House of Commons Hansard #151 of the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was criminals.
Gary Goodyear ConservativeMinister of State (Science and Technology) (Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario)
Mr. Speaker, I will respond to the member's talking points. There is a process in place to review this transaction and determine the net benefit for Canadians, as always. This transaction will be scrutinized very closely.
However, we have no lessons to take from the NDP, whose reckless economic policies will deter investment, kill jobs and hurt Canadian families.
Everyone knows that the NDP is against all trade, including the free trade agreement with the United States.
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Mr. Speaker, if there is another area where people are going to pay the price for a lack of consultation, it is employment insurance. In May, the Conservatives changed the employment insurance rules with their mammoth bill, and unemployed workers are fed up. Since May, the minister has been changing the rules as she sees fit in order to prevent claimants from receiving the benefits they are entitled to. She also wants to force workers to accept 30% pay cuts.
Why the improvisation? Why the lack of consultation?
Kellie Leitch ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and to the Minister of Labour
Mr. Speaker, our government has been focused on creating jobs and that is what we have done. We have created 770,000 net new jobs since the base of the recession.
This is a little bit different from the approach by the NDP: a $21 billion tax hike through a carbon tax, let alone that the NDP and Liberals have voted against every opportunity to ensure the unemployed have opportunities for employment. What are those? The EI hiring tax credit they voted against. The Helmets to Hardhats they voted against. The youth employment strategy they voted against.
The members opposite should pick: create jobs or not.
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Mr. Speaker, that money does not belong to the Conservatives or to the minister. It belongs to the workers. Why is she acting as though it is her money?
By changing the rules, she is penalizing claimants who are attempting to make up some of their lost income by working. The first $75 in benefits is going to be cut by 50%. Not content with forcing people to accept 30% pay cuts, the minister is now going to penalize those who are trying to make up this lost income.
Is she doing this deliberately or is she simply incompetent?
Kellie Leitch ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and to the Minister of Labour
Mr. Speaker, those who work more will be able to keep more when it comes to their employment insurance.
What do we know? We know that when people take a part-time job there is an opportunity for them to get a full-time job. We have created 770,000 net new jobs since the base of the recession in 2009. The NDP and the Liberals continually vote against initiatives to help the unemployed.
I will go through a few more: the apprenticeship incentive grant, the targeted initiative for older workers, or whether that be working while—
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
Order, please. The hon. parliamentary secretary has the floor. She has a few seconds left to conclude her remarks.
Kellie Leitch Conservative Simcoe—Grey, ON
Mr. Speaker, the evidence is clear. We are creating jobs for Canadians and they are not.
Philip Toone NDP Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
Mr. Speaker, by making seasonal workers ineligible for employment insurance benefits, the Conservatives are attacking the economy in our regions. This is particularly true for seasonal industries, such as agriculture.
Since 2006, the Association des entrepreneurs en drainage agricole du Québec has invested half a million dollars in training workers. Under the new rules, employees who turn to employment insurance during the winter will have to take jobs rather than continue their training.
Is the minister aware that her reform is penalizing companies?
Kellie Leitch ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and to the Minister of Labour
Mr. Speaker, I have a rural riding with a lot of seasonal workers in it. The employers and employees in my riding are saying that these new changes work.
We are creating new jobs here in Canada, in fact, 770,000 net new jobs. I encourage the NDP and the Liberals once again to step up and help those people who are unemployed by supporting these changes.
Philip Toone NDP Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
Mr. Speaker, there is another category of seasonal workers who may have to pay the price for the changes that are being made to employment insurance, and that is contract teachers.
New teachers who work on contract in our schools often apply for employment insurance benefits during the summer to help them make ends meet. From now on, they will be forced to accept jobs in other areas, rather than continuing to upgrade their skills.
Is the minister aware that this reform is penalizing teachers and the quality of our young people's education?
Kellie Leitch ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and to the Minister of Labour
Mr. Speaker, I want to be very clear on what the rules are so that the opposition understands.
Our government is working to help Canadians find jobs in their local areas appropriate to their qualifications. I encourage the member to read the new regulations.
For those who are unable to find employment, employment insurance will be there for them, just as it has been in the past.
Chris Charlton NDP Hamilton Mountain, ON
Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary knows full well that it is failed Conservative economic policies that are keeping so many Canadians unemployed. The fact is that there are 300,000 more people unemployed today than during the recession.
How do the Conservatives deal with the growing number of unemployed Canadians? They further restrict access to EI and punish people on EI for working. They make changes with no public consultation. Will they start listening to Canadians now and immediately rescind these callous policies?
Kellie Leitch ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and to the Minister of Labour
Mr. Speaker, let us talk about what the NDP would do to create jobs. It would have a $21 billion carbon tax, which would kill jobs.
We have done a great deal to create new jobs in this country, in fact, 770,000 net new jobs. I can say it again and again but those are the facts.
We are changing EI to ensure more Canadians can be employed.
Rodger Cuzner Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
Mr. Speaker, the 1.4 million unemployed Canadians do not think the Conservative government is doing a great job. It has taken away the allowable earnings provision in EI, which used to allow all people earning EI benefits up to 40% of that EI benefit, so they were able to keep that money. With the changes now, if people work three days or fewer, they will lose money.
The math does not lie. It is obvious and overwhelming. People can make $800 while receiving EI and keep $800 but people who make $300 lose half of that via clawback. When will the Conservatives understand that this is hurting local income earners?
Kellie Leitch ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and to the Minister of Labour
Mr. Speaker, as I said before, those who work more will be keeping more of their earnings, which will encourage people to accept work while on unemployment insurance.
Kellie Leitch Conservative Simcoe—Grey, ON
Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned before, we actually have the best job growth in the G7. That is something for Canadians to be proud of. We need to take ownership of it.
When it comes to low-income Canadians, the Liberals and the NDP continue to vote against increases to the GIS and its income exemption. These are things that low-income Canadians need. That is what we are focused on here.
Sean Casey Liberal Charlottetown, PE
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives spent $750,000 unsuccessfully fighting disabled veterans in court to justify clawing back their pensions. Disabled RCMP vets have also sued to stop the government from doing the very same thing to them.
This morning, the Minister of National Defence spoke to an association of military ombudsmen about fair treatment and support for the defence family.
Did the minister explain to this international audience that the Conservatives have learned their lesson or will they put disabled and retired police officers through the same grief?
Eve Adams ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs
Mr. Speaker, our government has enormous respect for the veterans who have served and sacrificed for our country. We agreed with the court decision and we are acting expeditiously to ensure that the veterans and the current members who need this benefit receive it as soon as possible. Our government has significantly improved benefits for veterans, including the benefits for disabled veterans, while the NDP and the Liberals consistently vote against these benefits.
Judy Sgro Liberal York West, ON
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the person who speaks for Canada abroad, and of course I mean the British foreign secretary.
Given that the Prime Minister has handed the British the keys to Canada's embassies abroad, I wonder, is the British PM going to be speaking for Canada at the UN too? Exactly how much is Canada's sovereignty selling for these days?
John Baird ConservativeMinister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, that is an absolutely ridiculous question. The fact that the once great Liberal Party of Canada could ask such a ridiculous question is probably the best example of why its members are sitting in the far corner.
Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives allegedly spent over $700,000 to hire a public relations firm to help them avoid answering questions about the F-35s.
For $700,000, National Defence responds “no comment”, Public Works and Government Services responds “no comment”, and the new Chief of Defence Staff responds “ no comment”.
Why spend $700,000 if they can do no better than “no comment”?
Rona Ambrose ConservativeMinister of Public Works and Government Services and Minister for Status of Women
Mr. Speaker, as the member knows, the National Fighter Procurement Secretariat has been set up to oversee the due diligence that is necessary in the decision to replace our CF-18s. Of course, as she knows, the secretariat is made up of the most senior public servants in government responsible for military procurement and two independent members, one of whom is a respected academic and the other a very well-respected former auditor general. I would ask her to allow them to do their work. All of their work will be public.