Debates of May 8th, 2009

Employment Insurance

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and to the Minister of Labour]

Mr. Speaker, it is the Liberal Party that created the EI program that we have today at a time when the unemployment rate was higher than it is today. We have improved that system.

Here is what others have to say about the Liberal record with respect to unemployment.

The Winnipeg Free Press said:

--the Liberals were the architects of the distortions in the EI programs--

The Ottawa Sun said:

The Grits gutted EI in the '90s.

And this member has the tenacity to get up and speak about that here today.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the government continues to show an appalling lack of concern for unemployed Canadians. Now the Conservatives even ignore their own MPs and they ignore their own MPPs, the member from Whitby—Ajax, the spouse of the finance minister.

The member for Barrie has publicly stated that the EI system leaves too many unemployed workers out in the cold and discriminates against them based upon where they live. This is the government.

When will the minister and the government introduce EI fairness across the country?

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and to the Minister of Labour]

Mr. Speaker, I will indicate to this House what we will not do, and that is what the leader of the Liberal Party said and mused about, and that is raise taxes. We will not do that.

What we will do is increase benefits. We have done that by extending the EI benefits by five weeks, increasing the maximum from 45 weeks to 50 weeks. We have also extended the work sharing program which will help preserve about 93,000 jobs and more into the future.

[Lise Zarac, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

Mr. Speaker, let us take the example of the recent layoffs at Gurit in Magog. Many of the workers at this plant live in Magog, but others live 15 minutes away on Highway 10 in Sherbrooke. Because of the different regional eligibility thresholds for employment insurance, workers at the same plant are being treated differently.

Does this not prove that there needs to be a single EI eligibility threshold?

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and to the Minister of Labour]

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned, the particular party that encouraged that system was the Liberal Party. We have taken that and we have enhanced the provisions for it. When the unemployment rate in a region goes up, the number of hours required to qualify goes down and the benefits are extended.

In addition to that, we have invested significant funds into training, into the billions of dollars, to ensure that those who do not even qualify for EI are able to receive training for the jobs of the future.

[Lise Zarac, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

Mr. Speaker, that was then, this is now.

Whether these workers choose to live in Magog or Sherbrooke should have no bearing on their eligibility for employment insurance. The workers at the Gurit plant all paid the same employment insurance premiums. They lost their jobs at the same time. They should be entitled to the same treatment while they look for jobs in the same region.

Will the government change the employment insurance system so that all workers are treated equally?

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and to the Minister of Labour]

Mr. Speaker, it was her predecessor who had a lot to do with the system as it is now, but we can say that our unemployment rate today is lower than it was then.

That said, there is no question that we have done a number of things to enhance the benefits, such as extending the EI benefits by five weeks for everyone. We have ensured that the maximum has been raised from 45 weeks to 50 weeks. We have ensured that a number of dollars have been invested for training those who are unfortunately laid off. There is $1 billion for skills training through the EI program and $500 million for training, including those who do not qualify.

We are investing significantly to ensure people have jobs.

Taxation

[Guy Lauzon, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it has been 24 days since the Liberal leader said, “We will have to raise taxes”.

In that time, he has neither retracted his statement nor provided any details about his promise to raise taxes. Most surprisingly, the ever-vigilant media that parses each and every Conservative word has refused to press him for details.

Could someone in the government please comment on the Liberal leader's promise that, “We will have to raise taxes”?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, during his three decades-plus in the United States, the Liberal leader distinguished himself as a debater and an academic. Now he needs to put those skills to work to explain what he meant when he said, “We will have to raise taxes”, or when he said, “I'm not going to take a GST hike off the table--”, or when he said, “I am a tax-and-spend, Pearsonian, Trudeau Liberal”. His verbal acumen permits him, indeed his sense of honour compels him, to explain who will pay more, how much, and which taxes he will raise.

RCMP

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the government's decision to appeal the rights of RCMP officers to organize is a smack in the face to our national police force. On April 6 the Ontario Superior Court upheld their right to collective bargaining and said to deny it was unconstitutional.

The Liberal Party denied RCMP officers their rights for 13 years and now the Conservative government is carrying on that unjust legacy. This winter the government slashed RCMP wages and ripped up an agreement signed only six months before.

I have a simple question. Will the government allow RCMP officers to unionize if they choose, yes or no?

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, as I said before, this matter is before the courts and therefore I cannot comment on it. What I can say is that we are standing behind our RCMP officers. We are supporting them with new legislation to protect them in the line of duty. We are also spending more money on training and increasing the force by thousands of members. That is what we are doing for the RCMP. We are standing strong behind our men in uniform.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we should let the RCMP officers protect themselves then.

Yesterday, we saw yet another Canadian die after being tasered by RCMP officers in Brooks, Alberta. A major part of the problem is the continuing failure by the RCMP commissioner to issue clear and responsible policies on taser use by officers in the field. This negligence is costing lives. This is the 27th death since 2003 from taser use.

When will the minister instruct the RCMP commissioner to enforce clear and responsible policies on taser use and stop this avoidable pattern of deaths?

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, those were two questions and two radically different approaches. On the one hand, he tries to build up the RCMP, and on the other hand he tries to destroy the RCMP.

Quite frankly, the minister is aware of the issues that revolve around the taser. The commissioner has been before the committee. The member may or may not have known that. The issue is certainly one that is well known and police officers use their best discretion. This particular matter is currently under investigation. I think it is premature for him to make any suggestions as to what the issue is.

Agriculture and Agri-Food

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Mr. Speaker, regarding the issue of the “Product of Canada” label, the Minister of National Revenue is minimizing the problem and repeating that it is simply a matter of making a few adjustments to the regulations. The problem is not minor, as the minister claims. Cases are piling up: creamed corn, apple sauce, poultry and the chocolate made by the Trappist monks in Mistassini, just to name a few.

Does the minister not agree that this is becoming a real problem and that he must change the regulations, which are completely ridiculous?

[David Anderson, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources and for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians had a legitimate concern about what was in their food. They wanted to know what was in their food. We delivered on that.

They know that it is unpalatable to have foreign products and foreign ingredients listed under a product of Canada label. The old Liberal system allowed that to happen. We have put a stop to that. We are working with producers and the industry to make sure this system works for them.

[France Bonsant, Bloc, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this government's stubborn refusal to review the 98% rule could have unexpected negative effects. With such a high threshold, many producers will be completely unmotivated to use Canadian products and could turn to foreign products, which are often much cheaper.

Does the government realize that these regulations, which are meant to promote Canadian products, could have the exact opposite effect and undermine them instead?

[David Anderson, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources and for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, it is important that Canadians know what is in their food and where it has come from. It was left to us to solve this problem. The Liberals were in power for 13 years and never did anything about this. Canadians told us they wanted an answer to this problem. We have delivered on that.

Let me read what the member for Malpeque, who fancies himself an agricultural specialist, said when we brought in these regulations. He said, “The new regulations provide consumers with honest information on the contents they purchase and the changes could also increase the consumption of Canadian products”. This is good for Canadian producers, good for Canadian industry.

Employment Insurance

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Mr. Speaker, weeks have passed since the minister of unemployment promised an EI extension to assist fishermen due to severe ice conditions, saying a plan would indeed be announced soon.

“The fishers do have special circumstances both within their employment and under the EI rules. That is why we are working with the Department of Fisheries to make sure that we are looking after these individuals, and we will be addressing that situation very soon”, she reported to the House on April 22. Now her own officials suggest the minister may have misled the House.

What did the minister mean when she said she will look after these individuals, and what did the minister mean when she said “very soon”?

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and to the Minister of Labour]

Mr. Speaker, we will always be concerned and look after the interests of the fishers of our country. The minister said that we would look into the situation, that we would monitor the situation and that is exactly what we will do. We will report at the appropriate time and in due course.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Mr. Speaker, the appropriate time was several weeks ago.

Today, however, fisheries organizations throughout Atlantic Canada and Quebec have issued a joint call to the federal and provincial fisheries ministers to convene an emergency meeting to deal with the economic crisis in the fishery. Members of the FFAW, the MFU in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, the P.E.I. Fishermen's Association, Regroupement des pêcheurs professionnels du sud de la Gaspésie in Quebec are urgently calling on the federal government to intervene.

Will the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, along with her seatmate, the minister of unemployment , commit to meet with these organizations in the next three days, or is she prepared to handle this by simply whistling past the graveyard?

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, in fact, our government has done a lot of things for the fishing industry. Even today, the fisheries minister is there on the ground. Her deputy minister was out there yesterday and is still out there. They are working together with provinces and organizations to develop a plan to combine with the economic action plan to provide increased access to credit. As well, we have assisted with marketing and all of those issues.

We understand it is a difficult issue and we are working on it.

Infrastructure

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the government talks the talk about western Canada and rural communities, but it does not walk the walk.

For 30 years the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration has been making a positive impact for communities by providing flood protection and drainage support. Now it has been swallowed up by another organization, leaving a gap for rural communities like the ones I represent.

With all its talk of economic stimulus, why is the government slashing stable support for rural infrastructure? Why is it leaving rural and western Canadians in the cold?

[David Anderson, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources and for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, let me inform the member what we have done for western Canadian rural communities. We put $1 billion in the community adjustment for rural communities, $500 million in agriculture flexibility programs, and $50 million to strengthen the slaughterhouse capacity. We introduced changes to FINCLA to make it easier to get credit. We have provided $600 million to kickstart agri-stability, agri-recovery, agri-invest and agri-insurance. We have developed bankable, predictable and stable programs.

Every one of those things the NDP opposed.

Species at Risk

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, since SARA, the Species at Risk Act, was introduced, not one fish species has ever been listed under SARA. In fact, off Canada's west coast, the great basking shark, which is Canada's largest fish, is down to about 95% of eradication.

My question is for the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans. With regard to the great basking shark or any other fish species which is severely in danger of being lost to this country forever, why are none of those species listed under SARA?

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, let me start by saying it is regrettable that this magnificent creature has come to this situation. My colleague will know that the process starts with a recommendation from the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada.

The legislation then requires consultation with affected stakeholders, including provincial and territorial governments and consultation with aboriginal organizations and industry, then analysis to provide input to the governor in council so that it can balance conservation issues with socio-economic impacts. That is the approach we are taking on the basking shark as well as other aquatic species.