Debates of May 26th, 2009

Employment Insurance

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

On the contrary, Mr. Speaker, because of the economic situation, we will be spending much more this year on employment insurance. That is how we are reacting to the situation. We cannot change the employment insurance system every two or three months. The Leader of the Opposition voted in favour of the budget. Our response to this situation is helping the great majority of the unemployed workers in this country.

[Michael Ignatieff, Liberal, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister says that the system helps most people. Here are some people it does not help.

In Quebec and Atlantic Canada lobster fishermen are hurting especially hard and so are their crews. In Glace Bay, in Parsons Pond, in Shediac collapsing prices are forcing fishermen to let their crew go. Thousands of them may not qualify for EI at all, despite what the Prime Minister says.

Why is the government not fixing EI to help these Canadians in their hour of need?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the government has just announced additional assistance for marketing in the lobster industry. We continue to meet with stakeholders in that industry to address the specific and very serious problems in the industry.

However, there are figures out today showing that in March the number of EI beneficiaries went up more quickly than the number of unemployed.

The system has been changed. People are benefiting from the system. We will be spending a lot more money on the system. Unlike the leader of the Liberal Party, we cannot be changing our minds on budgets every two or three months.

The Economy

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Mr. Speaker, in 2003 the finance minister was a senior member of the Mike Harris government and it ran on a balanced budget. Whoops, it turned out to be a big deficit.

Last November, he projected never ending surpluses. Whoops again, two months later it was an $80 billion deficit, which the IMF says is now $120 billion. That is enough to wipe out all the debt reduction since Liberals balanced the budget in 1997.

Why is the minister so bad with numbers?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, virtually every national government in the world is running a deficit. Ours, by comparison, remains much lower than our competitors.

That member, who was once an esteemed economist, should know that when interest rates are zero and we have a recession like this and we have the strong, long-term fiscal position we have, that we put money into a deficit to ensure we help unemployment people in our country.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the implication of what the Prime Minister said is to agree with the Liberal Party and increase EI.

I would also suggest that both the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance subscribe to an excellent publication titled “deficits for dummies”. It might help them to come to some understanding.

My question for the finance minister is this. Canadians want to see the colour of his money. The deficits are soaring and the promises are soaring, but we are seeing nothing invested in communities and Canadians are not seeing any jobs created—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Peter Milliken]

The right hon. Prime Minister.

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. When we did our prebudget consultations, the Liberal Party wanted two more weeks of employment insurance. We gave five more weeks of employment insurance, plus all kinds of additional money for training, for people both on EI and not on EI. These are measures to help the unemployed in this recession.

What we are not going to do is, every two or three months, come up with another economic policy, another budget, until we need to raise taxes. Our deficits are affordable, but they will remain short-term.

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

Mr. Speaker, for a year now, the government has kept on making contradictory statements on the real economic situation. During the election, the Prime Minister denied the very existence of a crisis. Then his Minister of Finance admitted there would be a slight deficit. A few months later, he set the figure at $34 billion, and finally yesterday admitted that it will be still larger than that.

Will the Prime Minister admit that he made a mistake in his homework, that his recovery plan is totally inadequate and that he must now take action and present a new plan which will better meet the needs of the population?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we are spending a great deal of money and that includes improvements to employment insurance to benefit the country's unemployed. Compared to other countries, our deficits are workable and short term. There is only one contradiction here and that is that the Bloc Québécois asked for two more weeks of EI. We added five, and it voted against that measure because it constantly votes against the interests of this country's real unemployed.

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

Mr. Speaker, now I have heard everything.

The government's inaction in dealing with the crisis is inexcusable. Last November, the Bloc made some proposals, but they all went nowhere. A few weeks ago, we submitted phase 2 of our recovery plan, which included loan guarantees for the forest industries, compensation for the harmonization of the GST with Quebec, implementation of the Kyoto protocol, and improvements to unemployment insurance. Those are all serious and rigorous measures.

What is the Prime Minister waiting for before he takes action?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, during this crisis, the Bloc has done just one thing: voted things down. It voted against improving employment insurance, against programs to stimulate the municipalities, against tax reductions for taxpayers. The Bloc voted against those measures, but we have taken action. That is the difference.

Employment Insurance

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

Mr. Speaker, not only does the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development refuse to lift a finger to help the unemployed, but she is also distorting the proposals made by the Bloc Québécois and the other opposition parties. She knows very well that a 360-hour eligibility threshold would result in a maximum of 36 weeks of benefits and not 52 weeks as she falsely stated.

Instead of spreading misinformation, should the minister not lower the eligibility threshold to facilitate access to employment insurance?

[Jean-Pierre Blackburn, Conservative, Minister of National Revenue and Minister of State (Agriculture)]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to again remind this House and the Bloc Québécois members, who do not understand anything, that our employment insurance system works as follows. If the unemployment rate is higher in a given region, a shorter period of employment is usually required in order to qualify for benefits. However, if there are practically no unemployed people or the unemployment rate is low in a region, a longer period of employment is required to qualify for benefits.

Here is what one journalist had to say today in Le Devoir: “The 360-hour measure would result in considerable costs and a higher deficit, which—”

[The Speaker, Liberal, Peter Milliken]

The hon. member for Saint-Lambert.

[Josée Beaudin, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in that case, there a great number of us who do not understand.

If the minister were the least bit concerned, she would recognize that the current system does not meet the needs of the unemployed and she would eliminate the two-week waiting period, an unfair and unwarranted measure.

Unless she believes, as does the Minister of National Revenue, that improving the employment insurance plan will promote moonlighting, as though claimants were cheaters, what is she waiting for to take action?

[Jean-Pierre Blackburn, Conservative, Minister of National Revenue and Minister of State (Agriculture)]

Mr. Speaker, I will address those listening to us. According to their proposal, a worker who becomes unemployed and is entitled to 30 weeks of employment insurance, would receive the same 30 weeks of benefits, but the benefits would start two weeks earlier and end two weeks earlier. With our proposal, if a worker unfortunately becomes unemployed and is entitled to 30 weeks, they will receive an additional five weeks at the end. This represents about $2,000 for someone receiving weekly benefits of $400.

The Bloc voted against our proposal providing an additional five weeks. They were against it.

The Economy

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government's fiscal and economic policies have failed. They have resulted in the worst recession since 1929, the biggest drop in GDP in 18 years, the first trade deficit in 33 years, and falling exports for the sixth consecutive quarter, something we have not seen for 60 years. The Minister of Finance said that his deficit would beat Brian Mulroney's record. Some 400,000 people are out of work. It is a complete failure.

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I did not hear a question.

Everyone knows that this is a global recession. International experts say that Canada's economy is doing better than that of any other G7 country. Our programs and our budget are helping people during this economic crisis.

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the approach that has been taken has been completely reckless. By cutting taxes for the banks and the big oil companies just a few months ago, the Conservatives have now created the largest deficit we have seen in the history of Canada, worse than Brian Mulroney's, for heaven's sake.

What do they have to show for it? There have been 400,000 people thrown out of work. There should at least be some results for the steps they have taken, but there are not. It is a result of their policies, supported time and time again by the Liberals.

When is the Prime Minister going to admit that he has it wrong and he has to change direction if the Canadian economy is going to survive this?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, one of the reasons the deficit will be larger this year is of course because of all the assistance that is going to unemployed Canadians for retraining and for unemployment insurance.

The leader of the NDP raises the issue of tax cuts for business. I recall that it was the leader of the NDP, when he was pushing this coalition thing, who was all prepared to support those corporate tax cuts. I say to the leader of the NDP that I do not know how many times he has admitted he is wrong, but stop changing direction every other week.

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the International Monetary Fund says that Canada can and should do more to kickstart the economy. The government has failed to do so. The money is not making it to the infrastructure projects, so it is not creating work this summer in our communities the way it should.

The IMF says that Canada's economic recovery is shrouded in risk, partly because of the record $1.3 billion of consumer and household debt that people have. They are getting dinged and gouged with interest rates.

When is the government going to understand that we need a second stimulus package? Bring it to the House--

[The Speaker, Liberal, Peter Milliken]

The right hon. Prime Minister.

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

There are three things, Mr. Speaker. First, lots of infrastructure spending is going out, and will be out, this year; second, the IMF is on record as being very complimentary of the Minister of Finance's action on this economy; and, third, we have the opposition parties, and I think Canadians will notice this, saying, “The deficit is too large, why don't you spend more?”

What was absolutely clear during the last election, and every day since, is there is not a person over there who has a single clue of what to do about the economy.

Employment Insurance

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it was a Liberal government that brought in seven--