Debates of Nov. 30th, 2011

Employment Insurance Act

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

I declare the motion carried. Accordingly, the bill stands referred to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities.

(Bill read the second time and referred to a committee)

I wish to inform the House that because of the delay, there will be no private members' business hour today. Accordingly, the order will be rescheduled for another sitting.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

I would ask hon. members who may not be staying for adjournment proceedings and who have conversations they would like to carry on with their colleagues to perhaps do so in their respective lobbies.

The hon. member for Cape Breton—Canso.

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Mr. Speaker, my question in the adjournment proceedings this evening pertains to a question posed to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development.

I am aware of the format for adjournment proceedings: I can speak for four minutes, and then the parliamentary secretary speaks for four minutes. She has five minutes in total, so I will give her the question now and then I will give her the preamble to the question.

The parliamentary secretary will have five minutes to come up with the right answer. When I asked her the other day, obviously the minister was totally unaware of the fact that the speed of payment indicator measured both the speed of issuing a cheque and of issuing a notice of nonpayment. The minister had no clue about that.

I want to ask the parliamentary secretary this question: once a notice of nonpayment is issued to somebody who has applied for employment insurance, does that notice start the clock all over again?

An unemployed individual filled out the application and went through the process, but the postal code was not the same on the application as it was on the record of employment. I want to ask specifically whether it is a fact that after the file is rejected and the person is issued a notice of nonpayment, that same individual then has to go four weeks without employment insurance because once the information is supplied, the clock starts again at day one.

The individual applied on October 1, but because there was some kind of mistake on the application, the computer rejected it. It got fixed up and was put back into the system. By that time it was the first or second week of November. It is a 28-day level of service, and the government says it can do it within 28 days, but in fact it is the second 28 days.

The minister almost separated her shoulder patting herself on the back the other day for getting cheques out in 28 days. It is pretty easy if we only measure 28 days at a time, but it is pretty tough if it is an individual's third 28-day rotation and that person has gone six, seven, eight weeks without a cheque. It is pretty tough to pay the bills with a notice of nonpayment.

The one question I pose is this: is it a fact that the clock is restarted after an applicant receives a notice of nonpayment?

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

Mr. Speaker, I cannot speak specifically to all of the numbers and cases the member for Cape Breton—Canso seems to want to bring up, but I can say that the government is committed to delivering programs and services in an effective and efficient way.

Our government received a clear mandate from Canadians to eliminate the deficit, keep taxes low and continue creating jobs for Canadians.

A few years ago, we began to automate EI processing for greater efficiency. Over the next three years, EI processing will be consolidated into 22 large regional centres. We will ease the transition to a smaller workforce through attrition, reassignment and retraining. Affected employees will be considered for other available positions.

In these fragile economic times, we are working hard to make sure that we are investing in the priorities of Canadians and to ensure that their hard-earned tax dollars are put to the best use.

Our government is continually monitoring the performances of our services and technology to make improvements that meet the needs of Canadians.

We are implementing measures regularly to further improve service levels and help our employees continue to deliver results to Canadians.

Canadians want their tax dollars spent wisely, and we are taking full advantage of opportunities to modernize the delivery of employment insurance. Modernizing our services over the next three years will mean changes in the way we currently do business. Ultimately, it will allow for better, faster and more cost-effective services for Canadians.

For example, automation will soon be introduced with respect to the revisions of existing claims work all of which previously was done manually. Just last month we introduced changes to make it easier for employers to register and submit their records of employment electronically, a key requirement for automating claims processing.

As more employers sign up, we will eliminate an unnecessary paper burden on the system and continue our efforts to faster, more cost-effective processing of claims. We have also taken steps to reassign staff from non-core functions to support claims processing during peak periods.

We know that Canadians want efficient government that gives them value for their hard-earned tax dollars. That is exactly what we are doing and we are staying focused on that goal.

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Mr. Speaker, reference was made to automation. When the officials appeared before us at committee, they identified that currently 99% of applications are filed online and 50% of the applications are processed electronically.

The Conservatives make reference to the amount of paper. I think that excuse is paper thin. As they continue to automate, the performance numbers have been going down and down to five- and six-year lows.

How is laying off 600 employees and closing the call centres and the processing centres which the Conservatives are looking at doing, going to improve service to unemployed Canadians? It is coming up to Christmas. The government should show a little bit of love.

[Kellie Leitch, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

Mr. Speaker, with continuous improvements to our business model, such as increasing automation, improved e-services, national workload management and document imaging, Service Canada is positioned to manage its workload in a very effective way.

The government is clearly adopting measures to ensure that the employment insurance program is delivered effectively and in a way that is most beneficial to Canadians.

The way in which EI claims are currently processed is out of date. Modernization at Service Canada will give Canadians in every region of the country better access to employment insurance and a host of other Government of Canada services.

So far this year, the average time to receive the first EI payment is 23 days. That is only two days longer than last year. The member should know that considering that the same information is included in the answer to order paper Question No. 162, which was provided to him earlier this month.

However, we are not satisfied with that. We all want to see improvements to serve Canadians better. That is why we are modernizing the employment insurance system so Canadians can receive their EI benefits even faster.

[Jamie Nicholls, NDP, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this is to address my question posed on November 4 of this year. It was regarding ethics and in particular the lack of full accountability regarding the planning process and funding of projects by the member for Parry Sound—Muskoka with the complicity of the then Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, the member for Ottawa West—Nepean.

To summarize, there were 33 projects that used up approximately $50 million of funds that were earmarked for border infrastructure. Even with the facts that we have in hand, it appears that the members for Parry Sound—Muskoka and Ottawa West—Nepean used their privilege and power to skirt the rules and processes of infrastructure funding. It is this that disturbs all Canadians. They do not care that the projects were done on time and under budget. They are not comforted by the assurances of both members that they realize the error of their ways and that they will not do this again.

These members are not in elementary school. They are some of the most privileged individuals in the country. They are among the 308 leaders of Canada. Nor are they rookie members, for they served a long time under the Harris government previous to joining the Reform-Conservative coalition.

It seems that whenever there are these kinds of misdirections of funds the government always has a justification. The justification from certain wings of the Liberal Party about the sponsorship scandal was that it was to promote pro-Canada sentiment in Quebec after a fractious referendum in 1995. However, we know now, from the uncovering of all the information, that funds were misused and the original intent was subverted.

In 2006 the government came to power under the banner of accountability but a mere five years later we see that the Conservative government too has developed its own sense of entitlement. The member for Parry Sound—Muskoka and his accomplice, the member for Ottawa West—Nepean, believe that they do not have to submit the project application documents.

In the 2006 election one of the tightest races happened in Parry Sound—Muskoka. The member who ran in that race profited from disgust with the Liberal record and lack of accountability. His sense of entitlement will only hurt his colleagues in the future. This is why strategists in his party may have tried to tie his funding to the G8 summit, even though many of the projects were not even close to the site of the summit. These appear to be re-election gifts. These kinds of things work in the short-term for the member, but they harm the image of his party overall.

I am expecting to hear the same pat answers about how the minister appeared before the committee for two hours, how the members took the Auditor General's recommendations and will do a better job in the future, and how all projects came in on time and under budget. However, Canadians are expecting the whole story and waiting for the full truth.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to the question from my hon. colleague. To be quite frank, this issue has been thoroughly aired and here are the facts.

The Minister for the Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario has said that all the documents were provided to the Auditor General. Our government accepts the Auditor General's recommendations and will improve the process in the future. The Auditor General and now the RCMP have reviewed all of the facts in this case and the NDP has not produced any information that changes these facts.

This is the same kind of muckraking that Canadians rejected in the last election. We will remain focused on what matters to Canadians, and that is jobs and the economy.

[Jamie Nicholls, NDP, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Speaker, do members know what Canadians reject time after time? It is when there is a lack of accountability and transparency on the part of the government. Throughout history, Canadian voters have rejected governments that take their sense of entitlement and privilege to an extreme where they actually misuse funds.

In this case, we do not believe that all the documents have been given. We would like to see the application documents. Some 200-odd application documents out of those 33 projects were chosen and we have not seen those documents. If the government were willing to do so, we would like to see it table the documents in this House.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, again the opposition continues to muckrake and bring up issues.

Canadians right now are incredibly concerned about jobs and the economy, so let me just go back on this particular question and say that all documents were provided. The Auditor General and the RCMP have reviewed all the facts in the case and our government accepts the Auditor General's recommendations. The NDP has not given us any information that changes these facts, so again, we accept the Auditor General's recommendations and it has been thoroughly aired in this Parliament.

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, with respect to the previous question, I used to sit on the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, and I could easily talk about the fact that we did not obtain the documents and that the documents we have are new ones. However, that is not the question that I want to raise this evening. In fact, I asked a question on November 4 about a troubling and problematic situation at the Canada Revenue Agency.

This has been known for a while, and other revelations have added to the questions we have about the Canada Revenue Agency. This is a problem for all Canadians, not only because the Canada Revenue Agency is an essential part of the government, since it is the main agency that collects money and enables the government to function, but also because Canadians must view the agency as neutral, efficient and above reproach.

Reports we obtained from the media, for instance, show that a situation is developing in some of the agency's offices in Quebec, particularly in Montreal. We are hearing about an extortion scheme and bribes paid to rather senior CRA employees in exchange for substantial income tax reductions. In one particular case, we heard about a Montreal business that owed CRA $3,500,000. Through this bribe and extortion scheme, that company managed to reduce that amount to $50,000.

All of this was uncovered in 2007 and we know that it has been going on for about 10 years. It was uncovered during an investigation into organized crime in Montreal as part of Operation Colisée. That investigation revealed that senior CRA employees in Montreal had some questionable ties to construction companies that were suspected of having links to organized crime.

Everyone agrees that the Canada Revenue Agency has to be above reproach. Obviously, the question that was asked did not apply to all employees, or to the employees in general, but to the few people who tried to use their positions in the Canada Revenue Agency for their own personal gains and to allow their friends to end up with a clean tax record. The investigation has not come up with much so far. Only nine employees may have been suspended or dismissed and many questions remain about the integrity of the process. That is why I asked the Minister of National Revenue the question.

There is one last thing I want to emphasize and it has to do with my second question on the fact that, during the investigation into one business in particular, the file, which had been in the office when the internal auditor mandated by the Auditor General was there, disappeared. This also causes certain problems and raises suspicions about the way in which the office operates.

The question was for the Minister of National Revenue and I would like to have an answer with regard to the investigation and what the government intends to do to reassure Canadians about the integrity of the Canada Revenue Agency.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, the government takes this issue very seriously. We cannot tolerate the types of activities that are alleged. An RCMP investigation into these matters is ongoing and CRA officials are co-operating fully. Many of these allegations date back more than a decade and some of these cases are currently making their way through the courts. The integrity of our tax system is important to all Canadians and our government will take any steps necessary to ensure it is protected. It would not be appropriate to comment further or to add political interference in an RCMP investigation.

Having said that, I want to assure the House that CRA employees are held to a very high standard and any type of allegation of wrongdoing or inappropriate conduct is taken very seriously by our government. CRA employees are subject to the laws, as are all Canadians. Accordingly in cases where CRA employees are found to be involved in criminal activity, they are subject to prosecution to the fullest extent of the law.

The CRA investigates all allegations of employee misconduct. All CRA employees are subject to a strict standard of conduct, which is clearly defined in the agency's Code of Ethics and Conduct. Breaches of the standard of conduct may result in disciplinary measures up to and including termination of employment. The CRA expects that its employees, like all Canadian taxpayers, will meet their personal tax obligations and that they will respect the system within which they are employed. Our government's absolute expectation is that the appropriate authorities take all steps necessary to ensure Canada's law is respected.

Unlike the opposition, we have faith in the RCMP. We await the outcome of its investigation. I would encourage my colleague to allow this work to go ahead free of unhelpful and potentially damaging political rhetoric and inappropriate political interference.

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I regret the tone that was used. This debate must not be politicized. Canadians are concerned about these news stories, and Quebeckers particularly, since happened in Montreal. I understand that police intervention is a delicate subject, but it is important to remember that nine employees were suspended or dismissed as a result of the investigation. People were sentenced. Are there other employees who will be sentenced or who are currently under investigation?

My second question is about the missing records. We recently learned that over 2,700 tax records at the Canada Revenue Agency were allegedly consulted without authorization and also went missing. What is even more serious is the fact that the Privacy Commissioner, Ms. Stoddart, was not even made aware of this situation. The fact that employees were suspended or dismissed is of interest to Canadians regardless of their political affiliation.

With regard to the disappearance of these records and the protection of privacy, I would like to know what the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue intends to do to remedy this situation.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I have to reinforce this because it is very important. The government does take the issue very seriously. The minister has been clear that we will not tolerate the type of activities alleged. An RCMP investigation into these matters is ongoing and CRA officials are co-operating fully. We are confident in the RCMP's ability to conduct this investigation.

The integrity of our tax system is of course important to all Canadians. Our government will take any steps necessary to ensure that it is protected. Canada has one of the most successful and internationally praised systems of tax administration in the world. CRA is recognized as a world leader in administering the nation's taxes and the overwhelming majority of the 40,000 employees are above reproach.

In those exceptionally rare cases where there is a breach of the public trust, the CRA acts swiftly to take corrective action. In these cases, I would ask my colleague across the way to please allow the RCMP to do its job free of political interference. It is really not a time to try to score cheap political points with such a serious issue.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 9:10 p.m.)