Debates of Dec. 12th, 2012

Employment Insurance

[Anne-Marie Day, NDP, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. Parliamentary Secretary who will be replying to the question and taking part in the debate today. She is always present and I know that just because the file is a complete disaster does not mean that she will not give a professional, noble answer. I would also like to wish her happy holidays.

On behalf of the NDP, I am pleased to be able to once again raise this important issue, since it has not yet been completely resolved. Indeed, on October 2, 2012, I rose during question period to ask the government two questions.

A few weeks ago already, in the face of mounting evidence gathered by the opposition, the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development finally admitted that the former working while on claim pilot project was more beneficial for some unemployed workers than for others. In light of that statement, I asked the minister what she planned to do to resolve the problem now that she was aware of it.

The minister replied, and I quote, “a number of employers across the country are in need of Canadians' skills and abilities. They have jobs to offer people who have these skills and abilities. The problem is that these people are not accepting these jobs or do not know that they exist.”

But what Canadians learned three days later, late in the afternoon of Friday, October 5, while everyone was heading out for the Thanksgiving long weekend, was that amendments would be made to the famous working while on claim pilot project.

The minister announced:

Under the adjustment announced today, those EI recipients who were working while on claim between August 7, 2011 and August 4, 2012 will be given the option of reverting to the rules that existed under the previous pilot project. This change will go into effect January 6, 2013, but it will be applied retrospectively to August 5, 2012--the start of the new pilot program.

Beginning January 6, 2013, eligible claimants must make the request to revert to the old pilot parameters within 30 days of their last EI benefit payment. For claims that have already ended, claimants will have 30 days from the introduction of this option.

The Minister's words were clear: these adjustments affected only employment insurance claimants who were working during their benefit period between August 7, 2011 and August 4, 2012.

First, I want to say that it is very admirable that the minister acknowledged that there are flaws in the proposed EI reform. It is natural to try some initiatives and then realize in hindsight that certain amendments are needed. Policy development should be an ongoing improvement process.

However, my concern is that the government offered an inadequate solution to a major problem that was taking money from the pockets of hundreds of thousands of part-time workers who were benefiting from this pilot project.

The proposed amendments affect too few people in a short period of time. They do not address the problem to solve it once and for all. This seems to be another band-aid measure to placate the public, but the government still has the overall idea of reforming the system to restrict access to EI and reduce benefits.

What does the minister have to say to the pilot project participants who are not eligible to choose between the old and new calculation methods, and what will she have to say to unemployed workers who will work part-time in 2015? When everyone's salary is cut by 50%, will she tell these people that she put off solving the problem and now they are paying the price?

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to respond to the hon. member regarding her concerns for seasonal workers.

The employment situation of all Canadians is a matter of great concern for this government.

As the hon. member knows, our country faces ongoing labour and skills shortages. Therefore, it is important that we make changes now to ensure the employment insurance program is working effectively for Canadians.

The extra five weeks pilot project was always intended as a temporary measure. It was brought in during Canada's economic action plan to help people during the downturn of the recession. The purpose of the EI pilot project is to conduct a test for a defined period, up to three years, in order to accurately assess the labour markets impacts on new approaches that are designed to assist the unemployed.

The extended EI benefits pilot project was designed as a temporary measure to define and provide an extra five weeks of EI benefits for claimants in 21 regions with higher than average unemployment rates as a result of the economic downturn.

The pilot project came to its scheduled end on September 15, and even earlier in regions where there was a sustained period of economic recovery whereby the unemployment rate remained below 8% for 12 consecutive months.

This considered, all EI claimants, including those who are seasonal workers, can still continue to benefit from other recent EI measures introduced by our government. In fact, we are pleased that nearly 900,000 net new jobs have been created since the downturn of the recession, and over 90% of those were full-time.

We have also introduced, through economic action plan 2012, a new national working while on claim pilot project.

Previously, EI claimants could earn the equivalent of 40%, or $75, of their weekly benefits without seeing a reduction in their benefits. However, if their earnings were above that threshold, their benefits were reduced dollar for dollar. This created a disincentive to accept work beyond the earnings threshold. Under the new working while on claim pilot project that came into effect on August 5, eligible claimants are able to keep EI benefits equalling 50% of every dollar earned while on claim, up to 90% of the weekly insurable earnings used to calculate the EI benefits amount. The intent is to encourage claimants to accept all available work while receiving EI benefits and earning some additional income while on claim.

We know some concerns have been raised about this new pilot project, and we have listened. That is why we recently announced adjustments to the new pilot project.

This will allow individuals to temporarily revert to the rules that existed under the previous pilot project.

As our government is focused on jobs, growth and long-term prosperity, we are committed to supporting workers and ensuring that EI enables a strong and competitive workforce for all Canadians in every region of the country.

[Anne-Marie Day, NDP, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to correct some of what the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and to the Minister of Labour just said. It is not the workers who are seasonal, but the work. The workers are prepared to work throughout the year, but the work remains seasonal.

On October 2, I asked a second question in the House. I asked the minister about the fact that unemployment experts were not consulted about changes to the program.

This is even more of a problem now that winter has arrived and Christmas is approaching. Social inequality is growing in Canada. The minister cannot ignore this fact. Thousands of Canadians are having trouble paying their bills, heating their homes and feeding their children.

The economy remains fragile and the unemployment rate is not declining as quickly as the Conservatives had hoped. This means that hundreds of thousands of unemployed workers will find it difficult to make the money last until the end of December, and hundreds if not thousands of these people will be using food banks.

Seasonal work has been most affected. There are jobs in Canada, but the reality is that the jobs are not distributed evenly throughout the year or throughout the regions. We have to live with that, and the minister must take that into account in her reform.

Could the minister listen to everyone who has a stake in employment insurance and announce major adjustments to the reform?

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

Mr. Speaker, our government is making significant investments to help Canadians in every region of the country find work. Pilot projects are an important feature of the EI program but we need to remember that they are only one part of a bigger pie designed to encourage Canadians to stay active in the job market.

We have introduced the new working while on claim pilot project that allows EI claimants to accept all available work while receiving EI benefits and rewards them for their additional work.

Our government is committed to ensuring EI enables a strong and competitive workforce in every region of the country. We are proud of our economic record and our nearly 900,000 net new jobs created since the downturn of the recession. We are proud to have the strongest job record in the G7. I wonder why the opposition continues to not support this great economic plan?

Small and Medium-Sized Businesses

[François Lapointe, NDP, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am going to have to speak rather quickly in order to talk about everything that could be relevant to the question. I would like to revisit a question I raised in the House in October 2012, when I said the following:

Mr. Speaker, the economic recovery is still fragile and, yesterday, instead of announcing tangible solutions to support SMEs, the minister hauled out of mothballs his worn-out promise to reduce red tape, which has not produced any results in six years.

Yesterday's announcement certainly cannot be called a recovery plan. It is nothing more than a normal goal for a modern country, and it does not hide the lack of a real vision to help our SMEs and stimulate the country's economy.

We are waiting for a real plan for SMEs. What is the minister waiting for to come up with one?

I would like to revisit this important question. I will now share a few highlights of the response given by the Minister of State for Small Business and Tourism. First he congratulated me on my appointment, and I thank him for that. Then he went on to say, “I have been waiting since April to be asked a question about entrepreneurship.”

Let me quickly tell the minister that that is not true, because I had already put questions to him regarding excessive fees for credit cards weeks and months before, but the minister had not bothered answering my questions.

The minister then said, “For us, entrepreneurship is a priority, not just today but every day.” Again, this is a kind of cynicism that, unfortunately, is very prevalent in this government. It also appropriates economic issues as though not all members of this House were hoping to see the Canadian economy get firmly back on track.

The minister added, “That is why we are reducing the amount of paperwork that governments impose on entrepreneurs.” What a surprise, he used the plural and said “governments”. Why? Is the federal government preparing a plan that will impose standards on the provincial governments? We do not really know, but there is still not even a hint of a plan for small and medium-size businesses.

The next day, my colleague, the industry critic, said, “We want to make things easier for our SMEs, but the the application of random principles like the abolition of a rule before creating another seems much more like improvisation. This is not an economic recovery plan.”

On the government's website, in a January 2012 document entitled Cutting Red Tape and Freeing Business to Grow, we can read the following under the heading “Message From the Minister of State (Small Business and Tourism)”: “This is why we are proposing to give the Office of the Auditor General of Canada the mandate of reviewing and reporting on the government's progress in reducing regulatory administrative burden through its One-for-One Rule...”.

Plus one minus one equals zero. We cannot reduce by adding one rule and taking away another. Yet this is the basis for the minister's announcement in the introduction to this document, which has some good points. So we are talking about the Red Tape Reduction Commission that worked on this issue. Why did the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology not study this matter? Why was that mandate given to a committee outside of Parliament?

Some very good people sit on that committee, including Bernard Bélanger, the president and chairman of the board of Premier Tech. There are essential recommendations on Web 3.0. That is very important, because if we integrate Web 3.0 properly, we could at last see small and medium-size businesses reduce their paperwork. However, we do not really know how this could be achieved.

However, on the website of the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, there is an explanation of the administrative reforms. These reforms are broad—and they are referred to as highlights—and so many requests will be made to regulatory bodies, that I am afraid we will have red tape on the red tape related to the process designed to reduce red tape. On the face of it, it really looks like a mess. Therefore, we need answers.

This evening, we have four minutes, and I hope someone on the other side of the House will be able to give us some real answers about how red tape will be reduced.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to respond to the member concerning the recently announced red tape reduction action plan.

Successful entrepreneurs make successful economies, fuelling innovation and productivity gains, and driving job creation and economic growth.

Ensuring an internationally competitive business environment in which entrepreneurs can thrive has been, and will continue to be, a top priority for our government.

Today, Canada is internationally recognized as one of the best places in the world to do business. A solid fiscal standing, with the lowest debt among the leading G7 countries, a competitive tax regime and a robust regulatory system have distinguished Canada at a time when many countries are struggling with rising debt and an increasing tax burden.

Within this solid business infrastructure, the state of entrepreneurship in Canada is relatively strong. However, unnecessary red tape stifles economic growth and job creation. It is a hidden tax that weighs heaviest on the entrepreneurs least able to bear it: small business owners.

If Canada is to maintain its competitive edge, increase productivity and spur innovation, we must constantly strive to improve the conditions for doing business. Thus, we have announced our red tape reduction action plan that promises to further enhance Canada's global reputation.

Most important, our plan responds directly to the needs and concerns entrepreneurs have raised about red tape, saving small businesses both time and money.

The systematic reforms contained in the action plan are game-changers for doing business in Canada and are among the most ambitious of their kind today. Our red tape reduction action plan will cut red tape, make it easier to do business with the federal government and improve service and predictability.

The action plan is a comprehensive response to the Red Tape Reduction Commission's recommendations. The reforms will update the government's regulations and show results through annual reporting.

Principal among the systematic reforms to be implemented over the next three years are the adoption of a one-for-one rule and the application of a small business lens. The one-for-one rule will require regulators to offset new administrative burden costs imposed on business with equal reductions in administrative burden.

Small business owners are at the very heart of Canada's entrepreneurial drive. Yet, because of their more limited resources, small business owners bear a disproportionate burden of red tape.

We are going to change that by introducing a small business lens to regulations. This means that the federal government will be required to assess the impact on small business to demonstrate efforts to keep costs down.

All in all, there is a checklist that regulators will have to fill out and publish. The checklist will drive efforts to minimize burden on small business, avoid duplication and communicate regulatory requirements in clear, plain language.

We are talking about is reducing the time and money small business owners spend filling out forms and reporting information to government. We are trying to find a smarter, less costly way to do business.

Red tape is a costly, hurtful burden on small businesses. Reducing red tape, especially when everyone is looking for ways to keep costs down, is an important thing for government to do. That is what we are doing, so small businesses can do what they do best: innovate, create jobs and grow the economy.

[François Lapointe, NDP, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this is disappointing. Once again, the main idea is “plus one, minus one, equals zero”. It does not mean less. The rest is a vauge intention about how to do it. Reducing red tape is a highly technical endeavour. The government must explain how to achieve that goal.

The other important thing is that the government cannot do what it is doing and say that reducing red tape qualifies as an economic plan. When we sit down with business people, we talk about fundamental issues, such as specific tax cuts for small businesses and a true job creation tax credit of more than $3,000. Again, I mean a real tax credit, not $1,000 applied to employment insurance. We can talk about making it easier to transfer businesses between members of the same family. Making it easier for small businesses to have access to research and development support would also qualify as an economic recovery plan for small businesses, as opposed to merely reducing red tape, particularly since we still do not really know how small businesses can actually do it.

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

Mr. Speaker, today Canada is internationally recognized as one of the best places in the world to do business.

Our red tape reduction action plan promises to further enhance Canada's reputation. Reducing red tape is an important way in which the government can help entrepreneurs and small business do what they do best: innovate, create jobs and grow the economy.

On another note, as I am the last speaker in the House of Commons before the Christmas break, I would like to thank you, the Speaker, the Clerk, the House officers, pages and staff, everyone that allows all of us as parliamentarians to do our jobs well for Canadians.

I want to wish all, as well as my constituents at home in Simcoe—Grey and people across the country, all Canadians, a very merry Christmas and a happy New Year. Merry Christmas, Mr. Speaker.

[The Deputy Speaker]

It being 9 p.m., pursuant to an order made earlier today, this House stands adjourned until Monday, January 28, at 11 a.m., pursuant to Standing Orders 28(2) and 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 9 p.m.)