Human Resources Committee on March 24th, 2022

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

It certainly does seem unfair.

I noticed in your mandate letter that you have a goal of increasing the number of personal support workers by 50,000, which is good to hear because we all know that we're short and long-term care facilities are suffering.

Is this target before or after the 22,000 personal support workers who were fired for not having vaccines?

[Carla Qualtrough, Liberal, Delta, BC]

These are two separate issues. It's a completely different conversation that we would have to have with provincial and territorial governments, who are responsible for dictating employment requirements and standards for personal support workers.

Our goal on the training side of it, having recognized this gap, is to train these individuals as quickly as possible so that they can be part of the health care sector.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Okay, thank you.

I'm very interested in the disability benefit. There were private members' bills that the Conservatives brought forward to try to address the issue that when disabled people want to work, they actually lose their benefits so it's a punishment to them for going to work and that keeps them in the cycle of poverty.

These new benefits that you're designing, will they address this concern so that the disabled who want to work will not lose their benefits when they do?

[Carla Qualtrough, Liberal, Delta, BC]

That's a really important question, and in fact, the number one preoccupation of mine on this benefit is to make sure that this benefit doesn't disincentivize or punish work and it fairly incentivizes work, I would say, so that people are better off working. It's also so that we're not replacing benefits, particularly at the provincial and territorial level where disability supports are primarily housed, and we are actually making people's lives better and people are getting lifted out of poverty.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Speaking of poverty, I have a lot of seniors in my riding and obviously the cost of everything is going up—gas, groceries and heating—and people can't always afford all of those.

I wanted to ask about the policy that awarded increases to seniors over the age of 75 but excluded those between 65 and 75.

Is there a possibility that the government would reverse that policy in recognition that inflation is hitting all of the people who are on a fixed income equally?

[Carla Qualtrough, Liberal, Delta, BC]

Again, that's a really important question. We have committed to increasing writ large the OAS and increasing it for people over the age of 75, which is a recognition of the increased costs of medication, of accessibility issues that people face at 75. There's much less likelihood of working by that age whereas we find people between 65 and 75 do sometimes have another source of employment income. It's not my file. I apologize, colleagues, but I just don't have any further detail. You'll have to ask the Minister of Seniors.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

No problem.

I have one final question. We have heard of this NDP-Liberal coalition and that there have been agreements made in the back room about what programs might be added.

Can you clarify what, if anything, will be added to the estimates that we're seeing here in order to appease the NDP?

[Carla Qualtrough, Liberal, Delta, BC]

What I can say is that the agreement allows Parliament to function exceedingly better. It will allow us to move forward on areas of mutual interest including pharmacare and climate change. Certainly from the perspective of the disability community, dental care is a welcome addition to that list.

I can tell you I'm not sure. Again, they're not my files so I think it would be best to talk to another minister about the details of those particular programs.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thank you, Minister.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

We have Mr. Long for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Chair. I'm sharing my time with MP Van Bynen.

Minister Qualtrough, Carla, welcome and thank you for coming back to speak with us today. It's always a pleasure to have you back, and I thank you so much for the work you do on behalf of so many Canadians.

As we know, the Canada disability benefit was tabled in the last Parliament. It died on the Order Paper. I'm very happy to see it remains part of your mandate, and I'm really looking forward to fulfilling this important platform promise.

In New Brunswick, approximately 23% of the working-age population lives with a disability. This benefit will be crucial to those who live in my riding Saint John-Rothesay and across Canada.

I actually tabled a motion to study how a benefit such as this would reduce poverty among working-age Canadians with disabilities and how the federal government can improve access to federal programs and services for persons with disabilities. I look forward to getting to work on it in the near future.

Minister, could you explain the importance of the Canada disability benefit and exactly what you believe it will achieve and can you provide any insight on when my constituents can expect this legislation to come into place?

Thank you and welcome.

[Carla Qualtrough, Liberal, Delta, BC]

Thank you for the question, and thanks for having me.

As I said in my remarks, no one should live in poverty. Right now, we have working-age Canadians living with disabilities who are twice as likely to live in poverty than those without disabilities. Twenty-two per cent of Canadians with disabilities who are of working age live under the poverty line. That's one in five. It's shocking.

Poverty rates go down by half when persons with disabilities reach age 65, and you know why; it's because they now have access to the GIS. It's a big gap between the CCB disability, which ends when an individual becomes an adult, and 65, when someone is able to access the GIS. This has the potential to lift hundreds of thousands of people out of poverty.

We are committed to looking at introducing this as soon as we possibly can. I'm grateful for the support from members of all parties who have indicated that they want this benefit to move forward. Forty-five senators wrote us a letter saying that they want to fast-track it. It's very exciting and I look forward to tabling it as soon as we can, given the legislative schedule.

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

Thank you for that, Minister.

I'll turn it over to MP Van Bynen.

[Tony Van Bynen, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Thank you, Minister. I appreciate you taking the time to bring us up to date on your mandate letter and the funding that's required going forward.

An item in your mandate letter is to continue to support the work of the national campaign to promote the skilled trades as a first-choice career for young people in diverse populations.

Blue Door Shelters is an example of an organization that's providing emergency housing in York region and supports women, children and families at risk of experiencing homelessness. They've started Construct, which is a program that provides entry-level experience in construction in the home improvements industry to develop an interest in pursuing the trades and to become self-reliant. At the same time, they can generate some income for a social enterprise. The program is building on support, and some of the supports that you're contemplating may apply.

I fully support promoting these skilled trades as a first-choice career. I'd be interested in knowing if you could provide us with an overview of this work and update us on how that's progressing. Specifically, is there a benefit for the social enterprise programs?

[Carla Qualtrough, Liberal, Delta, BC]

I think a lot about how we can get young people, in particular, to seriously consider a skilled trade as a career of first choice. Our workforce desperately needs skilled trades workers. We have about 700,000 skilled trade workers who will retire between 2019 and 2028, I think. These are good-paying, professional, exciting, in-demand jobs.

Historically, these jobs have been second-choice careers. We have put in place a strategy and launched a campaign to educate and to reframe the conversation to get young people, in particular, excited about a career in the skilled trades.

We have been working with industry partners. We've formed an advisory group. We've launched this campaign, which is wrapping up at the end of this year. Again, we're trying to get the conversation shifted to promote our apprenticeship strategy and promote the supports we have with UTIP, for example—the union training and innovation program—to change the conversation. This is a first-career choice. When I came into this portfolio, the average age upon entry into the skilled trades was around was around 27 or 28.

We want people to be excited about these good-paying jobs. We desperately need our workforce to have the richness of skilled trades workers in it in order to get what we need to get done: to build our economy.

[Tony Van Bynen, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Thank you, Minister.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mr. Van Bynen.

You have the floor for six minutes, Ms. Chabot.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon, Minister, and thank you for being with us to discuss your mandate letters, which are several pages long. You have been given a number of responsibilities. I would like to talk to you about the reform of Canada's employment insurance scheme.

I know that you are holding consultations and I imagine the work you are doing is much appreciated both among groups of unemployed people and among groups of unions and employers.

The Prime Minister has instructed you to build "a better, more inclusive employment insurance system" by the summer of 2022. According to an article published in La Presse on January 1, you said that you were sure you would be able to meet the June 2022 deadline the Prime Minister had given you.

Do you intend to honour the resolution you made on January 1 and give us a guarantee that we can count on reform and modernization of the employment insurance scheme in June 2022?

[Carla Qualtrough, Liberal, Delta, BC]

Thank you for the question.

I don't recall saying that, but frankly,

what I have always committed to is getting this right.

I've been very clear that we need to do this in stages and phases. We want to get the more agreed-upon consensus elements built into the system more quickly, and take the time we need to dig in on the elements for where there might not be consistency.

Specifically, around the self-employed benefit, when I think of that...We have to consider the costs of doing this, and we have to phase it in through costs. We have to consider the need to make system changes.

We are putting forth a bold vision for EI, where benefits are accessible and adequate, and address the needs of workers today. That will be done as quickly as possible, ensuring we take into account all the factors I've just put forth.

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

Minister, you know that the flexible employment insurance measures will be ending in September 2022. You also know that numerous solutions are known and that modernization by stages, without considering it comprehensively, is just going to provide piecemeal responses to certain needs. I can send you the article in which you said you could meet the deadline for the reform. Ultimately, what we expect is that there will be a reform of employment insurance as of now.

My colleague asked some questions relating to women. The employment insurance scheme discriminates against women in two regards: the eligibility criteria, because they often hold atypical jobs, and entitlement to maternity leave. Women have successfully fought this. They proved there were discriminatory rules that meant that if they lost their jobs they were not entitled to parental leave.

In another article on the subject published in La Presse, you showed that you were sensitive to the cause of these new mothers who had no access to benefits. In spite of all that, you decided to appeal the decision of the Social Security Tribunal of Canada.

Are you committed to correcting this discrimination against women in your reform?

[Carla Qualtrough, Liberal, Delta, BC]

Just to quickly add to my last answer, I want to assure you that while we may be implementing EI reforms in stages, we will not be doing this piecemeal. We're thinking about the entire system, and how every decision and issue we address, or don't address, impacts others. It's a systemic reform that will be implemented over time.

In terms of the issues you speak about, absolutely, I remain committed to addressing the inequities that women face in the EI system, whether it's the stacking rules, or rules that sometimes result in women getting to the end of regular benefits, and having no weeks left in the 50-week limit to access maternity or parental benefits. These are the issues that are driving our reforms.

I can't, of course, speak to one particular case before the Social Security Tribunal of Canada, because of privacy issues, but I can assure you that reforms will address inequities faced by women.

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

How much time do I have left, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

You have one minute left.

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

Minister, my Conservative colleague asked a question about workers who did not comply with mandatory vaccination being denied employment insurance benefits and emergency benefits such as the Canada Recovery Caregiving Benefit and the Canada Recovery Sickness Benefit.

You said that it depended on the companies and the decision was not up to the department. But it actually is a decision by your department, and a majority of the companies where vaccination is mandatory come under federal jurisdiction. Those workers have already been laid off or dismissed or put on leave without pay, and a punitive burden has now been piled on: that they are no longer eligible for employment insurance benefits. You have said this measure would last as long as public health required.

At this time, do you think that depriving people of employment insurance benefits in this situation is an extreme measure?

Are you considering lifting this measure?

[Carla Qualtrough, Liberal, Delta, BC]

As my colleague, the Minister of Health and others, including me, contemplate next steps with respect to vaccine mandates, I can assure you that we will follow the science. The vast majority of businesses in this country are under provincial jurisdiction. Their decisions as to whether to impose a mandatory vaccine requirement are matters of their internal business policy, and, of course, if someone loses a job or chooses to leave a job because they are not following an internal policy, that, again, in most cases would result in their not being eligible for EI.

I'm not talking about a situation in which someone has a duty to accommodate due to a legitimate medical reason. That is an important caveat.

With regard to the federal public service, in terms of workplaces that are currently under federal mandates, I think we will continue to follow the science and we will continue to make decisions based on our commitment to make sure our workplaces are healthy. Doing that benefits not only our citizens but our economy as well.