moved:
That, in the opinion of the House, the government should as quickly as possible implement a genuine income support program for older workers who lost their job in order to ease their transition from active employment to pension benefits.
Mr. Speaker, Motion M-285 calls on the government to, “as quickly as possible implement a genuine income support program for older workers who lost their job in order to ease their transition from active employment to pension benefits”.
That is quite different from a program that targets training. We are talking about workers who, quite often, cannot be retrained. This program would give them the financial assistance needed to bridge the gap, after age 55, until they receive their pension and old age security. Such a program has existed in the past and was very successful.
In introducing this motion, I am thinking of those who have already benefited from the program and who could see it be reinstated. For example, in my riding, nearly 2,000 workers from Marine Industries were forced to retire because of the closure of the shipbuilding and railway car sections. These people were able to bridge the gap I mentioned earlier. The people of Sidbec-Dosco (Ispat) Inc., in a neighbouring riding, including many of my constituents, the people of the sewing plants in Saint-Ours and Pierreville, and the people from the manufacturing sector in Nicolet and Bécancour benefited from this program.
Today, it is just as sorely needed in Sorel, for example, where QIT-Fer et Titane, a plant that is actually doing well, shut down for eight weeks. These temporary closures worry the older workers. The Poudres Métalliques plant has had some difficult adjustments in recent years. At the Mittal plant in Contrecoeur, there are many workers from my riding. There was also the closure of Norsk Hydro in Bécancour, where there were workers aged 55 and up who could have taken advantage of such a program.
In fact, all working people throughout Quebec would be well served by the creation of this new program, which would really not cost very much money. The cost of restoring this program, known as POWA or the Program for Older Worker Adjustment, is estimated to be between $70 and $75 million.
In general, the Bloc Québécois thinks it is unacceptable for the government to delay creating an income support program for older workers who find themselves in an especially difficult situation.
In the 2006 Speech from the Throne, the Conservative government promised to establish a committee to study the creation of such a program, but the Bloc Québécois has seen the government do all it can to avoid real discussions of setting up this income support program.
An expert panel on older workers was established in January 2007 and submitted its report in 2008. However, this group clearly had a mandate to repeat the Conservative rhetoric and orient its work toward active measures. That is the difference I was talking about a little while ago in regard to active measures to reintegrate these workers who are 55 years of age or more and cannot go back to school, for example, because all they have is grade 2 or 3. They have not even finished secondary school. That is why the workers I am talking about are poorly served by active measures.
This program was aimed at all workers who suffered mass layoffs and could not be re-trained. POWA was established in 1988 and provided eligible workers between 55 and 64 years of age who had lost their jobs as a result of major, permanent layoffs with benefits in order to bridge the gap between their employment insurance and old age pension. Unfortunately the program was ended in March 1997. It was a shared-cost program, 70% funded by the federal government and 30% by the participating provinces. In 1996, 111,700 people were registered in the program after 900 layoffs.
Since the disappearance of POWA, the Program for Older Worker Adjustment, in March 1997, there have not been any more income support programs targeted specifically at older workers affected by mass layoffs or company closures.
It is a well-known fact, though, that age is a particular problem after job losses because employers are more reluctant to hire older people. This means that even though workers 55 years of age or more are generally less likely to be unemployed than young people, when they do find themselves unemployed, it is usually for a much longer time than the average.
In its 2004 Monitoring and Assessment Report, submitted in March 2005, the Employment Insurance Commission said that older workers are overrepresented among the long-term unemployed, making up 21.3% of this group but only 12.5% of the active population.
The pilot projects created in response to the mass layoffs are aimed mainly at providing training for people who have been laid off. However, older workers do not participate very much in this kind of training and measures like this are clearly inappropriate for them.
In addition, according to the four big central labour bodies, and I quote:
—studies have also shown that the older they are, the harder it is for workers to get training. Losing a job is much harder on older workers than on younger workers because the skills of older workers, who have not had access to training, are increasingly out of sync with the skills required by the current labour market.
The numbers speak volumes: workers over 55 years of age account for only 3.5% of participants in the regular skills development component, that is, training programs.
The Employment Insurance Commission notes that, “as a general rule, older workers remain unemployed longer than do workers between the ages of 25 and 54”. Older workers remain unemployed for an average of 33.6 weeks versus 23.3 weeks for workers aged 25 to 54. They are also relatively unskilled, which is why the program is so important. In fact, 39.1% of older workers have not completed high school, compared to 18.9% of workers between 25 and 54 years of age.
Workers have been calling for the reinstatement of POWA since the Minister of Finance at the time, Paul Martin, abolished it in 1997.
In 1995, the federal government contributed $297 million and the provinces contributed $127 million. It was clear that the program was useful. The final evaluation report released in 1997 had this to say about it:
POWA appears to have contributed to a greater quality of life for the participants. Participants, particularly under Regime 1, express greater satisfaction with aspects of their life such as ability to spend time with family, and participation in social and recreational activities.
POWA was renegotiated in 1993. At that time, Quebec and Ottawa renewed the program for older worker adjustment for those over 55 who were victims of massive layoffs in 1993. They reduced the minimum number of years of employment required to benefit from 15 to 13, which was an improvement.
Once their EI benefits had run out, workers aged 55 to 60 could also draw a monthly benefit of between $760 and $1,000, depending on their income, as long as they remained available for work.
For those aged 60 to 64, the benefits were set at $700 because RRQ benefits could be tacked on to their income. Previously, these benefits varied between $754 and $1,200.
This did not prevent recipients from working, as only 40% of employment income in excess of $300 could be deducted from benefits collected under the program.
During the 38th Parliament, the Bloc Québécois worked hard on many occasions to get an income support program for older workers implemented.
In the report of the Standing Committee on Human Resources tabled on February 15, 2005, recommendation 13 reflects the Bloc Québécois' position. It reads:
The Committee recommends that the proposed employment insurance commission consult program contributors and report to the government on the feasibility of providing a supplementary benefit beyond the proposed 50-week maximum period so as to help unemployed workers 50 years of age and over cope with extended periods of unemployment. The amount of the supplementary benefit and its duration should depend on lifetime contributions to employment insurance.
On June 9, 2005, the Bloc Québécois had a motion unanimously passed that referred to the increasing number of factory closures associated with globalization and called on the government to establish a strategy to help older workers who lose their jobs, a strategy that should include income support measures.
Despite that motion, the Liberals, in power at the time, took no action. We believe, however, that funds allocated to POWA should not come from employment insurance, but rather from the consolidated revenue fund, and that POWA should be a social program managed by Quebec and the provinces.
On April 6, 2006, the House unanimously passed an amendment to the amendment to the Speech from the Throne proposed by the Bloc Québécois, and I quote:
That the amendment be amended by adding after the words “tax increases” the following: “, for the lack of a strategy to help older workers who lose their jobs, a strategy that should include income support measures,”.
That idea was therefore added, and was unanimously adopted. This should have prompted the government to act, but it did not.
Although the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development talked about a feasibility study in spring 2006, the Conservative government still has done nothing. We still do not know the results of that study.
The Bloc devoted another opposition day to the issue in October 2006, and the Conservative Party was the only party to vote against the Bloc's proposal. The vote was 155 members in favour, and 124 against. The Bloc included this program in phase one and phase two of its economic recovery, which was announced in fall 2008 and 2009.
It would cost the federal government approximately $75 million a year to improve POWA. This calculation has been confirmed by a number of economists.
The expert panel consulted the provincial and territorial governments, employers, unions and academics. The public was also able to participate in these consultations.
As indicated in budget 2006, the expert panel was mandated to conduct a feasibility study, in partnership with the provinces and territories, to evaluate current and potential measures to address the challenges faced by displaced older workers, in order to help them overcome these difficulties, including improved training and enhanced income support, such as early retirement benefits. The group produced a report along the lines I mentioned today.
I wish to conclude by saying that the Canadian and provincial governments already have experience in implementing the type of programs I am talking about today. The program that we advocate is not only feasible, it is essential to take into account the actual situation of older workers who are collectively laid off or who lose their jobs because of plant closures. In spite of all efforts and good intentions, some of these workers are unable to find a new job. It is high time to act in order to correct the situation created by the elimination of the POWA in 1997. It only takes political will.