Debates of Feb. 25th, 2013

Response to the Supreme Court of Canada Decision in R. v. Tse Act

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that we see the clock as 6:30 p.m.

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Joe Comartin]

Is it agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

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

Employment Insurance

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

Mr. Speaker, once again, I believe that it is important to come back to a question that was asked in the House last fall with regard to the employment insurance reform.

A few weeks ago, I asked the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development to listen to the public's criticisms of her reform and to understand that it does not make any sense. Since the employment insurance reform was announced at the beginning of the last budget, the government has been completely ignoring the opinions and warnings of experts in the field. Practically all of the stakeholders affected by this reform have spoken out against the changes imposed, as they now stand.

Can the minister explain to Canadians why her government decided to force the implementation of this reform without any consultation? Can the minister admit that the reason why the Conservatives did not want to consult anyone about this reform is that they knew that it would penalize thousands of Canadians and would literally steal from them the benefits to which they are entitled by virtue of the fact that they contributed to the program?

Can the minister tell us why no impact study was conducted and why no reliable scientific data was collected that would support this political decision? Can the minister simply admit that this reform is essentially based on an ideological choice designed to satisfy an electoral base?

When I asked my question last October, people across the country were already speaking out against the changes to employment insurance. Workers feel like they are being treated like criminals, the regions feel abandoned, and seasonal employers are afraid of losing skilled labour. The provinces, which will have to support all these people who will be on social assistance, were not even consulted.

Even now, does the minister not see that tension is rising? What does the government have to say to all these worried workers in the retail, construction, education, forestry, fisheries, agriculture and tourism sectors?

Protests are growing in Quebec, New Brunswick and the rest of the Maritimes. People in our regions are not fools. A simple press release to reassure the unemployed is useless when they have received their last pay cheque and are preparing to face the gap, because you have cut all support and they have nothing left to put on the table.

Will the minister promise to sit down with elected officials in the most affected regions? Will she promise to be open, to listen to what is happening in the regions and to find immediate solutions to help families in the regions?

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and for the Asia-Pacific Gateway]

Mr. Speaker, I can assure the hon. member that we have created programs that support the unemployed and that provide the assistance they need to return to the workforce. For Canadians who are unable to find work, EI will be there for them, as it always has been. We are committed to helping the unemployed return to the labour force quickly. Our government's top priority remains job creation and economic growth.

I can also assure the member opposite that the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development, her hard-working parliamentary secretary and the Minister of State (Seniors) have held consultations in every region of the country on an ongoing basis. In their travels, they regularly meet with stakeholders, including individual citizens, employers, employer associations, labour groups and academics, to talk about important subjects such as employment insurance.

From coast to coast to coast, our government has heard that there is a skills gap that is preventing unemployed Canadians from finding work. That is why this government has invested unprecedented amounts in skills training. We have heard that the EI system can act as a barrier to accepting all available work. That is why we made changes to the working while on claim pilot project that would allow Canadians to earn more by working more.

Is it backtracking to create a new employment insurance benefit for parents of critically ill children? These are steps forward, and they are the direct result of listening to Canadians in many ways. Effective consultation happens in many locations, involves a wide range of stakeholders and is ongoing. In fact, that is how the new EI benefit for parents caring for a critically ill child came about. The government consulted with medical specialists and other stakeholders to find out how this benefit could support parents facing this difficult circumstance.

Consultations with Canadians provides valuable input into our decision-making process. As the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development has said many times in this place, for Canadians who are unavailable to find work in their local areas, EI will continue to be there for them, as it always has been.

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

Mr. Speaker, the NDP supported the bill so that parents will be able to receive employment insurance benefits to help children who are ill.

What are the programs the member is talking about? He should tell us what they are.

Five additional weeks of benefits for people who live in remote areas have been abolished. We have seen the introduction of the 100 km rule, and now it will be Service Canada employees who will decide what suitable employment is, rather than the person concerned. This is a big change for our workers.

Employment insurance has to start working again for workers. Workers do not want to be called lazy just because at some point in the year they have to resort to employment insurance. That is something they will no longer accept.

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

Mr. Speaker, to the member's general point, we know that to create programs that serve the needs of Canadians, we need to hear their views and concerns. That is why our government continues to consult with stakeholders about how to best address the growing skills and labour gap. Unfortunately, the opposition has not supported our low-tax plan for jobs and economic growth, a plan that has created over 900,000 net new jobs since the depth of the recession.

I think it is the opposition that needs to listen to Canadians, who elected this strong, stable, national majority government to manage our economy through these fragile economic times. I want to ask the member to resist the temptation to fearmonger and to instead reassure her constituents that for Canadians who are unable to find work, EI will be there for them, as it always has been.

Search and Rescue

[Annick Papillon, NDP, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in 2011, the Conservative government announced the closing of the Quebec City marine rescue sub-centre. The closing will lead to the transfer of more than 1,800 calls for assistance to the coordination centre in Halifax and the centre in Trenton, Ontario.

Shift personnel in these centres are still not bilingual, and we know that, since the announcement of the closing of the Quebec City marine rescue sub-centre, three staffing processes have not been successful in finding enough bilingual officers who could become marine SAR coordinators able to handle urgent requests in French.

No matter what the results of the forthcoming staffing actions are and no matter what the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans says, over the years it will be impossible to maintain the required level of bilingualism in these rescue centres.

The most logical solution, the simplest and least expensive solution, would be to keep the Quebec City sub-centre open. If the government does not quickly overturn this misguided decision, incidents involving francophones will be handled in centres where the language of work will still be English, and we will lose the geographical knowledge that is essential for quickly identifying the location of an incident, local resource capabilities and local crisis solutions. To date, no effort has been made to train staff in Halifax or Trenton on the specifics of the Quebec City area.

I think it is important to point out that, on January 9, 2013, Guillaume Gagné, a resident of Cap-Saint-Ignace, in the Montmagny area, found himself in difficulty when the ice pan on which his fishing hut stood broke off and began floating down the river with the tide as night was falling.

The man’s life was in serious danger, because later that night violent winds destroyed the ice pan. It is important to recognize the work done by the Quebec City marine rescue sub-centre, the Canadian Coast Guard and the Lachance family, who joined forces and used local resources that were tailored to suit the circumstances.

Dominic Lachance, who saved the young fisherman, said that things could have gone very differently if the maritime search and rescue centre in Quebec City had been moved to Halifax, as the Conservative government is planning.

This is what Mr. Lachance had to say after the rescue:

If the office were located outside, the connection would probably be slower… They are going to have to find a way of communicating and mobilizing the people on site, because otherwise I think some very unfortunate things could happen.

With that kind of example of effectiveness, and given the repeated statements by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, who says that the safety of Canadians is the government’s priority, do we have reason to hope that the minister will order the Canadian Coast Guard to keep the maritime search and rescue centre in Quebec City in operation for good?

Can we count on this government to reconsider that decision instead of postponing the shutdown? The government has postponed it twice so far and will continue to do so because it is very clear that the decision makes no sense. What can the minister tell us today? Good news, I hope.

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and for the Asia-Pacific Gateway]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take the opportunity to address again the issue raised by my hon. colleague, the member of Parliament for Québec. This is the issue of consolidation of the marine rescue sub-centre located in Quebec City with the joint rescue coordination centre located in Trenton.

In April 2012, we witnessed a similar, successful consolidation of the marine rescue sub-centre in St. John's into the joint rescue coordination centre in Halifax. Search and rescue coordination and response continues to be provided at the same level of service today as it was when the marine rescue sub-centre in St. John's was in place. This is proof that the consolidation of one centre into another can be done safely.

The Coast Guard continues to undertake all efforts to recruit qualified search and rescue mission coordinators at both joint rescue coordination centres. Currently, bilingual services are provided by two centres: Joint Rescue Coordination Centre Halifax and the marine rescue sub-centre in Quebec. The consolidation project will ensure that bilingual capacity is enhanced in both Halifax and Trenton before the Quebec centre is closed.

Significant progress has been made on this initiative. The joint rescue coordination centre in Halifax has undergone extensive renovations and now has a state of the art communications management system. Joint Rescue Coordination Centre Trenton will undergo a similar renovation in the near future. Both centres have recruited bilingual staff who have been trained and are now on the job. Additionally, search and rescue staff have been working with our emergency response partners to ensure that the transition will be seamless and that the current level of co-operation between partners will continue.

The government is fully aware that the provision of bilingual services is critical, particularly when it comes to the safety of mariners. As a result, the Coast Guard has increased the required level of language proficiency for the maritime search and rescue coordinators at the rescue coordination centres and developed language training and maintenance plans. These steps will ensure that we are meeting our official languages obligations in the most effective way.

These changes to search and rescue coordination service delivery would not be made if there were any evidence that they would negatively impact the safety of Canadians, whatever their official language of choice. As we have stated many times before, these changes do not affect the availability of search and rescue resources and the level of response during a distress incident. Coast Guard crews and the volunteers of the Coast Guard Auxiliary will continue to respond to emergencies as they have under the coordination of the joint rescue centres.

I can assure members that search and rescue coordination services will still be available 24 hours a day, seven days a week in both official languages.

Canada is an international leader in marine safety and the Canadian Coast Guard's search and rescue program is among the best in the world and will remain so. We will continue to ensure that timely and appropriate maritime search and rescue coordination and response services are available to all mariners.

I assure the member that the Quebec marine rescue sub-centre will only be closed when we are fully confident that the same level of services can be provided and public safety assured. The safety of Canadians remains this government's top priority. The excellent standard of maritime search and rescue that Canadians have come to expect, and indeed depend upon, will be maintained.

[Annick Papillon, NDP, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, first, the Quebec City centre is not a “sub-centre”, it is a major search and rescue centre. It will not be as easy to close as other centres elsewhere in the country. It is a major centre, the only one in the country that is officially bilingual. I am not sure that it will be possible to provide the same high-quality services in French as before.

Expanding the Halifax centre and relocating the Trenton centre, as well as setting up two relay sites, will call for major spending that was not planned initially. They said they would scrimp here and there to save $1 million. But to date, we know it has cost at least three times more. The logistics cost so much that scrimping here and there makes no sense.

We have to realize that far too much money has been spent to date. To make sure that francophones are safe on our navigable waterways throughout Canada, the best thing is to keep the Coast Guard search and rescue centre in Quebec City open year-round, with no changes, for everyone’s benefit. In Trenton and Halifax they do not find this funny.

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

Mr. Speaker, I will continue to stress to my colleague and fellow Canadians that marine safety remains a top priority for Fisheries and Oceans Canada. In spite of the member opposite's misgivings, the consolidation of the marine rescue sub-centre in Quebec will not impact public safety. Mariners will receive the same high-quality search and rescue coordination response they have in the past, in both official languages. The appropriate steps are being taken to ensure this.

Additionally, there have been no changes in the standard of search and rescue response as a result of this initiative. Services will continue to be provided by the highly capable Coast Guard crews in conjunction with the volunteers of the Coast Guard Auxiliary and our other emergency response partners. We want to reassure Canadians that bilingual marine search and rescue coordination services will always be available, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, in Canada.

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Joe Comartin]

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

(The House adjourned at 6:38 p.m.)