Madam Speaker, I am speaking today in support of the motion of my colleague from the riding of Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques—like the name of some families down home, the Basques—proposing major amendments to the employment insurance system.
My colleague proposes that the benefits for seasonal workers and new entrants be improved.
These are serious problems, and the government must address them immediately. I believe the Liberals have forgotten that these are real people who are suffering, that entire families have nothing to eat because of the changes to employment insurance. I will give you examples of the government's insensitivity and incompetence.
First, I would like to point out that we have a bit of a problem with the matter of reducing contributions. Allow me to explain what our problem is. Before reducing contributions, I think the first problem needs to be solved, the problem of employment insurance and the employment insurance formula. After that has been done, then would come the time to look at contributions, if there is any money left to reduce contributions.
I think it is really important to look at the employment insurance formula in order to be certain that it meets the requirements of the people who need it.
If we look at what employment insurance reform has brought to our area and other areas in Canada, we see mostly problems. I am going to give you a few examples from back home, which I am very familiar with.
First, when the government decided to make changes to employment insurance, what did it do? Not only did it decide to make changes for the future, but it suddenly decided to look at people's files, people who had been told by its officials they were eligible for employment insurance. Surprise, they found they had made a mistake three years back. They wrongly told some people they were entitled to employment insurance. The people concerned were poor—I will give you examples—they were not rich.
I will give the example of a man who came to see me in my office shortly after the elections, a man with a child. There were also a father, and a mother with 11 children from Caraquet, in New Brunswick. Because of the problems in the fish plants, that man went to see the government to find out whether he qualified for employment insurance. You know, employment insurance is supposed to provide some money to feed families. He went to the government and was told “Well, you have to work, to work hard. Go out there and find some work”. The man said “I would be glad to work, but I cannot get a job”. And he was told “We are creating jobs in New Brunswick now. We are making Christmas wreaths. Go and see the employer, he will give you a job”. And he did get a job making Christmas decorations.
The poor man went to work and put in a number of weeks in order to qualify for employment insurance. The guy, his wife and his kid would have loved to keep on making Christmas wreaths all year long, but that is not the way it works. After Christmas, wreaths are no longer in demand. So, they are out of a job again.
They applied for employment insurance to see if they qualified. “Of course. You are entitled to employment insurance, and your son too.” So they get benefits for a year or two and then, all of a sudden, department officials come to their senses—I mean senior officers, I make the distinction because I do not want to offend low-level public servants who have no authority whatsoever—and ask for an investigation on these poor people because it would seem a mistake was made two years back. They tell these people they owe the government $10,000 or $15,000.
That is what Canadians got from the Liberals. The Liberals told seasonal workers back home to make Christmas wreaths, that great new job in New Brunswick.
I call on the Government of Canada not to blackmail Atlantic Canadians by telling them they are going to make them work full time.