Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak to the report that was tabled today. I helped draft this report, since it is the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, on which I sit, that also examined premium rates and employment insurance surpluses.
We asked many questions in the House. The Department of Human Resources Development provided some explanations. So did the Department of Finance. This is the third time that the Auditor General has sounded the alarm and said “It really makes no sense that, with current premiums, there is a surplus which, on March 31, 2002, reached $42.8 billion”.
I invite members opposite to read the report. There are some very interesting conclusions and recommendations. We hope that, for once, the government will address this issue.
I want to say something about the first recommendation. When recommendations are made to this government, it is important to include dates, because this government has a habit of saying “Soon, soon, soon”. But for us, soon now means 2003, if not 2004.
The first recommendation is very clear and it includes a cut-off date. It reads:
That the government clarify and disclose to Parliament and the public accounts committee all the relevant factors used in setting the employment insurance premium rates, particularly with regard to determining the nature of the employment insurance account balance and deciding on its disposition.
That the government table the relevant information to Parliament and the Committee no later than March 31, 2003.
This means that the other side will have to wake up and begin to realize that there is a major problem with premium rates and the employment insurance surplus.
The second recommendation states that:
During the review of the employment insurance premium setting process, the government take all necessary steps to include consultations with employee and employer groups along with the Canada Employment Insurance Commission and the Chief Actuary of Human Resources Development Canada and all other relevant stakeholders.
We put a question to Human Resources Development officials. They told us “We will soon begin consultations and that is about it”. We asked where these consultations would lead us. They replied “If we cannot agree, we will go back to the old method”.
The old practice is the one that allows the government to keep on collecting the surplus and strangling the unemployed.
I will continue because this report is very important. The last time the Auditor General referred to the EI fund, she said, “This is the third time I have raised this issue. I hope that the government will deal with this very important issue once and for all”.
The third recommendation is as follows:
That the government prepare a status report on these consultations—
It should start with this. This is most important.
--summarizing each participant's position, contribution and conclusion to the review of the employment insurance rate setting process and table the document to Parliament and the Public Accounts Committee when the review is complete.
I think that the members of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts have once again found ways and methods for this government to finally resolve this problem that affects workers and small business. The way that premiums are paid hurts small business and creates problems in terms of competition. The members opposite do not seem to understand this.
I will continue with the fourth recommendation, and I hope the members opposite will take the time to read this report.
The Auditor General said that if the government did not act, she would have very harsh criticism when she returns before us in April, 2003. She has warned the government three times now and she hopes that they have heeded her.
The fourth recommendation reads:
That the government formally reinstate the requirement that the Chief Actuary of Human Resources Development Canada prepare and produce full and complete actuarial reports for the EI program for 2002-2003.
As my colleague, the member for Rimouski-Neigette-et-la Mitis, said earlier, since Bill C-2 was passed, the whole issue has been left in the hands of the government and the Minister of Human Resources Development. We do not know where the money goes, nor how the premiums are set. It is high time, therefore, to return to more transparent and more effective methods.
I will finish by quoting the fifth recommendation from the report:
That the government consider legislative amendments that would require the Chief Actuary of Human Resources Development Canada to produce on an annual basis actuarial reports on the EI program. That these reports be made available in a timely fashion to all stakeholders and the public on the Human Resources Development Canada website.
There are five major recommendations in this report, which are to my mind logical and necessary if we are to get to the bottom of this problem with employment insurance, which affects workers and small businesses. The current employment insurance rates are strangling them.
I am directing this message to the government, and to the present Prime Minister as well, if he really wants to leave a legacy, an image of someone who cares, who has given some thought to the fate of the jobless and the small and medium size businesses that are struggling. He has an opportunity, in my opinion, to leave us as the mark of his passage through here as Prime Minister, the proof that he is humane, a man of compassion and one who understands the suffering in our society.
I do not think this will happen, because there is a conspiracy within this government, the present Minister of Finance, his parliamentary secretary who has just spoken, the member for LaSalle—Émard, the Liberals, or the Quebec Liberal caucus, to keep on digging into the employment insurance fund.
This government's sole objective, in maintaining the premium rates and the surplus in the fund so high, is to keep its hand in the till so it can pay down the debt. It is doing this at the expense of the unemployed workers and the small and medium size businesses. This is unacceptable, heartless, totally arrogant.
I trust that the Liberals over there, the federal Liberals from Quebec, will take time to read this report so they will understand what poverty is, and will get moving once and for all on solving the problem with the EI fund and its surplus.