Human Resources Committee on June 18th, 2025

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I don't think, colleagues, you'll find anyone around this table disagreeing about the importance of this issue. Obviously it's a very important issue, and it is a study that merits being looked at. However, I don't believe that having this study over the summer is going to solve the issue that one in five young people can't find a job. We just announced the Canada summer jobs program. We increased it by 6,000, so there are 76,000 new jobs happening right now for the summer.

I think this study needs to be done. I would say the timeline is probably a little problematic, especially if we want to invite witnesses so that the study will mean something. We have to make sure that we find the right witnesses and that witnesses are available to come. If it's amenable to you, perhaps we could have a friendly amendment that we adopt this as a study but not to have the five meetings before September. That way we'll give all the parties here at the committee the opportunity to determine witnesses and send out invitations to them. I think that the study will be better for it for all of us.

It is an important issue. We all agree that we need to look at it more closely, but let's do it the right way and not rush it through and end up with a study that doesn't really give us the fruits that we're looking for.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Just to be clear, Ms. Koutrakis, did you make an amendment? Was that in the form of an amendment?

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

I did.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Now we have an amendment to the motion.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Chair, I want to speak on a point of order.

If we're going to have an amendment, we do need to know what's being removed and what's coming, or perhaps we can talk back and forth a couple more times and see if we can arrive at some kind of consensus in whatever way you want to do it.

However, I didn't hear specific wording. If we're going to debate an amendment, we need to....

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

I thought it was clear.

Ms. Koutrakis, could you verbalize that again?

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

The only thing I would ask is that we could change the date from July 31 to the end of September, so September 30.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Is everybody clear? Do you need that on paper and written? It's clear. It's changing the study timeline conclusion from July to September, as articulated by Ms. Koutrakis.

Go ahead, Mr. Genuis.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

If I could speak on the amendment, I was just thinking this through, and I guess there are a couple of thoughts.

I think it is valuable to begin this work as soon as possible. I'm not proposing a study completed by the end of June. I agree that there are studies happening now on bills like Bill C-5 with a breakneck pace that's done sometimes. I think in this case that we can find a middle path that recognizes the urgency of it but doesn't say that we're going to do it all this week.

Thinking about what would need to unfold if we give ourselves a week to 10 days to identify witnesses, and then there's a period of a week to 10 days to invite and to schedule those witnesses, we would still be able to do these hearings, I think, fairly easily before the end of July.

I don't think that our having a hearing is, on its own, going to get all of these students back to work. However, I do think that we can, through a process of these hearings, hear ideas and magnify concepts that could be implemented by the government.

The numbers are pretty significant. I know that the minister and others have talked about the federally funded summer jobs program within that. We have over two million post-secondary students in this country. One in five returning students is struggling to find a job. This is clearly orders of magnitude beyond what has been proposed so far.

The other issue with the September 30 date is that I don't think it would be realistic to pack all these hearings into the last two weeks of September, if that was the idea. We're probably still with that, talking about some summer hearings anyway. Maybe we could say there could be five hearings before August 30, with the understanding that we're going to space them out. I would like to start early and think about how we can space them out. Maybe there are some witnesses who are ready to present to us right away and some who are ready to present later on. We can talk about whether the number of meetings is right as well.

I do think that doing some work on this, starting earlier in the summer and continuing, would make the most sense. I want to see if we can meet in the middle on a timeline.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

For discussion, we do have a motion to amend that's currently on the floor. Is there anything further, Ms. Koutrakis, on your amendment?

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

To my colleague across the way, I'm sure that we could find a friendly way to make sure that we all get what we're looking for.

We agree that a study needs to be done. Doing it in the summer is not the ideal time to do this. Students are going to be unemployed, as you say. I happen to remain more positive that students will be employed. The government does have programs in place to help them. I don't see how a study in August, before the House rises again in September, is going to help the employment situation of our students over the summer. I really don't.

I think that if we're serious about doing a study like that, we should take our time and make sure that we put a framework in place that is going to yield a study that we can look to and that we can present, and we can make sure that we do it right.

I don't agree. I don't know what my other colleagues around the table feel, but I am not in agreement with that. I think that it's very reasonable to ask for September 30. All of us are going to be very busy in our constituencies. There's a lot of work to be done. Among all the MPs around this table, there are many newly elected members who are still getting their teams in place.

I just think we should be logical. This is about working together in a friendly manner to make sure that we all get what we're looking for. No one is saying no to the study; we're just looking at the timeline. I don't think that September 30 is an unreasonable timeline, given where we are in the schedule of this session that just started.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Koutrakis.

Ms. Goodridge, go ahead on the amendment.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I agree with Mr. Genuis. This is something that we absolutely do need to start and that we need to get done sooner rather than later. I think his recommendation of doing it until the end of August shows that we are serious about doing this. Quite frankly, I think students need to hear that their government actually understands and acknowledges that there is a problem. Saying that we can kick this down the road and wait until September to hash this out doesn't tell them that we're taking it with the urgency that they are telling us, very clearly—or at least that they were telling me in Fort McMurray—Cold Lake—was their priority.

I think that many of these students are making hard decisions. Can they actually go on to post-secondary studies? What is their fall going to look like? They're picking their classes right now, and they're making these decisions. If they can see that we are working on this, and hopefully they have a plan, then we can give them hope. Saying, “No, this isn't our priority. We're going to wait till September to see what this looks like” is not giving them that hope.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you.

Go ahead, Madam Desrochers, on the amendment.

[Caroline Desrochers, Liberal, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you.

I just want to make sure that what we're proposing is not being misconstrued. We are not saying, “Let's wait until September to start the work.” We're saying, “Let's complete it. Let's extend the time of completion so we can take a little more time to get the right witnesses, to have the real discussion and to do the right study.” Maybe there is a way to come in at the ground and commit to having maybe one or two meetings over the summer, agreeing on who the witnesses are and who we're bringing, and then inviting them and scheduling it.

I also agree that I don't think we're going to be in the same place if we just wait and cram everything into September, so that's not what we're proposing here. I just want to extend the time so that there's more time to prepare. I think we're ready to have a couple of these meetings over the summer, but to complete it at the end of August.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you.

Go ahead, Mr. Genuis, on the amendment.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

There are a couple of ways committees can make decisions. They can make decisions by motion or by understanding. If we can just identify what our understanding would be around scheduling, then we can adopt the amendment in that spirit.

I think it would make sense if the chair would endeavour to schedule these meetings in a periodic way, not so it's, say, September 29, and we're going to get extra time in the evening when we're already back here to we try to do a whole bunch, but we would try to have a couple of meetings in July, one or two meetings in August and a meeting in September.

We don't want to be too rigid about that, but if we have an understanding that we're not going to end-load this and that we're going to begin the work—I mean, I think it does make sense to try to get started sooner rather than later—and if we can agree to that in a spirit of co-operation, then I think we probably have an understanding that we can move on. Is that fair enough?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Not really.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

The clerk can clarify, but at the end of the committee meeting, you have motions and then agreements of the committee. I just want to put it out there for discussion. There could be agreement by the committee that the chair would seek to schedule these meetings in a relatively evenly spaced out fashion, rather than all at once. If people don't agree to that, then we have to be a bit more rigid, but if that's our understanding, then that works for me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Currently before the committee is an amendment to the motion that moves the conclusion date, the completion date, to September 30. The only significant part of the motion was about the 10 hours—or was it? I don't have it in front of me.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I'm sorry, but I can make this simpler.

If people like the direction I proposed, then we can adopt the amendment, and then I can propose another amendment that gives some guidance to the chair about trying to schedule the meetings in an even way, as discussed.

Is that what people want?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Okay. I'm seeing that there seems to be consensus that we would move the date to—

[Caroline Desrochers, Liberal, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Just to clarify, would we have the amendment that it's to the end of September, or until between now and September 30, and then you would make another amendment asking the chair to start working on scheduling those meetings?

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Maybe I'll propose an additional amendment that says that the chair should endeavour to schedule one to two of those meetings per month during that period. Is that fair enough?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

What I would like to deal with, because you can't come back, is the first amendment, which was to move the timeline to September 30, unless you're making an amendment to the amendment.