of 20 weeks. So it recognizes people who have been in the workplace a long time and have paid into it for a long time. It has been scientifically identified that these are the individuals who are having the toughest time getting new jobs. They are the ones to whom we're trying to give a hand up and support while they look for those jobs, recognizing it is going to take them longer.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Thank you, Minister.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you.

We'll now go to Ms. Beaudin and the Bloc for five minutes.

[Josée Beaudin, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

I thank the honourable minister and her colleagues for being here today.

I want to come back briefly to the issue of assistance for employment transition. If I am not mistaken, there are two initiatives, one initiative extends employment insurance benefits and encourages training, the other initiative provides for investing severance pay in training. Am I right?

Career Transition Assistance is a temporary program, is it not?

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

Yes, it is temporary.

[Josée Beaudin, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Bill C-50 is also a temporary measure.

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

Yes, precisely; it is meant for the people who are the most seriously affected.

[Josée Beaudin, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Fine. Given that both programs are temporary, why did you not conduct a pilot project with Bill C-50, as you did for Career Transition Assistance?

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

The initiative that extends the period of benefits and encourages training is a pilot project. We wanted to produce a bill to make sure that everything would be done correctly.

[Josée Beaudin, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

As with Career Transition Assistance, you know very well that, if this had been a pilot project, these measures would already have come into force. You knew very well that producing legislation would take some time. There is an October 23rd deadline. The bill was tabled around mid-September. Certainly, if parliamentarians want to do our work with any kind of seriousness, we must get answers to certain questions. It was very clear that the bill would not come into force by the October 23^rd deadline in any event. Why did you not do a pilot project?

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

If we had put forward a pilot project,

it would have taken the same amount of time operationally to get things up and running. That would not have been able to speed it up.

The reasons you just gave are the very same reasons that I mentioned earlier. We will move two amendments, the first should establish January 4^th as a starting point and the second amendment is a technical one that will provide for the adjustments that we need to make sure that everyone will receive the maximum amount of benefits.

[Josée Beaudin, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Thank you, but I believe that if a pilot project had been in place, the workers would have quickly taken advantage of it. This leads me to believe that, ultimately, you are sort of playing politics on the backs of the unemployed, especially given that, yes, it does take a certain amount of time to go through the legislative process.

Nevertheless, you have said from the outset that this is a temporary measure. So it is an extraordinary measure, a measure taken in a time of crisis. That being the case, why did you give priority to clients who are already enjoying more favourable conditions than younger workers, by giving them extra weeks of benefits, for example? We know for a fact that young workers and especially women are going through very uncertain times. Why was the priority given to long-tenured workers?

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

As I said previously, studies have shown that long-tenured workers take 35% longer to find another job. We are aware that it is very difficult for young workers to find jobs at this time. This is why our government allocated an extra $10 million to the student summer employment program. This created several thousand jobs for students. For the same reason, we

brought in a program with the YMCA and YWCA to create more jobs for students. That's coupled with our changes to the student funding programs to help them have the money they need to go to university.

But we did significantly expand both our own hiring and the creation of programs for youth.