Human Resources Committee on March 1st, 2011

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

I generally support this motion and will in all likelihood vote for it.

I don't think the $10 million that Mr. Vellacott and Mr. Komarnicki referred to could be considered significant investment. It's 10%. Youth unemployment is double the national average, and there are other programs in jeopardy in the youth employment strategy of the government.

We know what happened to the summer jobs in 2006 and 2007 under the government. The program was literally butchered and destroyed, and then they went back to the previous Liberal program, which at least worked. So this does provide some good support for students.

I wonder whether Madame Beaudin would consider it friendly--not as an amendment--to see if we could get a report from the department. This doesn't speak only to the amount of money, but to the process of determining where the jobs go. I wonder if it might be helpful to get something from the department that updates their criteria for allocating Canada summer jobs. The most recent $10 million goes proportionately by riding, but this goes to the issue of student unemployment, minimum wage rates, etc.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

I think we'll deal with the motion, unless you have an amendment that wouldn't change the scope of the motion, and then--

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

I have no amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Okay. Then you could maybe have that discussion after this.

Mr. Lessard.

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

I tend to agree with you, Madam Chair.

I think Mr. Savage's suggestion is a good one. We will indeed have to figure out how to address the issue of employability. We would be willing to support a separate motion on that. The program is applied in such a way that some jobs are sometimes inaccessible to students. For example, under Canada Summer Jobs, a budget was allocated to aboriginal communities. But that budget no longer exists, and the members of those communities are now being directed to the riding where the reserve is located. And that eliminates a certain number of jobs in that region, as a result. This roundabout way of cutting the funding allocated to aboriginal communities is totally unacceptable. This issue could perhaps be analyzed along with Mr. Savage's motion.

As for the motion put forward by my colleague, Ms. Beaudin, it is wrong to claim, as the government does, that the budget increased by $10 million this year. The government's so-called $10-million increase has been around since 2008. So this is the fourth year that that $10 million has been invested. In Quebec, in 2008, a total of 2,600 agencies called on the government not to cut that budget. In response, $10 million was added to the budget but on a time-limited basis.

Every year, the government has maintained that investment, which has also given it an opportunity to come off looking good. But it is still the same $10 million. There has been no increase since 2007. My colleague is absolutely right. In Quebec, minimum wage has gone up three times since 2007. In my riding, we used to be able to provide 165 student jobs a year, but today that number is just 130. That is happening in each and every one of your ridings because the financial burden on employers is greater given their payroll obligations.

I think the time has come to address the matter. I am certain, Madam Chair, that you have the same problem in your riding. This program, for which people are very grateful, was put in place a number of years ago. It benefits students not only financially, but also in terms of knowledge and skills. Some people end up being hired by the employer they used to work for back when they were a student, and they spend their career working for that same employer.

For once, I think we need to recognize a program that is really doing its job and is very appreciated. Its effectiveness is in danger. So we all have reason to stand united and vote together so this program can fulfill its initial mandate, which is giving students jobs.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Madame Beaudin.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

My colleague basically said what I wanted to reiterate. Nevertheless, I would once again point out that this has been the situation in Quebec and elsewhere since 2006. When you consider that the average minimum wage used to be $7.50 and is now $9.36, a quick calculation is all you need to figure out that the number of jobs available through the program this year will likely drop and that the length of each student's employment will also be shorter. Students do not know what to do once their employment comes to an end.

A new reality has emerged, and we are going to have to address it in the next few years. I am already seeing it in my riding, and perhaps you are as well. What about all those students who are above the age of 30 and therefore too old to participate in the program? There are 35 year olds. In my riding, some of these people are women who have gone back to school. They have raised families and now want to re-enter the workforce. These summer jobs are not accessible to them, even if they are full-time students. This is a new reality that we will have to address.

When I worked for an agency, I submitted applications to offer employment under the Canada Summer Jobs program. For years, many organizations have seen their applications denied. Some community agencies need students to work during the summer. They may need four employees, but they get approval for just one. These organizations are already making the most of the limited resources they have to begin with. The program could create a lot more jobs if the budget were adjusted to reflect the increase in minimum wage and in the cost of living. Minimum wage has gone up in every single province. So I would think this has been happening everywhere, especially in the regions, where municipalities are often the ones applying for student workers. The program gives students valuable work experience. If we indeed want to continue encouraging youth employment and economic development in the regions, then I think we must support an increase in the budget.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Mr. Watson.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Madam Chair, my only intervention on this is that the motion calls on the committee to make a conclusion and prescribe an action. It's not asking us to study or weigh any of the empirical evidence as to whether this aim has been achieved in some fashion or another.

My only difficulty is I'm hearing some statistics being presented now. I'm not sure what the entire coast-to-coast situation looks like. I know there have been $10 million increases both in the economic action plan and now the decision is that the base budget reflect that on an ongoing basis. I don't know for sure that it hasn't been accomplished, so how do I support a motion like this one that comes to a conclusion? I'd be more amenable to actually hearing evidence and then coming to a conclusion, rather than being asked to support a conclusion.

Madam Chair, I'll confess I'm newer to this committee than most of the members. Maybe that was hashed out before I got to this committee and everybody else understands it really well, but I don't. The reason I'm opposing this is that I don't really know what the picture is. I'm not sure I can make that conclusion. I'd much rather hear the evidence and weigh it and evaluate whether what the government has done actually meets the intent of where they'd like this motion to go. I will be opposing it on those grounds.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Mr. Lessard.

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

For the benefit of our colleague, Mr. Watson, I would like to point out that we have already done a study. You mentioned it. If memory serves, it was back in 2007-2008. A full report was done. The committee made a total of 19 recommendations to the minister at the time, and this motion was one of those recommendations. As we said, the work has already been done. Now it is time to vote, unless we want to reinvent the wheel every time. And I don't think that is what Mr. Watson wants.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Mr. Watson, do you want to respond?

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Yes. If that's the one that's mentioned in the motion itself, that was done in 2006, not 2008, as the member is now saying. It was on a precursor program with a different budget. If that's what he's referring to, then the work hasn't been done. Work was done on a different program and a different budget.

That's why I'd be much more amenable to seeing what the impacts of a new budget and a new program are, and whether it actually meets the objectives. Then it would be the other way around.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Thank you.

Mr. Komarnicki.

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

I was present as a member of that committee when that study was concluded, to go back a ways in history. There were a number of recommendations made, not just the one that the member raises. If there were formula changes, it might have a negative impact on one region or another, including that of the member who's bringing in this motion.

If you're looking at the whole picture, you have to take everything in that report into consideration. There were a number of recommendations, including how the formulas may have been applied or should be changed.

I'd just raise that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Mr. Lessard.

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

Once again, for the benefit of Mr. Watson, the only thing different was the name. When the Liberals were in power, it was called the student summer employment program. The Conservatives dropped the word “student” and now call it Canada Summer Jobs. That's all well and good, but the actual program did not change one bit. It is exactly the same. I have nothing further to add except to say that if my colleague, Mr. Komarnicki, would like to introduce all the other amendments, he can do so through another motion. There were indeed a number of other recommendations. We did not put forward those other recommendations because this was not implemented at the time. But if he would like to come back with the others, we could deal with them. We chose to focus on this particular recommendation because we believe urgent and swift action is needed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Thank you very much, Mr. Lessard.

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

We are ready to vote.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

All right, I think discussion is complete. We are ready to vote on Madame Beaudin's motion.

You would like a recorded vote?

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

Please, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

All right.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5) [See Minutes of Proceedings]

Mr. Savage, you had a notice of motion. Did you wish to move your motion at this time?

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

I'll reserve that for now, if I can, in order to go to our next piece of business.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

All right.

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

If we finish that, I'd like to come back to this. I'd still like to keep it as a priority of the committee, and I do believe very strongly that we need to have a subcommittee. I recognize that in the time we have to discuss it today, it wouldn't do it justice. Perhaps we can move on and then come back to it.