Mr. Speaker, in September, when we returned from the summer break, Canadians were just beginning to discover the full scope of the Conservatives' famous mammoth budget bill.
The employment insurance counter-reforms imposed by the government would have all manner of negative consequences for our economy, but also for our workers and the unemployed.
Last May, because of pressure from the opposition, the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development was forced to clarify for Canadians the concepts of suitable employment and reasonable job search. We then discovered what the Conservatives deem to be suitable employment.
In Bill C-38, the government has done away with the concept of suitable employment, except in cases when employment arises in consequence of a work stoppage.
The minister also explained that the Canada Employment Insurance Commission would henceforth determine which jobs are suitable for workers based on personal circumstances, working conditions, hours of work, travel time, type of work and salary.
The government also announced the creation of three new categories of claimants: long-tenured workers, frequent claimants and occasional claimants. All of the categories of claimants will be under more pressure to find a job and, within a few weeks, will have to accept any old job at pay that can be just 70% of their previous salary.
As for the notion of reasonable job search, we know that claimants will have to prove that they are conducting daily job searches. We even learned that job seekers would have to prove that they are filling out five job applications a week in urban areas and three applications a week in rural areas.
Claimants will have to keep a journal in which they log all of their job search activities and will have to submit this evidence on request. There will also be a new electronic job alert system that claimants will have to consult, even though claimants do not all have easy access to a computer, let alone the Internet.
Lastly, job seekers will have to search for jobs within a 100 km radius of their home or the equivalent of one hour of commuting time.
I have to say that when I was in Montreal recently, it took me 20 minutes to go through three lights near the Palais des congrès. So the 100 km radius is not always clear.
A few months ago, a man from Carleton was offered a job in Gaspé, even though Gaspé is three and a half hours from Carleton. Someone else, a man from the Îles-de-la-Madeleine, was offered a job in Bonaventure, on the Gaspé Peninsula. That is a twelve-hour trip, including a $50 ferry ride.
How can the minister call these job offers “suitable employment”, when accepting such an offer would cost the unemployed individual one way or another? It would involve either a costly move, uprooting that individual from his community, or a loss of income that could actually exceed the wages offered, after transportation costs.