Evidence of meeting #26 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 businesses.
A video is available from Parliament.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
Madam Clerk, in terms of the interpretation, are there any adjustments that we can make with the minister's equipment to make this better?
3:50 p.m.
The Clerk of the Committee Ms. Danielle Widmer
We've tried multiple avenues right now. We're not too sure if we can improve the quality to ensure that the interpreters get the best quality. We can do another test.
Mr. Chair, would you like to suspend for a few seconds?
4 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
We are now back in session. The technical problems have been resolved. The question has been posed by Ms. Young. She has five minutes remaining.
Madam Minister, could you repeat your answer? You have the floor.
4 p.m.
Liberal
Carla Qualtrough Liberal Delta, BC
Thank you very much, Chair.
The question had to do with the Canada recovery sickness benefit. I was explaining that this benefit is available to any Canadian worker who is impacted by COVID.
If you're required to self-isolate, if you're in quarantine or if you have COVID, this benefit is available to you as a Canadian worker for up to four weeks in one-week increments if, because of COVID, you've lost 50% of your work in any given week.
I could add that almost 500,000 Canadians have accessed this benefit since it was put in place.
4 p.m.
Liberal
Kate Young Liberal London West, ON
Minister, thank you very much for that.
The EI sickness benefits are going from 15 weeks to 26 weeks.
4 p.m.
Liberal
Carla Qualtrough Liberal Delta, BC
Yes. We have committed and we understand that too many claimants use up their sickness benefit before they can return to work. We've heard clearly from stakeholders that sickness benefits need to be extended, and that's why we have committed to extending benefits.
I think you'll hear from me today a theme that we have to look at everything as a system. As we look at the system, all the changes we want to make, the cost of these changes, the sequencing of these changes, the impact on our system and any legislative changes we need to make, changes to EI sickness benefits will absolutely be part of that discussion and that mix in consideration, because we are committed to extending them.
4 p.m.
Liberal
Kate Young Liberal London West, ON
Thank you. That's good news.
Modernizing employment insurance for the 21st century really requires us to make sure we're talking with various stakeholder groups. I was just wondering if you could tell us what outreach there has been and what you're hearing from shareholder groups.
4 p.m.
Liberal
Carla Qualtrough Liberal Delta, BC
Thank you.
Employers and workers and other stakeholders have a real stake in how the EI program works. I spent a lot of time with a variety of stakeholders and experts, getting their input and learning and hearing their priorities and their concerns. We heard from labour organizations and employer groups, and maybe I could just share a couple.
We met with the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, the Fédération des travailleurs et travailleuses du Québec, the Confédération des syndicats nationaux, the Centrale des syndicats du Québec, the Centrale des syndicats démocratiques, the Canadian Labour Congress, the Canadian Cancer Society, the MS Society of Canada and, of course, Pierre Laliberté, who's the EI commissioner for workers. We brought together a group with the Canada Labour Congress and a bunch more, such as Canada's Building Trades Unions.
We've been leaning very heavily in because stakeholders want us to consult, but at the same time they want to see action. They expressed approval of an approach where we sequence our improvements such that there's more time to dig in on the most complex and novel ideas, maybe like support for the self-employed, but where we don't delay changes when there's consensus or where we're further along in the discussion.
4 p.m.
Liberal
Kate Young Liberal London West, ON
Some employers are really concerned about the status of the EI account, the EI premiums, and what those premiums are going to look like in the future. What should employers, and employees for that matter, expect when it comes to EI premiums?
4 p.m.
Liberal
Carla Qualtrough Liberal Delta, BC
That's a good question.
Throughout the crisis we've been very sensitive to not overburdening the EI account, which we know could ultimately result in increased premiums and employers and workers bearing the cost of the pandemic. That's why, first of all, we made a decision to not impose the costs of the CERB for EI-eligible Canadians on the EI account, so to credit the EI account. In fact, the EI senior actuary actually revised the forecast for the account to reflect this. It's also why we froze EI premiums for two years.
It's why stakeholder outreach is so important. We heard first-hand, for example, from the CFIB that they had this concern; they're very aware that big ideas can sometimes come with big-ticket prices.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Kate Young Liberal London West, ON
Given the fact that this is going to revert back in September 2021, when do you think we'll have some clear indication of what will happen after that?
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Carla Qualtrough Liberal Delta, BC
As I said in my opening remarks, in the weeks and months to come we're going to lay out that vision for a modernized EI for Canadians. Of course, we all know on Monday there is a very important budget that we're dropping, and it would be a bit of career-limiting move if I scooped my boss or our Deputy Prime Minister. I'll leave it to them to share with Canada what is happening then, but we absolutely have to have some decisions in place, at least for what happens to the changes that were made by the end of September, sooner rather than later. Graham and Cliff can talk about the timing we need from a systems point of view, but we need months to make those changes.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
4:05 p.m.
Bloc
Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Madam Minister, thank you for being with us.
With respect to the motion on EI reform that was passed by this committee, we're moving forward. We wanted to invite you to address our concerns, and I think your presentation served that purpose. I thank you again for taking the time to come and see us, and I hope we will have a copy of your remarks, if possible.
In your opening remarks, you said that in the coming weeks, you would already be looking at changes that could be put in place by September 26 or September 21, when the return to the status quo is supposed to take place, which wouldn't work. What types of measures are you specifically looking at?
For example, some of the measures that you've adopted to relax the eligibility criteria for EI include the requirement of 420 hours of work, setting the minimum unemployment rate at 13.1%, and now the 50 weeks of benefits.
Is this part of the kind of relief that could be a basis for working on these issues?
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Carla Qualtrough Liberal Delta, BC
You know, I can't, and I would be hesitant to weigh in on what specific elements will be announced as part of our vision and the plan moving forward, because as I alluded to in my last answer, this is indeed a conversation about the elements of a system, so we need to look at this as a bundle.
However, yes, I can tell you, for example, that the changes we made for COVID reasons—the simplification measures we put in place—would be a priority in enabling us to determine if we're going to extend them temporarily or if we're going to make them permanent, because those are the ones that are going to change without us doing anything, if we do nothing. It will be very important for us, based on the consultations, based on the work you all are doing as a committee, to make decisions around whether we continue with the standard unemployment rate, whether we have common hours to qualify or a benefit duration or benefit rate, and whether we keep our simplified reason for separation or separation-pay measures. These are all the things that are pressing because of the reality of September.
Those are the issues or the elements that are not only a priority for us, but also our commitments—as you said—like the one we made to sickness benefits.
4:05 p.m.
Bloc
Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC
Thank you.
I'm going to take this opportunity, not to ask you about the four weeks of sick leave, but rather to ask you about the special sickness benefits, which are part of the employment insurance program.
It deals with special benefits, which for 50 years have been 15 weeks. I don't need to explain the problem any more, because I'm sure that every one of us knows someone, whether a constituent or relative, who has come to their office to say that after 15 weeks, the benefits stopped, even though that person was suffering from a chronic illness or cancer. I have lots of examples. It was chaos every time, because it was hopeless. We know that 15 weeks isn't enough. A motion was passed to increase the maximum duration of special sickness benefits to 50 weeks.
Are you working to make this 50-week period possible?
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Carla Qualtrough Liberal Delta, BC
As I've said, I completely agree and understand how important support for Canadians is if they have to leave for reasons of sickness. Too many claimants use up their EI sickness benefits before they can return to work. I have immense respect for the will of Parliament. Coupled with that, we have heard clearly from stakeholders that sickness benefits need to be extended, so we are committed to extending sickness benefits.
As I said, as we look at the entire system—at all of the changes we want to make, being conscious, as was alluded to in other questions, of the cost to the EI operating account of all these changes and how we sequence them—that's when we'll be more comfortable committing to exact numbers.
Until then, I feel it would be premature, beyond the commitments we've already made, to comment on any one particular element.
4:10 p.m.
Bloc
Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC
Thank you for your response, Madam Minister, but I would have liked to know if increasing special benefits to 50 weeks is part of your commitment.
The costs have been identified, and they would be quite feasible, both for employees and for employers. As you know, 50 weeks is fair, and not everyone would take 50 weeks. Are you going to accept that 50 weeks?
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Carla Qualtrough Liberal Delta, BC
What I will tell you is what I have heard from stakeholders, that we need to increase the number of weeks. I have heard—full disclosure—from some stakeholders who would like us to go beyond 26 weeks. As we look at this system and modernizing the entire system, I am not leaving anything off the table, but again, I feel like I'm not able, as you can appreciate, to make that commitment today.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
Thank you, Minister.
Merci, Madam Chabot.
Next is Ms. Gazan, please, for six minutes.
4:10 p.m.
NDP
Leah Gazan NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Thank you so much, Chair. It's nice to see you again, Minister.
Campaign 2000 has been calling for repayment amnesty for low-income individuals who received the CERB since last July. The recommendation was submitted to this committee, and most recently, a parliamentary petition was launched. They are calling for a human rights-based approach towards all who have access to emergency benefits in order to cover basic expenses at a time of heightened need.
We know that the cost, for example, for families who were living on EIA and who have children increased just because kids were at home all day—for example, food costs, hydro costs and water costs. These recommendations call specifically for repayment amnesty based on annual total income and family size, and for an end to calls for penalization for anyone who received CERB and is now deemed ineligible.
You've been clear in prior committees that when the CERB rolled out, instructions weren't clear. I think your government has demonstrated that, in terms of rolling back some of the penalties it's already discussed. Is your government willing to provide CERB repayment amnesty for low-income individuals who received the CERB, including youth aging out of care?
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Carla Qualtrough Liberal Delta, BC
It greatly concerns me, the extent to which this continues to be such a difficult time for so many people. We've tried, as we've rolled out the CERB, to be responsive and to course correct when we've been able to or when we've been advised that there were things we could be doing better, for example when we decided to allow self-employed workers who applied for CERB using their gross income because of our messaging.
Right now, our focus is on getting everybody eligible and helping people file their taxes so they aren't in a position of having to repay. If they do have to repay, no one has to do it now. No one has to pay taxes on CERB for a year. We really want to work with Canadians who need to make repayments in a way that is flexible.