Debates of Dec. 5th, 1995

Supply

[Derek Wells, Liberal, South Shore, NS]

Madam Speaker, I did an interview in my riding last week. Some people who discussed the issue were in favour of some parts of the program and against other parts. To suggest that we can bring in this substantial change without there being some negative comment is not possible. Certainly when people will be affected there will be some negative comment.

However, on balance it is clear to me from discussions with the business community and others in my riding that the change from weeks to hours is very positive. Every hour of work will now count in the seasonal industries. In many of the industries in Atlantic Canada people do not work a 35-hour week during peak periods. They work 40, 50 and 60 hour weeks. Now they will get credit for

all the extra time, whereas in the past they would only get credit for the week regardless of the number of hours. That is a very positive aspect that has been accepted and endorsed by Atlantic Canadians.

As I stated earlier, there will be at least 45,000 additional people in Atlantic Canada who will now qualify for benefits. They are not getting benefits now because in most cases they are working less than the 15 hours presently needed to qualify.

In addition there is the new family support benefit, a family income supplement for low income families with children. This provision will allow claimants to earn up to 80 per cent of their insured income.

Those are just three points but there are others. I could perhaps cite six or seven other provisions that are very beneficial to Atlantic Canadians which will offset some areas where without question some adjustment will be needed. We all recognize that we need to make structural changes to make the system an employment program as opposed to an unemployment program.

[Philippe Paré, Bloc, Louis-Hébert, QC]

Madam Speaker, I must say that I was very disappointed and even shocked to hear the comments of the member who just spoke.

Throughout his speech, we had the impression that he feels the unemployed are lazy people and that making them hungry will somehow help create jobs.

A supermarket recently opened in my riding. It needed to hire 60 people, mostly for part-time jobs. Yet, 2,000 people showed up. It is not true that the unemployed are lazy. What is true, though, is that there are no jobs for people willing to work. Jobs will not be created by making these people hungry.

[Derek Wells, Liberal, South Shore, NS]

Madam Speaker, that comment is very much like the motion, a distortion of the true facts. That is certainly not what I said or implied. To even suggest it to me is an insult. I did not say that. I will not suggest it. The member should not even think it.

We all recognize that people who are out of work are not out of work by choice. At the same time the present system is not helping them. We are trying to bring in employment measures that will assist these people to get the tools and that will help industry and business create the jobs these people badly want.

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Fredericton—York—Sunbury, NB]

Madam Speaker, in support of my colleague for South Shore, I simply advise the member from the Bloc that we from the maritimes need not be told that unemployed people are not lazy.

I will speak to a number of benefits included in the minister's recent announcement. Probably the most important benefit concerns the fact that employment insurance will now be much more inclusive. There are estimates that up to half a million people who were not eligible to be included in the benefits of the unemployment insurance will be included for benefits under employment insurance.

I cannot overestimate how important that provision is because it will allow many Canadians inside the system who currently are on income assistance in the province of New Brunswick to qualify. In many cases they could not find sufficient numbers of weeks to work but could certainly find the number of hours necessary under this provision. There will be people in my province who will be able to qualify with nine or ten weeks of work who might have needed to find fourteen or fifteen weeks of work in the past. They will have access to the program by virtue of the fact that the industries in Atlantic Canada are very seasonal. During peak periods they can work long hours but they cannot extend the long hours over a large number of weeks. It is very important that it has a very progressive outcome by virtue of that.

A message was delivered by the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod as follows:

Madam Speaker, the Honourable Deputy to the Governor General desires the immediate attendance of this honourable House in the chamber of the honourable the Senate.

Accordingly, the Speaker with the House went up to the Senate chamber.

And being returned:

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

I have the honour to inform the House that when the House did attend Her Honour the Deputy to His Excellency the Governor General in the Senate chamber, Her Honour was pleased to give in Her Majesty's name the royal assent to the following bills:

Bill C-93, an act to amend the Cultural Property Export and Import Act, the Income Tax Act and the Tax Court of Canada Act-Chapter No. 38.

Bill C-68, an act respecting firearms and other weapons-Chapter No. 39.

Bill C-61, an act to establish a system of administrative monetary penalties for the enforcement of the Canada Agricultural Products Act, the Feeds Act, the Fertilizers Act, the Health of Animals Act, the Meat Inspection Act, the Pest Control Products Act, the Plant Protection Act and the Seeds Act-Chapter No. 40.

Bill C-102, an act to amend the Customs Act and the Customs Tariff and to make related and consequential amendments to other acts-Chapter No. 41.

The House resumed consideration of the motion and the amendment.

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Fredericton—York—Sunbury, NB]

Madam Speaker, one of the benefits of the recently announced employment insurance amendments has to do with the fact that coverage is going to be broadened quite considerably. Many people will have access to employment insurance who have not had access to it in the past.

Another significant advantage is the low income protection contained in the amendments. This will allow up to 80 per cent of insurable earnings to be covered for low income families with children.

There are also the advantages in terms of the long term political viability of the program in that high income earners will have a greater percentage of their benefits clawed back. As an Atlantic Canadian, I am somewhat tired of all of those who point to us and talk about all those wealthy people who are drawing unemployment insurance benefits after making large amounts of money. It does not happen very often. By introducing this clawback we will be able to establish that more quickly in the minds of Canadians.

I would also point out the importance of the employment benefit programs that are part of the package. There were 39 in the past which have been reduced to five. Those five programs will now be managed essentially by local officials which means if one element of the package is more suitable to my constituency then all of the attention could be placed in that area. That is a huge improvement.

The job partnership program meets a very real need in my part of Canada. Many people do not acquire enough coverage for the full 52-week period. For example, people are eligible for 26 weeks of insurance benefits yet their summer job or their seasonal job does not start until 10 weeks beyond that.

One of the elements of the new employment benefit package is a job partnership program which will allow job creation opportunities in the communities. This will allow people to fill in that gap when they otherwise would not have benefits or income.

I pay tribute to the minister for last year's consultation. As an Atlantic Canadian, I have been particularly concerned about the bill and the UI changes. I can only say good things about the amount of consultation the minister has allowed and I understand he is going to continue to receive when we look at the bill in committee.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

It being 5.15 p.m., it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the business of supply pursuant to Standing Order 81(16).

Is the House ready for the question?

[Some hon. members]

Question.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

The question is on the amendment. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the amendment?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

All those in favour of the amendment will please say yea.

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

All those opposed will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

In my opinion the nays have it.

And more than five members having risen:

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the amendment, which was negatived on the following division:)

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

I declare the amendment lost.

The next question is on the main motion.

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Madam Speaker, if you were to seek it, the House would probably give its unanimous consent that those members who voted on the previous motion be recorded as having voted on the motion now before the House, with Liberal members voting nay.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Madam Speaker, members of the Bloc Quebecois will vote in favour of this motion.

[Bob Ringma, Reform, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Madam Speaker, Reform members, except if they wish to do otherwise, will oppose the motion.

[John Solomon, NDP, Regina—Lumsden, SK]

Madam Speaker, members of the New Democratic Party vote no on this motion.

[Jag Bhaduria, Liberal, Markham—Whitchurch-Stouffville, ON]

Madam Speaker, I vote against the motion.

(The House divided on the motion, which was negatived on the following division:)

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

It being 6.47 p.m., the House will now proceed to the consideration of Private Members' Business as listed on today's Order Paper.