Evidence of meeting #20 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was workers.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:55 p.m.
President, Prince Edward Island Federation of Labour
Yes. There should be employment made for them.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Corey Tochor Conservative Saskatoon—University, SK
Where would the UBI fit in that reality? Would people just decide to take the UBI instead of working, then?
4:55 p.m.
President, Prince Edward Island Federation of Labour
We're talking about a guaranteed income. The majority of people do want to work. You would see nearly everybody working if they had meaningful work to work at. We have to create jobs and get people back to work. Most people want to work. This is why the two systems, livable income and EI, need to be separated and not tie the two of them together.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Corey Tochor Conservative Saskatoon—University, SK
You're talking about this different reality where people would not pay into EI, then, or the deductible. They wouldn't be forced, I believe you said.
4:55 p.m.
President, Prince Edward Island Federation of Labour
Yes, because we're talking about livable income and putting a type of living—
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
4:55 p.m.
President, Prince Edward Island Federation of Labour
In employment insurance, yes. It would all come under employment insurance in the end. Just for the study purpose, I think the two things should be separated.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Corey Tochor Conservative Saskatoon—University, SK
Okay.
Getting back to the deductible side of the EI, I didn't hear you right, then, that workers shouldn't pay the employment insurance deductible. That's not what you're proposing.
4:55 p.m.
President, Prince Edward Island Federation of Labour
No. Workers pay into employment insurance and employers pay in. Really, because of the programs that are being delivered, I think the government should be paying a portion into this too.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
Corey Tochor Conservative Saskatoon—University, SK
The government would get those dollars from where?
5 p.m.
Conservative
Corey Tochor Conservative Saskatoon—University, SK
It would be from taxes from the employees. We'd have a tripling effect on things. Maybe the leadership in P.E.I. of your movement is all for this, but do your members not mind paying more deducted union fees, if they increase?
5 p.m.
President, Prince Edward Island Federation of Labour
No, that wouldn't come out of union fees. Most of the ones who have problems with this—
5 p.m.
Conservative
Corey Tochor Conservative Saskatoon—University, SK
Do they complain, though? Do they have issues when union fees go up? Do you get complaints?
5 p.m.
President, Prince Edward Island Federation of Labour
We haven't raised union fees here for years.
5 p.m.
Conservative
Corey Tochor Conservative Saskatoon—University, SK
That's partially because people don't like additional fees coming off their paycheques, I would assume. Right?
5 p.m.
President, Prince Edward Island Federation of Labour
Yes, but this would come out of general revenue, where money for everything else comes. On the part the government pays in, they could realign some of the spending on other issues and put it into the unemployment fund.
5 p.m.
Conservative
Corey Tochor Conservative Saskatoon—University, SK
So they would take more income tax or take that income tax off that cheque and then back-end it over. I do have concerns that with any enhancements, we have to keep EI sustainable, and we're talking about stretching this out to almost a year that you could be on EI, made up from.... Keeping it whole would be deductible. You don't think there would be some push-back with your members that the EI premiums would go up.
5 p.m.
President, Prince Edward Island Federation of Labour
No, if the government was to pay some, the EI premiums would not go up. If some of the businesses that pay no money now in taxes, with their offshore accounts, were to pay taxes the way the rest of us do, the way the workers pay taxes, we wouldn't have this problem.
5 p.m.
Conservative
Corey Tochor Conservative Saskatoon—University, SK
You believe that if we changed the tax collection system, somehow we would be able to expand these benefits to a point where what's been highlighted is up to 50 weeks; additional dollars would not come off an individual's paycheque; if you had an inability to work, you would be on a guaranteed income system of some sort and the government would pay for this by collecting taxes that they aren't collecting right now.
5 p.m.
President, Prince Edward Island Federation of Labour
Yes. I think this program would pay for itself in the long run of about 10 years. There would be zero cost for the government on this, because people would be all working then and they'd be paying more taxes on what they're earning. Everything would be great. Everybody would have a higher standard of living.
5 p.m.
Conservative
Corey Tochor Conservative Saskatoon—University, SK
Utopia. The problem is that even under this government, they have attempted to raise rates and have received fewer dollars. That means more Canadians have to use their paycheque to make up a portion of the shortfall. I would be very cautious on what the impact on individuals would be with the changes being proposed. Their deductions would go up. We'd ultimately have families with less money to take care of their families if we went down this path.
5 p.m.
Conservative
5 p.m.
Liberal
