Human Resources Committee on Feb. 2nd, 2021

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

You mentioned new business or some outstanding items. Is this an okay time to mention that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

It sure is.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

I want to go back to the motion I tabled—I don't know how long ago—regarding the study about the officials meeting for a couple of meetings to talk about those who have lost a child. I can pull up the motion, if you'd like. It's about supporting families after the loss of a child. Basically, it would tie into maybe some of the EI conversation, but it might even be a stand-alone item.

I can reread it if you want.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Please do. I'm in the process of pulling it up, but if you have it on view, that would be helpful. I do recall it.

Go ahead.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

The motion is:

That the committee conduct a study of no less than three two-hour meetings on the implementation of the seven recommendations found in the committee’s 14th report entitled “Supporting Families After the Loss of a Child”; that the committee invite the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development and departmental officials to appear for one hour each; that the committee invite pregnancy and infant loss stakeholders groups to appear for no less than two, two-hour meetings; that the meetings be televised; and that that the committee present its findings to the House.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Okay, you've put that motion on notice and now you're moving it.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

I can move it or we can have a discussion on potentially studying it more.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

I think, for the sake of good form, let's consider it now to be moved. We'll have a discussion on it and we'll see where that goes.

Mr. Vaughan, you have the floor.

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Spadina—Fort York, ON]

I was a member in the last term of Parliament and we did that study. It was the last study we did before we rose in the summertime.

There are two things. One is that it sort of covers that ground again with an unlikely change in the recommendations. It's also, in many ways, the wrong minister. There were some recommendations regarding the Canada child benefit—that it wasn't cancelled fast enough and whether it should be cancelled with a one-month grace period to aid in the recovery. That was the only issue that touched the minister you refer to in your motion.

The minister who has carriage of this is Minister Qualtrough, through the EI fund. That's where the bereavement and a lot of tweaks to EI as they relate to maternity are carried.

You might not want to be so specific in the ministers you identify, and instead go at it from issues. Then we can find the right ministers of departments to speak to it.

Because there are some complexities there, I would suggest that we refer Mr. Schmale's motion to the subcommittee for scheduling and refinement and come back to the committee with a consensus motion that builds on the report and also identifies the right ministries to push to get satisfaction on this issue.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Vaughan.

Mrs. Falk, go ahead.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Thank you, Chair.

I was also on the committee when we studied this in the last Parliament. The testimony we heard was terrible. I would make the argument that this minister who is mentioned does have purview over Service Canada at some point as well, with the ESDC. I think that's where we heard the problems. You don't talk to people who have just lost their child by saying that now that their child is deceased, their benefits are eliminated.

This actually is quite interesting given the context of COVID and the high stresses—financial, emotional, mental health—that Canadians are feeling. I think it would even be good to check in and see what has been implemented. Several recommendations were made to the House, and it would be good to see if the ministers responsible have given direction at all to their departments to change or implement training or that type of thing.

I think it is quite timely, as well. For one, I can't imagine having a COVID baby in the middle of all this, let alone losing a child and not having that compassion and empathy that people deserve when they're in that situation.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mrs. Falk.

Mr. Schmale, I'm going to come back to you for your thoughts because I don't see anyone else on the speakers list. Then I'm going to go to Ms. Chabot, who just put her name on.

What are your thoughts on Mr. Vaughan's suggestion that we bounce this to subcommittee to see if we can come to consensus around refining the motion? Do you want just to bring this to a decision today?

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

I'm happy for it to go to the subcommittee. I would like it to be talked about in the schedule, if possible. I don't know if other colleagues have some suggestions that might help as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Schmale.

Ms. Chabot, the floor is yours.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

That would be very welcome because of the importance of this motion and the need to send it to the subcommittee for a detailed examination.

I would also like to know whether this kind of study has been done previously. I believe that Ms. Falk told us that we would be able to find out about some aspects of it before we start the study. Personally, I would like to know more about it so that I am better equipped.

We also need to know what federal government assistance these parents are currently receiving.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you.

Mr. Turnbull, please go ahead.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

I have a couple of thoughts.

Based on today's conversation so far, we've committed to 11 meetings past February 18. That would be my calculation, with Ms. Chabot's motion implying five meetings, and Mrs. Falk's motion, which is six meetings. That's not including any recommendations, I would assume. In the formulation of those reports, it's at least 11 meetings beyond February 18.

Given that, and given the time today, I have absolutely no problem with Mr. Schmale's motion. I do agree with my colleague Mr. Vaughan that perhaps referring it to the subcommittee and having a more fulsome discussion about scoping that particular study might be a good next step, given the fact that we're probably going to run out of time today.

There are also other motions that have been put on the list. There are quite a few there. I have one that I'm keen about and I think is relevant as well. I'm not moving it today, but there are quite a few other motions on notice.

Perhaps we need to think about what we schedule next, after the two studies, but is that really pressing at the moment? I would suggest not.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

I'm fine with the subcommittee. We'll fine-tune it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Mr. Turnbull made the point, but it's worth reminding everyone that separate and apart from the 11 meetings to which we've committed, there may very well be things referred to us from the House by way of legislation, by way of examination of supplementary estimates and the like.

Those 11 meetings do not take account of reviewing the draft report and consideration of the recommendations on the study that we're about to wrap up. The plate is filling quite quickly, and there seems to be so much more that we want to do.

Ms. Chabot, the floor is yours.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I am not concerned about it being decided today.

One of the motions I introduced had to do with a study on companies going bankrupt. Basically, it's about finding out how we can strengthen our current legislation to protect pension funds if companies go bankrupt. Unless the situation improves, 180,000 companies could go bankrupt or close, which raises the issue of protecting pension funds.

Not many meetings were set aside for that study. I bring it to your intention for consideration in the future, if we have room.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

It's probably another subject that the subcommittee can look at.

Mr. Housefather, please go ahead.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I wanted to give a heads-up and remind members that there is a private member's bill that our colleague Matt Jeneroux has put forward, which will be voted on by the House probably the week we come back. It will be referred to our committee if it's adopted.

I believe we should prioritize legislation and ensure there's a spot for any bill that gets sent to committee. On behalf of Matt, I want to give everybody a heads-up and remind everybody that there may be a bill coming to us. We should at least put a date if the bill gets referred to us and not wait on that too long.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you.

Mr. Vis, please go ahead.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Mr. Housefather, you just stole my thunder. I actually seconded that bill in Parliament, and I very much appreciate your intervention.