Debates of Nov. 4th, 2014

Aboriginal Affairs

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Mr. Speaker, yet again, the parliamentary secretary and the Government of Canada continue to disappoint. In fact, they continue to disappoint by continuing to use the word “continue”. Again, it is as though everything that they are doing now is perfect, yet this tragedy continues.

They talk about funding shelters. There are 44 shelters in over 600 first nations in this country. This is not good enough.

We have not seen any commitment to an increase in resources. The people of Canada, the families and the friends of the victims of missing and murdered indigenous women and girls, and frankly the 96% of Canadians not from an indigenous background are fed up. They want to see action. They know it only begins with a national public inquiry that will get to the facts and be able to determine the actions that will work.

We will not let up on this, and we hope that the government will come onside. If not, we will wait until the next government, and we will do it.

[Susan Truppe, Conservative, London North Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I probably would not hold my breath if I were the colleague opposite.

The investments being made by the Government of Canada to address violence against aboriginal women and girls are very significant. The action plan released by the Minister of Labour and Minister of Status of Women on September 15 includes new funding of $25 million over five years, beginning in 2015-16. There is further ongoing funding of $158.7 million over five years, beginning in 2015, for shelters and family violence prevention activities. There will also be an internal dedication of $5 million over five years, beginning in 2015, to improve the economic security of aboriginal women and promote their participation in leadership and decision-making roles through Status of Women Canada.

Measures outlined by the minister in the action plan represent a total investment of nearly $200 million over five years. I do not understand why my hon. colleague opposite sounds so concerned about this, yet she never supports anything that we do.

Employment

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am rising today in follow-up to a question that I put to the Minister of Employment and Social Development on September 25.

I commend the government for finally responding to my repeated requests for the minister, through his department, to develop an enforcement and compliance strategy to govern the temporary foreign worker program.

In my four decades of involvement in environmental enforcement and compliance, both domestically and internationally, a clear consensus has developed across the country and around the world that it is important to the credibility of a regulatory regime that there be a publicly available and endorsed enforcement and compliance strategy. It is important that policy also be opened up to the public, to impacted persons, to employers, and to employees to ensure that the government is delivering a credible policy.

I would again like to commend the minister for not only finally responding and producing an enforcement and compliance strategy but also making that available to various parties to provide feedback.

The questions I wish to raise tonight relate to the apparent final strategy that has been released by the government.

In that strategy, which I understand is the final enforcement compliance strategy for now, the government sets forth, to its credit, some clear, publicly known criteria for how it is deciding what the appropriate enforcement responses are to violations under that legislation. To my surprise, the criteria seem to have a few problems. I would like to reiterate one of the issues from the ironworkers, who were impacted by the temporary foreign worker program.

As I have previously raised in the House, there have been a number of occasions in the oil sands sector where in some cases more than 100 Canadian ironworkers have been surreptitiously laid off and replaced by foreign workers. I reached out to the ironworkers to ask what their thoughts were on the proposed enforcement compliance strategy. Here are some of their concerns. I noticed that despite their input, the draft strategy remains exactly the same. As the ironworkers have pointed out, and I agree with them, the fact that an employer has violated the temporary foreign worker program—for example, by replacing Canadian workers with temporary foreign workers—for an economic or competitive advantage, is given a very low rating.

In the system, the government has laid out the kind of offences that may occur under this regulation. Here is what we think the criteria are. There has been a lot of concern expressed by a number of parties with the way the criteria have been assigned. One of those is that an economic advantage is a major factor, and I agree.

I have asked these questions that I would like to put to the parliamentary secretary tonight repeated times in the House. The minister has said that he has quadrupled the number of inspectors. Exactly how many inspectors are now employed? What are their credentials? Are they employed full time? What is their training? How many of those officers are deployed to the oil sands sector?

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment and Social Development]

Mr. Speaker, on September 25, when the member asked for a commitment to increased enforcement of the rules governing the temporary foreign worker program, the Minister of Employment and Social Development said he was happy to make that commitment, because it had already been made.

As all hon. members know, the minister announced a comprehensive overhaul of the temporary foreign worker program earlier this year, on June 20. The primary objective of the changes is to make sure that the program is used as intended, namely as a last and limited resort to fill acute labour shortages on a temporary basis when qualified Canadians are not available.

The changes strengthen the enforcement provisions and provide tougher penalties for those who do not follow the rules. The new application process is more comprehensive and more rigorous. For example, employers must now reveal the number of Canadians who applied for the job in question. They must also reveal the number of Canadians they interviewed for the job and provide an explanation as to why they did not hire any of those Canadians.

Employers must now state that they are aware of the rule that Canadians cannot be laid off or have their hours reduced at a work site employing temporary foreign workers.

Contrary to the member's assertion in her question, serious criminal sanctions, including fines and even jail time, can result if employers break the rules. These sanctions include revoking their permission to bring in temporary workers and being named on a public list.

There will be four times as many government inspectors, and one in four employers using the program will be inspected each and every year. Inspectors will also have greater power to catch those breaking the rules through, for example, warrantless onsite visits, the ability to compel employers to produce relevant documents, and the ability to ban employers who break the rules from the program.

Any allegations of abuse of the temporary foreign worker program will be vigorously investigated. In addition to the tip line, a new complaints web page has been launched to allow the public to submit tips easily and securely online. We encourage all Canadians who have concerns or information to call our anonymous and confidential tip line with any allegation of abuse, and it will be investigated.

There can be no doubt whatsoever that our government has not only talked the talk when it comes to enforcing these rules but has also walked the walk to ensure that the temporary foreign worker program will remain a limited and last resort to fill acute labour shortages on a temporary basis when qualified Canadians simply are not available.

It is only our government Canadians can trust when it comes to putting Canadians first, and we will take no lessons from the NDP on this file.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is with great regret that I must ask yet again exactly the same questions I have asked continually in this place.

First, again, how many full-time inspectors are there, and how many are dedicated to enforcing the temporary foreign worker program in the oil sands?

Second, why is there public disclosure of only a small subset of the enforcement responses? It does not apply to the warning letters, the suspension or revocation of the LMIA, or the work permits. Why is that information not being disclosed to the public?

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I am wondering, when the member was talking to the workers in the oil sands, an area where she is from, if she explained to them that her party, if it had its way, would launch a massive carbon tax on the oil sands and that the jobs they are talking about would not exist for anybody, whether they be Canadians or temporary foreign workers.

Let me reiterate that the temporary foreign worker program can only be used by employers as a last and limited resort to fill acute labour shortages on a temporary basis when qualified Canadians are not available.

The government has strengthened the enforcement provisions of the program. We have tougher penalties for employers who do not follow the rules, and that includes in the oil sands. Any allegation of an abuse of the temporary foreign worker program will be vigorously investigated. In addition to the tip line, a new complaints website has been launched to allow the public to submit tips easily and securely online.

[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 2 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 6:48 p.m.)