Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to take part in the third hour of debate on Motion No. 222 tabled in this House by the hon. member for Acadie—Bathurst and seconded by the hon. member for Bras d'Or—Cape Breton. It reads as follows:
That, in the opinion of this House, the government should take immediate action to restore employment insurance benefits to seasonal workers.
That motion was later amended by the hon. member for Miramichi, seconded by the hon. member for Oak Ridges. The amendment does not ask for benefits to be restored, but rather for the issue of employment insurance benefits for seasonal workers to be reviewed.
Then the member for Bras d'Or—Cape Breton, seconded by the member for Winnipeg Centre, came back with an amendment to the amendment asking that the review take place as part of country-wide public hearings.
Should the motion take the form suggested by those who participated in the debate and proposed an amendment and an amendment to the amendment, it would read as follows:
That, in the opinion of this House, the government should take immediate action to review, in country-wide public hearings, Employment Insurance benefits for seasonal workers.
The seasonal workers issue is a real problem for the people affected by this blatant injustice, which completely distorts an insurance scheme to which people do not even have the right to abstain from contributing.
Indeed, the government makes it mandatory for every worker and employer to contribute to the EI fund from the very first hour of work. Everybody contributes in case the employer were to decide he or she does not need the worker's services any more.
In fact, there are people who have to face unemployment every year and at the same time of the year. They are categorized as seasonal workers.
From the second world war until the Liberals came to power in 1993, seasonal workers were sure to get unemployment benefits for the whole duration of their seasonal layoff.
Since the Liberal reform, the government is not providing an insurance scheme for the unemployment period but for the employment period which has not been changed for seasonal workers. The workers are not the ones deciding that their work will be seasonal, but rather the local economic structure that determines the working conditions in any given region.
The lower St. Lawrence—Gaspé—Magdalen Islands region, for example, is struggling with the seasonal workers issue, as are our colleagues in the maritimes.
This is why representatives of the RCM faced with this situation submitted to the Minister of Human Resources Development a pilot project aimed at trying out new ways of helping seasonal workers who, year after year, find themselves in what we call the black hole, or spring gap, namely a period of up to 10 weeks where they go without a paycheque between the time when their benefits run out and when their seasonal job starts.
This is not a geographical problem as it is tied to the very nature of the economic structure of the area, as I mentioned earlier.
What is this pilot project that was submitted to the minister all about?
The government could use section 109 of the current Employment Insurance Act and grant a special status to seasonal workers. The project could run for three years, as provided under section 110 of the same act.
Moreover, the pilot project could cover areas where seasonal work is very prevalent, such as the lower St. Lawrence region, the Gaspé and the islands. It would allow the government to test beforehand changes to the current employment insurance scheme regarding seasonal workers.
As I mentioned it earlier, a seasonal worker is a worker who makes a claim for the current year at approximately the same time as the previous year. These claimants have to apply for benefits because the work they do can only be done during a given season.
Seasonal workers are greatly affected by the intensity rule. In the lower St. Lawrence region, the type of unemployed workers registered with Human Resources Development Canada in Rimouski matches the profile of seasonal workers.
Our region has a resource-based economy in important areas such as logging, peat production, agriculture and agri-food, tourism and commercial fishing.
In December 1999, 17,983 unemployed workers applied for benefits. Of that number, 14,353 were frequent claimants, which means that they are affected by seasonal variations in employment. The lower St. Lawrence region has a 80% frequent claimant rate, compared to 20% for the Montreal region.
In this context, a pilot project is necessary, because seasonal workers are penalized by the intensity rule, whatever the reason is that forces them to rely on employment insurance.
Moreover, many of them have to live through the so-called “black hole of spring”, which refers to the period of up to 10 weeks without benefits before they are called back to work, as I was saying earlier. It is very important to understand what it means to the seasonal worker to receive no money for a certain period of time.
This situation is a consequence of the calculation of the benefit period based on the regional unemployment rate rather than on the number of hours worked.
A pilot project giving special status to seasonal workers would encourage them to keep their jobs, to upgrade their skills and to participate in the development of the local economy.
A stable labour force would encourage businesses to invest more readily in personnel training, so that employees can better contribute to the increased efficiency and profitability of the business.
How would that pilot project to give a special status to seasonal workers work? Simply as follows.
The seasonal workers would obtain the following advantages: first, the intensity rule would disappear; second, the admissibility would no longer be determined by the unemployment rate in the region, but rather by the minimum number of hours required by the present Employment Insurance Act, that is 420 hours. The workers would receive benefits during the total unemployment period, which would mean no more spring gap with no cheque. Fourth, the exclusion of small weeks rule would remain. Fifth, the basis for calculation would be the actual number of weeks worked.
I hope the government will agree with this motion, which is extremely important for our seasonal workers. I invite all my colleagues in the House to massively support the motion when we vote on it later.