Debates of Dec. 5th, 2012

Fisheries and Oceans

[Carol Hughes, NDP, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary is well aware that during the summer months there are literally thousands of boats on these waters every day. Shipping vessels, commercial fishermen, cruises, guides, outfitters and pleasure craft will now be monitored by a skeleton crew at a remote post, all to save a few bucks.

Sarnia's Coast Guard radio has three to four operators on duty 24 hours a day, but only two of those operators specifically monitor the marine emergency channels. During the 2011 boating season, Sarnia responded to 647 incidents. Now the Conservatives are going to add the 391 incidents the Thunder Bay station dealt with when Sarnia takes responsibility for all of that station's coverage area. It is being asked to do this without any additional staff on duty.

Why is the Conservative government cutting good-paying jobs in northern Ontario? How does putting people out of work help our economy? Why are the Conservatives victimizing boaters?

Will the government do the right thing for marine safety, abandon its reckless cuts and maintain the Thunder Bay marine communications and traffic services centre?

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the fact is, she has her facts wrong. When we will have completed the consolidation of these centres, they will have the right number of people, fully trained and in place, to be able to monitor this traffic. These people are not sitting and looking out a window. They are using electronic equipment.

All 214 radio towers and 24 radar facilities will remain where they are to maintain the current level of coverage. The staff who are there will be able to meet the requirements. They will not be overworked, as she has suggested. This will ensure the safety of mariners.

Privacy

[Charmaine Borg, NDP, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Mr. Speaker, on September 25, I rose in the House to share Canadians' concerns about the protection of their personal information online. I also asked the government what it was going to do about this and whether it would finally update Canadian laws in order to protect Canadians' personal information online. Canadians have cause for concern about the protection of their personal information. The Privacy Commissioner published a report showing that many popular websites that we use every day are leaking personal information, which is very worrisome.

The Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics is currently examining these issues and is finding that there are many problems and potential risks. Meanwhile, the Conservatives are stuck in the stone age. They are not modernizing our laws in order to ensure that those laws remain relevant given the existing digital reality and new risks.

The Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act is supposed to be reviewed every five years. Unfortunately, we have still not been able to pass the first revision. Bill C-12 is seven years late, and that is very worrisome. We are also late in dealing with Canada's anti-spam legislation. The regulations have still not been implemented, despite the fact that we have been waiting for years for this to happen.

Meanwhile, things are changing. In the digital age, everything moves very quickly. We must be proactive in order to protect personal information and keep up with the digital age, rather than being left behind. When I asked my question, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry said:

“The government introduced Bill C-12, which is an important tool for ensuring a stronger digital economy”.

As I have already pointed out, Bill C-12 is seven years behind. It is already time for another review, which we are supposed to do every five years according to the act. Unfortunately, we are not yet there. The government keeps putting off the review on personal information protection.

While the government is dragging its feet, businesses have no obligation to issue warnings about compromised data. Furthermore, major websites continue to disclose personal information. I repeat: will the government join the 21st century and modernize laws to protect our personal information online?

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to respond to comments made earlier by the hon. member about Canadian privacy laws.

The government takes the privacy of Canadians very seriously. The Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, or PIPEDA, is Canada's private sector privacy law. It is a good piece of legislation and has stood the test of time. However, some tweaks are needed. To that end, we have introduced amendments to PIPEDA. The amendments, which are contained in Bill C-12, will introduce new requirements for organizations to report data breaches to the Privacy Commissioner of Canada and to notify affected individuals when the breaches are deemed to pose a significant risk of harm, such as identity theft or fraud.

However, that is not all. These amendments will further protect the personal information of minors, by requiring organizations to consider the ability of their target audience to comprehend the consequences of sharing their personal information.

Bill C-12 is currently at second reading and, once done, will be headed to committee. I hope we can count on the support of opposition members in ushering in these important amendments to update Canada's private sector privacy law.

I would also like to add that there will be an opportunity to update PIPEDA during the second parliamentary review. While the timing of the review has yet to be determined, I can assure the opposition member that the committee undertaking the review will have an opportunity to examine the legislation, call witnesses and to consider making further amendments.

As I stated earlier, the privacy of Canadians is a matter that the government takes very seriously. I hope we can count on support from all members, including the member opposite, on the passage of Bill C-12.

[Charmaine Borg, NDP, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Conservative members keep promising us that they will modernize the legislation, except we have been hearing the same thing for seven years.

Bill C-12 has been on the order paper twice since I asked my question, but we have not debated it. Is it truly a priority of this government, or will they continue to say that amendments are coming? Canadians are tired of waiting. They want their information to be protected and these amendments to become law.

Will the government truly move forward with Bill C-12 or will it continue to make promises?

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the government did have this legislation before the House when the member's party forced an election about a year and a half ago.

This government has already taken steps to address the serious privacy concerns of Canadians. Notably, we have introduced amendments to the Personal Information, Protection and Electronic Documents Act contained in Bill C-12 that would empower and protect consumers by requiring organizations to inform the Privacy Commissioner and individuals when their personal information has been disclosed as a result of a data breach. These amendments would also clarify and streamline rules for business.

Protecting privacy is good for Canadians, good for business and it fosters trust and confidence in the online marketplace.

I trust I can count on the opposition member's support of Bill C-12.

Employment Insurance

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Parliamentary Secretary who will once again have the courage to reply to my intervention.

I rise again here today to further explore a question I asked in this House at the end of September. I had asked the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development why her government had so much contempt for unemployed workers and why it was introducing a new calculation for the working while on claim pilot project.

Ever since the employment insurance reforms were introduced in Bill C-38, thousands of Canadians have joined together to condemn the negative impact of those changes on our economy. Furthermore, those changes have proven to be an attack on the unemployed.

The changes to the calculation of the working while on claim pilot project were particularly troubling. Before the reform, a worker who had lost his job and was working part time while looking for another full-time job could still receive benefits. The rule was that those benefits were cut by 40%, with a non-deductible limit of $75.

The government is now proposing to eliminate the base amount, but to allow workers to keep 50% of their employment income. During question period in September, the minister even gave an example where the EI recipient would receive more money under the new system than under the old one.

In the weeks that followed, the opposition demonstrated many times in this House, that the new calculation penalized most of the program beneficiaries, especially low-income workers.

The minister had to admit that there were problems with the pilot project, and she was forced to make changes that gave some workers eligible for the program the choice of using the old calculation method or the new one.

Could the minister be honest and responsible towards Canadians? Was this change to the pilot project designed to make low-income workers receive less money, or was it just incompetence?

What will happen to other aspects of the reform that are currently making the headlines? Changes to the appeal mechanisms are being criticized by everyone, and many are predicting that unemployed workers will have to wait even longer than they already are.

What explanation does the minister have for the fact that the number of hours worked to settle first and second level appeals will decrease from approximately 18,200 hours a year with 700 part-time officials to 9,000 hours a year with 39 part-time officials, and that they will be doing the same job?

It is obvious that these reforms are being made haphazardly. Canadians deserve better because they have contributed to the social safety net. Will the Conservatives show some respect for the unemployed, and will they step back from their reforms?

[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 question from the member opposite about important changes that we are making to the employment insurance program through the working while on claim pilot project.

According to Statistics Canada, there were 273,000 unfilled jobs in Canada last June.

We believe that Canada's EI program must encourage and help unemployed individuals fill available jobs as quickly as possible. Unlike the NDP members who have focused on a carbon tax that would increase taxes and decrease available jobs, we are focused on ensuring that Canadians can work.

Under Canada's economic action plan in 2012, the Government of Canada made targeted, common sense changes to EI that encourage Canadians to stay active in the marketplace. One of these common sense changes was the working while on claim pilot project.

Under the previous pilot project, EI recipients who had part-time or occasional work had their benefits reduced dollar for dollar once they earned more than $75, or 40% of their weekly benefit amount, whichever was greater. Under the new pilot project announced on August 5, eligible EI claimants are able to keep EI benefits equalling 50% of total earnings they earned while on claim.

We know some concerns have been raised about the new pilot project and we have listened. That is why we recently announced adjustments to the new pilot project. On October 5, the government announced its intention to amend the current working while on claim pilot project. The amendment is aimed at providing the option of reverting to the rules that existed under the previous pilot project to recent EI claimants who were on claim and had earnings between August 7, 2011, and August 4, 2012.

With these changes, claimants will have more time to make the transition to the new rules.

We are working hard to help claimants stay connected with the labour market by encouraging them to accept available work while receiving EI benefits.

Canadians want to get back to work and statistics show that, if they stay active and connected to the labour market, they often find permanent employment faster. Our government is committed to supporting workers and ensuring that EI enables a strong and competitive workforce.

Our government's priorities are job creation, economic growth and long-term prosperity for all Canadians.

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

Mr. Speaker, when the opposition showed that the new benefits calculation under the working while on claim pilot project would penalize thousands of unemployed workers, the minister tried to placate us by agreeing to make some changes, but only for workers who collected employment insurance benefits between August 7, 2011, and August 4, 2012.

She did nothing for those who will lose their jobs in the future, and the new formula will apply to everyone as of 2015. Pulling the wool over people's eyes does not change the fact that unemployed workers are being punished. It just forestalls the inevitable.

Is the government unable to admit to its mistakes, or is it blinded by ideology and contempt for honest workers who, unfortunately, lose their jobs?

Once again, thousands of workers are crying foul. Even businesses are worried about losing skilled workers in specialized and seasonal industries.

What can the minister say to reassure employers and their employees?

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

Mr. Speaker, the improvements we are making to the employment insurance program are intended to help unemployed people all across Canada.

We are here to help and support unemployed workers.

Unlike the NDP members, who are putting forward a carbon tax that would increase taxes and decrease available jobs, we are focused on ensuring individuals have job availability.

We are strengthening the EI program to ensure that it is fair, flexible and helps Canadians to not only find jobs, but also earn additional income while on claim. We are helping claimants stay attached to the labour force while making available to them EI benefits. These changes make it easier for claimants to stay connected to the workforce.

Unlike the NDP carbon tax, which, as I mentioned before, would increase taxes and therefore decrease the availability of jobs to Canadians, we are focused on a job creation program.

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Joe Comartin]

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 7:55 p.m.)