Human Resources Committee on Feb. 2nd, 2021

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

I call the meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting 14 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House order of January 25, 2021. Everyone here is a member of the committee and knows the rules, so I'll spare you that.

Today, we are in public for committee business. There are a few things that I hope we will cover. Given that it's committee business, members are absolutely at liberty to bring up whatever topic they wish.

Just so you know, these are the things I hope we're going to be able to cover.

One is the study that we're going to do upon completion of the present study on urban, rural and northern indigenous housing. We did identify a study on employment insurance as a priority, so we'll need to plan whether that will be our next study, and some of the logistics around getting it set up, so that we can be efficient on February 18, which is the next day open to begin work on our next study.

There was a request from Mr. Vis to send a letter to the Department of Indigenous Services to get some clarification on one of the written answers it provided. I'd like the committee to consider that draft correspondence.

Other than that, there is probably a conversation about our next meeting on the rapid housing initiative, and the meeting after that in connection with the Parliamentary Budget Officer.

Those are the four things I would like to cover today. However, I am in your hands. This is committee business.

The floor is open. I suggest we begin with the subject of our next study to begin on the 18th.

Just so that we're not talking over each other—everyone is familiar and comfortable with one another, so that is bound to happen—please use the “raise hand” function. That might help us get through this efficiently.

I recognize Mrs. Falk. Go ahead, please.

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

Thank you, Chair.

I don't know if I've missed this somewhere—that's totally a possibility when working from home and having three kids who are very small. When was the EI study? When was the decision made with the committee that it's a priority, the next study or the priority?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

The study was received, and everyone was provided with a log of the motions. I believe the motion was presented on December 9. In setting the work plan, we identified EI and rapid housing as the two priority items after this study. I believe that to be the case.

I'm looking to the clerk or Madame Chabot to indicate that there was, in fact, a motion passed about that.

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

I don't recall that happening, so if someone could confirm that, that would be great.

That being said, I know I supplied the clerk with a motion, and she did distribute it in both official languages, so I would like to take this moment to move that motion and read it into the record.

I believe that with COVID being an evolving situation, we should be nimble also.

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee undertake a study on the impact of COVID-19 on the financial, social, health and overall wellbeing of seniors; that the committee review existing and announced programs for seniors and make recommendations to improve support for seniors; that the study be comprised of no less than six two-hour meetings; that the committee invite the Minister of Seniors and departmental officials to appear for one hour each; that the committee, pursuant to Standing Order 109, present its findings with recommendations to the House; and that the committee request that the government provide a comprehensive response.

Some of the justification for studying this at this particular time is that we just had a fall economic statement. There was money allocated in there for programs such as New Horizons, seniors and long-term care. I think it would be great to really take an in-depth look at seniors—they are the ones who have built this country—and take a look at their social health, their mental health, their financial health, how they are being affected, especially seniors in different rural and urban settings, and also with the lockdowns, the social isolation and physical isolation that's having on our seniors.

Taking that time.... I have heard from seniors from all across Canada, as well as groups, and they are a group that is falling through the cracks. I think it's our job as parliamentarians to make sure that we honour our seniors, those who have paved the path before us, make sure we hear how they are being affected with COVID, and bring their concerns to the House.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mrs. Falk.

The motion is in order. The debate is on the motion.

Ms. Chabot, the floor is yours.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I am going to start by talking about the work we have to do today. Then I will be able to give you my opinion about the motion that has just been introduced.

I understand that we have to establish our work schedule. We have actually received a document specifying the work we have to do, but it is actually more of a blank page because we have to agree on the work first. In order for our work to be done effectively within our work plan, I feel that we first have to refer to the many motions that we have passed. In that regard, you will recall that, when we resumed our work after the House was prorogued, we decided at the outset to put back into the agenda all the motions that were passed before the Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic was established.

After that, I myself introduced five motions—if I recall correctly—but, regardless of the number, Mr. Vis also introduced his motion on the rapid housing initiative. We actually met as a subcommittee and then informed the committee about three priorities, the first being urban, rural, and northern indigenous housing. That study is in the process of completion. I think that the only thing left is to produce the report.

I had understood that we were supposed to establish our work schedule for the second priority, the rapid housing initiative. Are we going to hear witnesses? How are we going to proceed?

The third priority was employment insurance. I introduced that and it was passed.

As for the motion that was proposed most recently, I will tell you soon whether I am for or against. However, to start with, we have to talk about the overall situation of seniors in the pandemic, in both financial and social terms. These are important issues. However, I have to say that we still have to be careful in our deliberations, because a number of services, particularly those dealing with health, are provincial matters. Living conditions and social programs are in provincial jurisdiction. So if we become involved in that issue, we will have to consider it from the perspective of federal programs.

I must also mention that I introduced a motion about seniors slipping into poverty.

I wouldn't want to cross swords with you, Ms. Falk, but, if you have read the Bloc's motion on this, you will see that motions are complementary, I feel. We have to undertake a study on the issue of seniors slipping into poverty.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Mr. Vis, go ahead, please.

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

I just have a quick comment.

I noticed Mr. Turnbull's old motion from the suite of materials received from the committee clerk. I think a discussion on seniors could absolutely include a discussion to include some of the provisions he suggested earlier about how that would relate to the national housing strategy. That would actually fit nicely together because we can't address the issue of seniors right now without addressing housing and long-term care.

Madame Chabot, I take your comments about respecting the proper orders of government and how that relates to our study as well.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Vis.

Mr. Long, go ahead, please.

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and good afternoon to everybody.

I certainly would want to be on the record as supporting MP Falk's motion. I think it's very relevant. Certainly EI and seniors are top of mind for all Canadians right now.

I know the subcommittee report prioritized MP Chabot's motion, but I'm certainly in favour of MP Falk's motion after we study MP Chabot's motion.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Long.

Mr. Turnbull.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Along the same lines, I just dug up an old document here that's dated October 21, 2020. It is a subcommittee report that clearly indicates that the EI study would be next in line after the rapid housing initiative work. I want to express my support for that and not go back on what the subcommittee said, yet I really want to show support for Mrs. Falk's motion. I think it's a great study. I like how it is worded.

I appreciated Mr. Vis's comments about housing and the link to housing, but I think the way Mrs. Falk's motion is worded keeps it focused on seniors and allows us the latitude to explore the many ways in which seniors have been impacted by COVID-19, which may include housing but would include a lot of other things. It's better, in my view, to have that wider net cast, so I would support both, but in that order.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Turnbull, and thanks for locating that document. I was flipping through trying to find it. What you said was consistent with my recollection, so I appreciate that.

Ms. Gazan, please.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I want to share that I certainly support the motion coming from MP Falk. I know that we had agreed on an order, and I know that we all know that seniors are in a really dire situation during the pandemic. Certainly in my riding, many seniors are living in severe poverty and are on the verge of homelessness. I don't think we can lose sight of that, of looking at really vulnerable populations, particularly in a pandemic.

Respecting the decisions we made as a group, I'm wondering if there's the flexibility to include portions of the next studies, which fit really nicely, to focus on seniors. I know that this is on employment insurance, but maybe we could also reserve part of it for a broader exploration of income supports in general. For example, we know that OAS is totally inadequate—in my opinion—and is leaving seniors in a very vulnerable position. I'd just like to put that forward.

Also, on the rapid housing initiative, where do seniors fit into that? We know that numbers of seniors are on the verge of homelessness.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Ms. Gazan.

Mr. Kent, please.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Following on Ms. Gazan's remarks, I think both the EI and senior studies are worthy.

As the conversation continues now, I don't think the committee needs to be bound by a decision made two months ago. I think our consideration now should be on the basis of which study is most timely and which recommendations from the study would be most effective in addressing the very serious challenges we have with regard to EI and the fact that it's terribly outdated and has caused some huge disruptions regarding the transfer from the CERB to the CRB. Also, I think Mrs. Falk's and Ms. Chabot's resolutions do underline the fact that seniors have been among the biggest losers in the pandemic.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Kent.

Ms. Chabot, you have the floor.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We must not mix up the types. The properly presented motion on employment insurance is not our third priority by accident. The employment insurance program is federal. A lot of temporary measures had to be put in place to deal with the pandemic, and those measures will soon come to an end.

Our committee received a motion from the House asking us to report on the Canada Emergency Response Benefit, the CERB. We know that the employment insurance program must be reviewed. That is also in the mandate of the Minister.

The employment insurance issue and the seniors issue are not in the same category. It is important to keep our motion on employment insurance, and it is just as important to talk globally about the seniors' situation, which could be the subject of our next study.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Mr. Housefather, please.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I basically just wanted to repeat that I support the motion Mrs. Falk has put forward. I believe the motion Mrs. Falk has put forward is a stand-alone motion. It doesn't relate to priority.

As I said, I support Ms. Falk's motion, but I believe that the next study should be the one on employment insurance, as we agreed in the fall. We should stick to that priority.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Housefather.

I believe we're at the end of the speaking order. We have a motion from Mrs. Falk. As Mr. Housefather rightly pointed out, it does not indicate priority. Every single speaker spoke in favour of it.

Can we agree that the motion is adopted by consent, or do we require a vote?

I see Adam's hand up.

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

Looking at a couple of different motions we have on the page together around seniors, there's a clear consensus within the committee to act on seniors, but I, too, will be supporting the decision we made to study EI. That was put forward by Madame Chabot in good faith, and there's important work to be done there, especially as we look at its application to things like basic income and other elements. The EI study is important, and it's important to look at what changes were made and how we move forward on that.

At the same time, MP Falk has brought forward an important concern. When you take a look at the prior motions that were passed on it and try to package them together, if we were to change the motion to be a bit more specific and to have it follow on the EI study, I think we could get both done in a timely fashion.

The motion I propose, which pulls together the different motions, would be that the committee study the impact of federal programs and transfers to other orders of government and individuals related to seniors and older Canadians, and how they have been impacted and/or augmented due to COVID. The study will also examine how other federal programs not directly related to seniors may be reformed to better serve Canadians as they age.

This ties in the point that I think Mr. Vis made around seniors' housing. It's not an explicitly defined program within the national housing strategy, but we fund seniors' housing. We don't fund long-term care, and we might want to look at why that is and what the provincial objections to that are. However, I think this captures all the seniors' issues and gives us a wide field that incorporates the other members' ideas.

As I said, MP Falk brought a motion forward, and I think the consensus of the committee is to support it, but it needs to be a bit broader to capture some of the additional points that were raised by other MPs in the conversation. That's the motion I put in its place to get the study done, if it's met with committee approval.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

All right.

What Mr. Vaughan has put forward is actually quite a substantial change to the motion of Mrs. Falk. I'd like to hear from Mrs. Falk on whether she is agreeable to, in effect, replacing her motion with that one or expanding it such that it looks like that one. If it isn't considered to be friendly, it's her motion that's on the floor and it's her motion that will have to be voted upon before we consider the one Mr. Vaughan has put forward.

As I said, there's a motion on the floor that needs to be dealt with.

Mrs. Falk, what are your thoughts on what Mr. Vaughan just had to say?

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

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, MP Vaughan, for the suggestion.

I thought we had made it pretty broad already. Do you have these changes written down? Are you able to send it out? I'd like to see it in writing before I commit to changing something completely.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Fair enough.

Would you be comfortable with our tabling this discussion until we can deal with a few other things, and then coming back to it?