Mr. Speaker, I would like, first of all, to set the record straight and, second, to bring a matter up for discussion.
You are probably aware of the fact that the Employment Insurance Act provides for the modernisation of the Canadian unemployment insurance system, which is 50 years old, and for the revision of federal employment programs. In fact, the Employment Insurance Act will establish a two part re-employment assistance system.
First, the revised insurance benefits. Income support will continue to be provided on a temporary basis to recipients while they are looking for work. The benefits were revised to give more value to the work effort.
On the subject of hours, the insurance system is based, not on weeks of work but on total hours worked.
As for earnings, each dollar earned is taken into account in the benefit calculation. The higher the total earnings during a reference period of 16 to 20 weeks, the higher the benefits paid upon becoming unemployed.
Regarding the intensity rule, as you know, the benefit rate will be gradually reduced based on the number of previous weeks of benefits.
Finally, as regards the family supplement, this new supplement will raise the benefit rate of low income families with children. This means that claimants whose family income is lower than $25,921 could see their benefit rate increase by 7 per cent on average.
Second, the active employment benefits. The 39 programs which are currently centralized will be replaced with an employment benefits program focusing on set goals.
It is estimated that 400,000 individuals will receive direct assistance in their job search through the five measures put forth: wage subsidy, income supplement, self-employment assistance, job creation partnerships and development grants and loans.
These five measures will be tailored to individual needs and will support the jobless in their efforts to return to work. These are flexible tools, which will be tailored to meet the needs of local communities as well.
Our goal is to ensure that everyone is treated with fairness. We want the population as a whole to be treated fairly. Low income families with children will get increased protection, thanks to a family supplement. This is one example.
Here is another one: some of the new rules will be applied gradually to give individuals and communities time to adjust to the new situation.
Third, jobless people in regions with a high rate of unemployment will need fewer hours to be eligible.
People earning $2,000 or less per year will get a refund of their premiums through the income tax system. Small businesses will be eligible for a temporary refund if the amount of the contributions that they pay over the next two years increases significantly.
All claimants will be allowed to work on a temporary basis and to earn at least $50 per week without their benefits being affected. The program will take into account all the hours spent working. Regions where unemployment is high will get proportionally greater support.
These measures are designed to facilitate the program's implementation, to be fair to all Canadians, and to be receptive to the needs of regions and communities.
Mr. Speaker, I would now like to share, with you and with members of this House, some comments made regarding this bill. I am not referring to comments made by members of the opposition parties, but by people who look at this legislation with an independent mind, if you will.
Raynald Langlois, president of Quebec's chamber of commerce, said: "As regards vocational training, the proposed legislation provides an interesting approach to reduce, if not eliminate, useless and costly overlap".
Yvon Charbonneau, a member of Quebec's national assembly and a former union leader, said: "At this point, the Quebec government's responsibility is to go to Ottawa and start negotiating directly and immediately".
Here is another quote: "The Conseil du patronat du Québec feels this is the first true federal overture in the manpower training sector. Consequently, the CPQ hopes that Quebec will agree to hold real discussions on this proposal with Ottawa". This from Ghislain Dufour, chairman of the Conseil du patronat du Québec.
There are other headlines and comments. Le Soleil stated: A good test for the good faith of the Government in Quebec''. And Jean-Jacques Samson, in <em>Le Soleil</em> , stated:
The minister's plan is an invitation for provincial governments to negotiate an agreement on labour which will be a good test of the good faith of the Government of Quebec''.
Jean-Robert Sansfaçon, in Le Devoir , said: Under the new plan, claimants with children whose family income is under $26,000 will become eligible for benefits of up to 80 per cent of their salary. This is an excellent measure''. Alain Dubuc, in <em>La Presse</em> , commented:
The minister has broken the wall of inertia and has launched the process of change''.
Jean Jacques Samson, in Le Soleil , stated: ``The new employment insurance proposed by the minister was designed to reduce costs, indeed, but it has many other merits, the main one being that 500,000 part time workers will become eligible. This measure is well adapted to one on the new realities of the labour market''.
There is more. The Ottawa Citizen stated that the plan is reasonable, practical and urgently important''. The <em>Financial Post</em> stated:
The federal government has taken some much needed steps in re-orienting the UI system. There are many positive features with the minister's proposals''. The Winnipeg Free Press stated: ``Responsible and fair''.
The Halifax Chronicle Herald stated: The minister has recognized the needs of the poor in Canada by providing additional benefits to those with family incomes of less than $26,000''. Sharon Clover, vice-chairman of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce:
These changes go a long way toward needed improvements, removing some features which previously had been a disincentive to work''.
What about other regions of Canada? It was stated in the Ottawa Citizen that the minister's plan is ``reasonable, practical and urgently important''.
The Financial Post stated: ``The federal government has taken some much needed steps in re-orienting the UI system. There are many positive features with the minister's proposals''.
The Winnipeg Free Press stated: ``responsible and fair''.
The Halifax Chronicle-Herald stated: ``The minister has recognized the needs of the poor in Canada by providing additional benefits to those with family incomes of less than $26,000''.
The vice-president of the Chamber of Commerce, Sharon Glover, stated: "These changes go a long way toward needed improvements, removing some features which previously had been a disincentive to work".
I have indicated clearly what this particular piece of legislation is all about. I have quoted people who are not members of the opposition, who were there in part to embarrass the government, to try to destabilize whatever project it brought forward. I have quoted neutral third parties who have looked at it with a detached eye. These are the kinds of comments they have made.
If I have more time, I have much more to say about this. May I have an indication?