Debates of Sept. 23rd, 2014

Opposition Motion—Employment Insurance

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Development]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Sarnia—Lambton.

Let me begin by reminding the hon. member that the new small business job credit is only the latest of our government's actions to create jobs, growth, and long-term prosperity. We have been taking numerous measures to lower the tax burden on small businesses since we came to office. By leaving more money in the hands of entrepreneurs and businesses, they can hire more Canadians and expand their operations. We understand that lower taxes make Canada's economy stronger and create good long-term jobs for Canadians.

According to the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters:

Reducing business taxes creates jobs, boosts investment, makes Canada more competitive and puts more money in the pockets of the Canadians....

...business tax cuts are critical drivers of the Canadian economy.

As a result of our Conservative government's low-tax plan, a small business earning $500,000 now saves over $28,000 in taxes. That includes tax cuts such as reducing the small business tax rate from 12% to 11%, increasing the amount of income eligible for the small business tax rate, and increasing and indexing the lifetime capital gains exemption.

Every time our government lowers taxes, the Canadian small business community and the workers they employ receive concrete benefits, and they benefit greatly from our fantastic small business job credit. However, no one has to take my word for it. Let me quote Monique Moreau of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, who stated, “Small businesses in Canada should be thrilled with this announcement because they told us time and time again that payroll taxes are the biggest disincentive to hiring”.

The Canadian Federation of Independent Business also estimates that the new credit would create 25,000 person years of employment over the next few years alone. Indeed, job creation is one of the many reasons that our government is committed to keeping payroll taxes and all other taxes low for Canadians.

However, we know that more needs to be done. We are well aware that Canada must continue to generate the highly skilled individuals and new ideas that will help our businesses innovate, secure new markets, and create well-paying jobs. That is why I would like to devote my time today to our government's commitment to strengthen education, skills training, and innovation in Canada.

For example, it is important for young Canadians to have access to information on a variety of careers in order to make informed choices about their education early in life. Good choices early on can help to ensure that young Canadians obtain the skills and experience necessary to find work quickly, avoid unnecessary debt, and get a better start on their careers. For instance, if young Canadians are interested in lifelong careers as skilled tradespeople, they need to know when, where, and how they can obtain the training that will secure them the real jobs that are in demand.

I would like to refer hon. members in the House to an article in the August 23 edition of The Economist. It is the Schumpeter article entitled “Got Skills?”, and it refers to the issue of vocational training at length. I would encourage members to take a look at it.

Of course, there are many different career options in Canada. Our government will continue to promote education in high-demand fields, including the skilled trades, science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. We take youth employment very seriously. Since coming to office, we have helped over two million youth obtain skills, training, and jobs.

In economic action plan 2013, we reallocated $19 million, over two years, to inform young people about fields of study that are relevant to existing and forecasted demand for labour in particular occupations. As well, our government is providing more information on the job prospects and benefits of working in various occupations. It is developing new outreach efforts to promote careers in such high-demand fields as science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and the skilled trades.

Although Canada boasts high levels of post-secondary achievement, the transition to a first job can be challenging. To ease this transition, the career focus program supports paid internships for recent post-secondary graduates, ensuring they get valuable hands-on work experience. Economic action plan 2012 provided funding for an expected 3,000 additional paid internships in high-demand fields. Economic action plan 2013 announced an additional investment of $70 million over three years to support an additional 5,000 paid internships.

Building on these measures, economic action plan 2014 introduced the flexibility and innovation in apprenticeship technical training pilot project to expand the use of innovative approaches to apprenticeship technical training. With this initiative, we are continuing to work with provinces and territories to harmonize apprenticeship systems and reduce barriers to certification in the skilled trades so that apprentices can more easily work and train where the jobs are. To further support apprentices, economic action plan 2014 takes steps to increase awareness of the existing financial supports available to apprentices through the employment insurance program while they are on technical training.

It also announced that our government will improve the youth employment strategy to align it with the evolving realities of the job market, and to ensure federal investments in youth employment provide young Canadians with real-life work experience in high-demand fields such as science, technology, engineering, mathematics and the skilled trades. Our future certainly depends on these high-demand fields to create the well-paying jobs of the future. This is especially the case when it comes to research and innovation. The government plays an important role in Canada's science, technology and innovation system. Since 2006, the government has provided more than $11 billion in new resources to support basic and applied research, talent development, research infrastructure and innovative activities in the private sector, including more effectively aligning federal support for research with business needs.

To be successful in the highly competitive global economy, Canada must continue to improve its ability to develop high-quality talented people performing world-leading research and generating new breakthrough ideas. In 2013, our government's support exceeded $3 billion for research in the post-secondary education sector alone. Economic action plan 2014 builds on these commitments with the creation of the new Canada first research excellence fund. The fund will provide significant flexible resources to further drive Canadian post-secondary research institutions to become the world's best.

Our government's investments in science, technology and innovation have helped ensure Canada leads the G7 in post-secondary research expenditures as a share of the economy, and our commitment remains strong. In economic action plan 2014 alone we announced the largest annual increase in funding for research through the granting councils in over a decade. This includes $46 million per year on an ongoing basis to be allotted as follows: $15 million per year to the Canadian Institutes of Health Research for the expansion of the strategy for patient-oriented research, the creation of the Canadian consortium on neurodegeneration in aging, and other health research priorities; $15 million per year to the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council to support advanced research in the natural sciences and engineering; $7 million per year for the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council to support advanced research in the social sciences and humanities; and $9 million per year for the indirect costs program.

If I had more time today, I could easily continue highlighting our government's many initiatives to position Canada at the forefront of innovation and excellence in education. Unfortunately, I must conclude.

[Rosane Doré Lefebvre, NDP, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Development for her speech.

When it comes to employment insurance, I have a very hard time trusting the Liberals, who moved the motion on EI today, or the Conservatives. In this case, it is six of one and half a dozen of the other, and unfortunately, the two parties have shamelessly plundered the employment insurance fund. That is so, so sad.

I would like to know what my colleague thinks, not of raiding the employment insurance fund, but of the fact that the third party, the Liberal Party, is having trouble with its numbers, with counting and with presenting a sensible motion about the employment insurance fund.

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague is absolutely right. The Liberals cannot do math.

It was the Liberals who raided the substantial amount of money that was in the EI coffers. Money that was contributed by employers and employees in this country who had worked hard to see that sizeable resource available for a rainy day.

It is very difficult to believe that the Liberals, who would do such a terrible thing as taking that money out and using it for their own pet projects, could have any idea, today, on what should happen with EI.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to my hon. colleague. What concerns me is that the employment insurance fund is a form of insurance, and like any insurance, if it is house insurance, it should be for house insurance; if it is life insurance, it should be for life insurance.

However, we see this idea that when we set aside funds that are meant to secure families when they lose their employment, that money can be raided, that money can be taken. In this case of the Liberals, they developed this job creation scheme that is off by over a billion dollars. I have deep concerns about that. We find that 68% of the people who are paying into the program are not receiving it. I do not know if the member deals with the kinds of people who I deal with, but when I deal with someone who has paid into the program who loses their job through no fault of their own and does not qualify, they can face really dire economic situations.

I would like to ask my hon. colleague what she thinks about this notion being put forward by the Liberals that, once again, EI could be some kind of political football, particularly, when their numbers are so obviously wrong.

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Mr. Speaker, first, what I talked about in my speech is that there are a number of initiatives that our government has taken to ensure that people have the opportunity to find good, well-paying jobs and to create the opportunity for new jobs for the future.

What we are doing here today is looking at an opportunity for small businesses, which are the backbone of the Canadian economy. Eighty per cent of the jobs that we see in our economy are provided by small businesses. We are looking at giving those small businesses a tax break so that they can open the door for new opportunities, particularly, for young people, who we know are often the ones who go into small businesses looking to get the kinds of job skills and experience they need to move forward with their own careers.

I own a small business. I know that when we look at the cost of the payroll taxes that are imposed upon new hires, it is often the breaking point between saying whether or not a business is going to take on a new employee or whether they are just going to contract that job out, because sometimes it is much easier to allow that contract work to be done on a short-term basis.

We want to create more jobs for young people particularly, ensure that small businesses can open the door for those opportunities and give those job opportunities, and open the door for the Canadian economy.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to thank the member for Newmarket—Aurora for sharing her time with me. Also, since this is my first time speaking this fall session, I would like to welcome back all of my colleagues and wish them the very best as we continue serving Canadians in this very august chamber.

As hon. members can see from the debate today, our government clearly recognizes the vital role that small businesses play in spurring economic growth and creating jobs for hard-working Canadians. That is why we have consistently cut taxes and reduced red tape for small businesses.

It is under this government that Canadian businesses have seen savings of more than $60 billion since 2008. In 2012, we lowered corporate taxes from 22% to 15%, leaving more money in the pockets of small businesses to help them grow and thrive. We also extended the temporary accelerated capital cost allowance for manufacturing and processing machinery and equipment through 2015, which has enabled companies in this industry to plan and invest for the future.

Both of these actions are part of our government's commitment to foster job creation, a commitment underpinned by a firm belief in keeping taxes low for Canadian businesses. Unfortunately for Canadians, both of these actions were also voted against by the same opposition that brought today's motion forward.

This government's commitment to tax relief has delivered real benefits to our country. Canada now has the lowest overall tax rate on new business investment in the G7. Moreover, Bloomberg recently ranked Canada as the second-best place in the world to grow and start a business. That is a record we can and should be proud of.

Unlike the reckless calls by the opposition to drastically hike taxes on businesses to pay for their risky spending plans, our government will remain committed to helping businesses in Canada succeed. That is why we are building on our success by introducing the new small business job credit. The credit is expected to significantly help over 780,000 small businesses in 2015, which is more than the number of businesses that benefited from the 2013 hiring credit.

In addition, while the amount of the EI hiring credit was capped at $1,000, there is no maximum capping for the small business job credit. In fact, small businesses could receive significantly more tax relief under the job credit than under the EI hiring credit. All in all, the small business job credit is expected to save small businesses more than $550 million and lead to the creation of several thousand jobs.

In contrast, the opposition have supported a 45-day work year that would drastically increase premiums by 35% at a cost of $4 billion directly out of the pockets of Canadian employees and employers. Instead of providing small businesses with the tax relief they need to spur job creation, this burden would cause needless harm to important job creators in Canada.

Our government is constantly looking for ways to help create jobs and better connect Canadians with those available jobs. Indeed, many employers continue to identify the shortage of skilled labour as an impediment to growth. Recently, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce listed skills shortages as the number one barrier to Canada's competitiveness. I know first-hand about challenges like this as many skilled labourers from my own riding of Sarnia—Lambton are looking outside of my community for work right now, which represents a drain of skilled labour from an area that drastically needs it.

Faced with this challenge, our government has taken concrete action to support the development of a skilled, mobile and productive workforce. Last year alone, our government transferred $2.7 billion to the provinces and territories to support labour market programming.

Moreover, we have also remained committed to fostering internship opportunities for Canada's youth. In economic action plan 2014, we invested $40 million towards supporting up to 3,000 internships across the country in high-demand fields. In addition, we are reallocating $15 million annually within the youth employment strategy to support up to 1,000 full-time internships for recent post-secondary graduates in small and medium-sized enterprises.

All the while, we are continually improving our strategy to better align it with the evolving realities of the job market and to ensure federal investments in youth employment provide young Canadians with real-life work experience in high-demand fields such as science, technology, engineering, mathematics and the skilled trades.

At the other end of the spectrum, our government also recognizes that many older Canadians want to remain active participants in the workforce. That is why we have taken many steps over the years to support the labour market participation of older Canadians, including the budget 2011 extension of the targeted initiative for older workers and the budget 2012 expansion of third-quarter project, an initiative that has helped more than 1,200 experienced workers who are over 50 find a job that matches their skills.

Going forward, our government will renew the targeted initiative for the older workers program for a three-year period, representing a federal investment of $75 million.

These are all important measures, measures which have helped to ensure that Canada has had the best record of job creation in the G7 since our government came to office.

The real game changer in our efforts to connect Canadians with available jobs has to be the introduction of the Canada job grant. By ensuring that federal funding responds to the hiring needs of employers and by giving them the opportunity to participate meaningfully as partners in skills training, this initiative is transforming skills training in Canada.

The Canada job grant could provide up to $15,000 to individuals for training costs, including tuition and training materials, helping them to gain the skills they need to succeed. Once implemented, this measure will offer real support to Canadians toward improved employment and earning prospects.

While our government remains focused on creating jobs, we hear the same tired strategies from the opposition, policies that form a high-tax, high-spending agenda that would seriously threaten job creation and set hard-working families back a decade to a time when the government thought surplus belonged in its pocket and not the families.

Our government is clear in its priorities. We will cut taxes to allow businesses to thrive and we will make targeted investments to help connect unemployed Canadians with available jobs.

These are just some of the central initiatives that continue to drive our government's jobs and growth agenda. I am proud of our record and would like to thank the hon. members for providing the opportunity to discuss it here today.

By helping Canadians acquire the skills that will get them hired or help them get better jobs, we are directly investing in our country's greatest asset, our people. The return on this investment is not just helping individuals, but it is also supporting their families, their communities and the country as a whole.

Given these measures and the ones listed by my colleagues, I would strongly encourage members to reject today's unilateral and ill-considered motion brought forward by the opposition. I would encourage all members to support our government's comprehensive plan to create jobs, spur economic growth and promote long-term prosperity for all Canadians.

[Rosane Doré Lefebvre, NDP, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from the other side of the House for her speech. We do not always agree on things, but we have worked on the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans together. Our relationship has been very collegial, and I am happy she is here in the House today.

I would like to talk more about the Liberals' proposal and today's opposition motion. As I said earlier, I always worry about the fact that the Liberals do not have a very good track record on the employment insurance fund and the millions of dollars they looted in the past.

With respect to this motion, what really interests me is the numbers the Liberals came up with, numbers that the experts do not agree on, such as the cost of the Liberal proposal to exempt employers from contributing for newly created jobs and the amount they are proposing here.

Can my colleague comment on the Liberals' math? Does she think this makes sense, or did they pull these numbers out of a hat?

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I certainly enjoy working with my colleague as well. I am pleased she was able to ask some questions. Perhaps she will participate in this debate later on.

That is an interesting question. We have heard a lot of comments regarding that very question this morning. We heard how the EI fund was raided and was used for pet projects. We heard how it was taken and not available when it was needed by the participants of that fund. We know that those are well-documented facts.

I cannot answer how the Liberals costed their motion before us today. I have heard some different responses this morning. Perhaps that part of the discussion will come out as we continue this debate in the House today. However, I know that on this side of the House we feel it takes a suite of programs to address some of the issues that Canadians feel today. That is why we have put in place what we have and why we will continue proudly with the small business job credit.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

Mr. Speaker, many people have been quoting the CFIB, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, quite a bit, including the Conservatives. Just a short time ago it was tweeted that Mr. Kelly endorsed our plan. He said that it was a good way to create jobs over the next two years.

Would the member like to comment on that?

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we know there have been many supportive quotes that have been stated in regard to the small business job credit. The CFIB had a couple of very supportive quotes when it was introduced.

Mr. Kelly said, “It is a big, big deal for small business. It is good news for people looking for jobs”.

Monique Moreau, the director of National Affairs for CFIB, said, “Small businesses in Canada should be thrilled with this announcement because they told us time and time again that payroll taxes like EI are the biggest disincentive to hiring, so any relief the government can provide will encourage them to be hiring more Canadians”.

It is not only the CFIB that has been making comments in support of it.

Jay Myers, president of the Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters, said:

The cost of labour is one of the top five challenges hurting Canadian companies...The Small Business Job Credit will help a powerhouse — the thousands of small businesses — of the Canadian economy become more competitive.

I could not agree more. We know that small businesses are the powerhouse of our country. As a government, we will continue to do everything we can to make them successful.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak on the Liberal opposition day motion regarding our premium exemption plan. I will be sharing my time with the member for Vancouver Centre.

My community of Etobicoke North and indeed all Canadians deserve a plan for jobs and growth. Unfortunately, the Conservatives' EI plan provides neither.

I have the privilege of serving a wonderful community. It is a place where I was born and raised. Etobicoke North is proudly one of the most diverse ridings in the country. Our constituents face challenges with family reunification, language barriers, a lack of jobs, and that is particularly for our youth.

Students' tuition, food, rent, transit and other costs have all been going up, yet student debt levels remain constant. The average post-secondary graduate carries $28,000 in debt. The unemployment and underemployment rates for youth have long-term consequences because it takes years to repay their debt. Parents and grandparents often step in to financially support their adult children.

This is scarring a generation of young Canadians and contributing to higher household debt and poor retirement savings.

Let me share some stories from the summer in my constituency office. I have permission to share each in the House of Commons. In fact, one of my constituents said, “Tell my story, I'm a person, I need a job, I have a family to feed. Make them care, make them do something that actually helps and doesn't hurt my family or me”.

From my community, an international doctor cannot practise medicine, bringing the total to dozens and dozens of international medical graduates I have met. A man previously had his own law firm back home for almost two decades, came to Canada for a better life for his children, repeated his law education in Canada and still cannot find a job. A countless number of students, parents and even grandparents came looking for summer jobs so they and their family could pay their fall tuition. An equally high number of college and university graduates have been out of work for one, two and three years.

A woman who had a good-paying job for 20 years lost her job to outsourcing. After months without work, she was living out of her car, afraid to go to sleep at night and unable to pay for her lifesaving drugs. We called her specialist and explained the problem, paid her gas money so she could drive to the doctor and she was able to pick up sample medication. Another woman could not afford the pain killers after her surgery. She came to my office in tears with an ice pack to kill the pain, so I bought her medication and paid for her trips to and from the hospital.

I am tired of hearing the government's rhetoric about jobs. It is time for the government to take unemployment, and particularly youth unemployment, seriously and provide meaningful support to Canadians who are struggling. I was in my constituency office almost daily this summer and almost 80% of those who came to see me needed a job. Because of unemployment, they also needed clothing, food and other supports. We helped them find jobs and got them the supports they needed. Just last week I spent six hours in the community with business leaders as part of a program to create jobs in Etobicoke North.

Etobicoke North residents and all Canadians deserve a plan for jobs and growth. Unfortunately, the Conservatives' EI plan provides neither. The Liberals' EI premium exemption plan would reward businesses for each new job created in 2015 and 2016. This would represent a benefit of up to $1,280 for each newly created job, which for $225 million could help to create over 175,000 new jobs.

On the other hand, the Conservatives' EI rate reduction only encourages businesses to stay small and punishes them if they grow and are successful.

With the Conservatives' plan, only businesses with EI taxes below $15,000 would see any savings, creating an incentive for businesses to fire workers. The price tag for the Conservatives' new small business EI tax credit is estimated at $550 million over two years; that is, the Conservatives have announced an annual $225 million measure that is unlikely to produce jobs.

The Conservatives' EI tax credit is getting slammed by economists ranging from Jack Mintz to Mike Moffatt.

From Jack Mintz of the University of Calgary: “It becomes a disincentive to growth.” From Stephen Gordon of Laval University: “But the Conservatives have yet again eschewed a straightforward and effective measure and adopted one that is complicated and most likely to have little effect on employment or wages.” From David MacDonald of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives: “So if you're an employer and your payroll is slightly over that $550,000, you've got a strong incentive to cut your payroll.” From Mike Moffatt of the Mowat Centre: “...the proposed ‘Small Business Job Credit’ has major structural flaws that, in many cases, give firms an incentive to fire workers and cut salaries.”

The Globe and Mail says that it is “...creating a perverse disincentive for small companies to grow”.

The tax credit gives firms about $200 to hire someone but over $2,200 to fire someone.

The Liberals have a solution: use the money to give job creators an EI premium exemption for new jobs. I have heard from members of my community, who want to know when the Conservatives will drop their poor plan and adopt the Liberal plan, which would actually reward job creation and growth.

Under the Conservatives, 527 mid-sized firms of 100 to 499 employees vanished between 2007 and 2010. Canada has a lack of medium-size and large companies compared to the United States and most other developed countries. Also under the Conservatives, 9,000 exporters disappeared between 2008 and 2012 and may never come back.

Not only have jobs been lost, but Statistics Canada does not know where job vacancies exist in communities across Canada. The Auditor General's 2014 spring report confirmed that the Conservatives' undermining of Statistics Canada has left the government unable to accurately address the economic needs of Canadian communities.

Liberals believe the government must not only create the right conditions for economic growth but must also ensure that growth is sustainable in order to finally help the struggling middle class. We understand that we must create the conditions that allow for economic prosperity, including investment in education, infrastructure, and trade expansion. The Liberal focus is on creating new jobs and hiring more Canadians. This is the only way that we can grow the middle class and expand opportunities for Canadian families.

The people of Etobicoke North need jobs, and I have worked hard to get them jobs. I obtained funding for a Completing the Circle program, a $500,000 jobs program in our community in remembrance of Loyan Gilao. I personally review and edit resumes late into the night, sometimes doing two and three drafts. We get our people into job programs and we follow up with them to make sure their job searches are going in the right direction. While they search, we help them with food, clothing and whatever other supports they might need.

I buy medicine. A lady was looking for help because she was in agony from an ear infection that had raged for three weeks. She had pus and blood running down her face. The sad reality is that she could not afford antibiotics because she could not find a job.

A constituent asked of me “How come you have to find me a job? Why doesn't the government make it easier for me to get a job so I can pay taxes, contribute, and have my dignity?”

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to my hon. colleague's speech. I have just one question for her. I already asked the member for Malpeque, but I did not get an answer, so I wonder if this member can answer.

She said that the Liberal plan involves granting a holiday from EI premiums for every new job created. Then she said that this could create 176,000 net jobs. She must realize that this means that about 1.5 million jobs would have to be created in total to get to the actual number of 176,000 total net jobs, considering job losses. If the economy creates 1.5 million jobs, that means that for every $1,000 in premiums, on average, the plan would cost at least $1.5 billion, and not the $225 million that was announced.

Can the member help me with this math problem? The program would cost about five times more than what the Liberal Party is suggesting.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is disappointing that the NDP is playing politics.

Over the last year, Canada has experienced very little job growth. From August 2013 to August 2014, the entire country created a net of only 81,300 jobs. Only 19% of those were full-time. In contrast, the United Kingdom created 775,000 jobs over the past 12 months. The United States created 2.2 million jobs.

Our plan has the exact same cost as the Conservatives', but the Liberal plan would actually create real potential for jobs.

Mr. Dan Kelly of the CFIB has said that he loves the Liberal Party of Canada plan and that it has lots of job potential

[Laurin Liu, NDP, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member's remarks. She talked about her constituents and the problems they are having finding work.

However, I would remind the House that when the Liberals were in power, they reduced access to employment insurance, for one thing. Eligibility dropped from 80% to 40% under the Liberals. We must not forget that important detail.

It is also important to remember that the NDP introduced a bill to keep the Conservatives' and the Liberals' hands out of the EI fund.

Will the Liberal member support the NDP's bill and protect her constituents' contributions?

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague, whom I have worked with many times. I have enjoyed working with her.

We do have a plan. It has the same cost as the Conservatives', and our plan would actually create 175,000 jobs.

I really want the House to hear the plight of my constituents, so I will give one more story.

A woman who is working full time has raised two adult children and done so without support. Both children are at university. Both need to find summer jobs to pay for tuition. Both struggled to find work. She came to our office for assistance to get her children help for dental surgery, which both need. Unfortunately, she cannot afford the fee for the dental consult, and her children are in pain every day. She asked, “How do you think that makes me feel as a mother?”

This mother has done everything right and worked hard all of her life. Her children have also worked hard. They have one question: Where are the jobs?

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise to speak to the Liberal opposition motion.

One of the things I want to stress is that this will be about jobs, jobs, jobs. When we look at what has happened with job creation in this country, we see that in the past year Canada has experienced negative job growth. In fact, as my colleague just said, from August 2013 to August 2014, the entire country created a net 81,000 jobs, but only 15,300, or 19%, of these are full time.

How do we expect families to live, to work, to pay their mortgages, to feed themselves, to send their kids to university, to do all the things that families have to do when they are working part time? It is not a sustainable way for people to live, so creating full-time jobs is what we need to talk about, not part-time jobs.

We can look at the United Kingdom. My colleague spoke about the number of jobs, but I want to put it into perspective. In the same period of this year, the United Kingdom created a 2.6% increase in new jobs, the United States 1.5%, and Canada 0.5% only.

Therefore, Canada is not doing very well. In spite of what we hear from the Conservative government, Canada is not creating new jobs, and when we do not create jobs and people keep losing their jobs and try to live on part-time jobs, there are huge effects that no one is talking about.

The health effects of unemployment were well documented in the 1990s, when many countries in the world were facing recession. We know there is a high incidence of high blood pressure, a high incidence of anxiety and depression, and a high incidence of suicide. A lot of people cannot afford to feed their families and a lot of people cannot afford to buy the prescriptions they need for chronic diseases. That is another impact that we are not even counting when we think about jobs and the ability of people to work, to pay taxes, to produce, and therefore to grow the economy. These things are inextricably linked.

The Liberal Party is not just saying that this is a terrible plan that the Minister of Finance announced; we are also offering a solution. We are offering an opportunity for the Conservatives to change the plan and moderate it so that it can actually start creating the kinds of jobs we are looking for.

The Canadian Federation of Independent Business suggests that this plan the minister tabled could create about 20,000 to 25,000 jobs. However, we also have economists saying that it could create no new jobs and actually cause a loss of jobs. These are things we have to take into consideration.

What we are presenting is evidence-based. I will go on to say why it is evidence-based, but we are talking about a way the government could help to stimulate businesses to create about 175,000 new jobs. We can compare 20,000 jobs, or a possible loss of jobs, to the creation of 175,000 jobs.

If the government is serious about doing the right thing to help stimulate the economy and create jobs, then the government will listen. This is not about politics. This is not about the Liberals saying they know better than the Conservatives and pointing out what they did; it is about finding the best solution when Canadians are having a difficult time.

This is where we in Parliament should work well together. All of the political parties should look for the best evidence-based solution.

The government has heard our solution. We are suggesting that for every new job created by any kind of business, small, medium or large, the business will get a holiday from EI premiums for two years, the same length of time the government is proposing for its plan. That is the first thing we are proposing.

I want to explain why I say it is evidence-based. When we became government in 1993, we had an unemployment rate of about 14%. By the time we left government, that unemployment rate was down to 6.5%, so that measure surely worked. The evidence shows that when we did something, it achieved the objective.

In 1997 we brought in a new hires program for two years. In this program, for every new job that was created, the company, regardless of its size, was given freedom for two years from EI premiums. That was an important thing. Then we topped that up in 1998 with a new hires program for young people, who were facing an 18% unemployment rate. We brought that down to about 12%.

We are talking about stuff that worked. We said that every business, regardless of its size, that hired a young person between the ages of 18 and 24 would actually get a holiday from EI premiums.

As a physician I have talked, and as a party we have talked, about being evidence-based. It means looking at what works. We can say that it worked. The figures are there. Everyone may deny it, but they are there. Members can go and look them up. It is true. We also started bringing down EI premiums overall. Every year, we dropped those so that by the time we left government in 2005, EI premiums across the board were down for all businesses. That is the way to stimulate work, agreeing that, in fact, it is small and medium-sized businesses that create the majority of jobs in this country.

We are offering a very important solution. This is not something that, again, looking at the evidence, we made up. We can see that this plan the Minister of Finance tabled was a very bad one.

Barrie McKenna, of the The Globe and Mail, said, “Put simply: Growing companies, not small ones, drive economic growth”. He said that growing companies, period, drive economic growth.

He continued, “Governments should want more of them. But [these] policies are sending exactly the opposite signal: Stay small. Don’t grow”.

Then we have Mike Moffatt saying, “...it is clear that firms under the $15,000 EI threshold”, which the current government is setting, “have a big incentive to keep wage increases to a minimum so they do not lose their tax credits”.

Those firms can do a couple of things once they get over $15,000 in EI premiums: they can lower the incomes of their employees, or they can cut their hours of work. This is a disincentive, not an incentive to create jobs.

Sometimes I think the government across the way has to put big flashy things in the window. The Conservatives think it is going to work, but they have not done their homework. They have not actually looked at the consequences of what they are going to do. They have not looked at the outcomes. This is where their plans are nearly always flawed and blow up in their faces.

I also talked about the evidence the Liberals had when we brought in an across-the-board payroll decrease in EI premiums, year after year. Here is what Stephen Gordon, who is an economic professor at Laval University, said:

Reducing payroll taxes is usually a clear win-win situation, resulting in increased employment and higher wages. The Conservatives have passed up this opportunity by creating yet another targeted boutique tax credit.

Instead of making things easier for everyone, the current government has actually created a more complex tax system. It has created these little boutique tax credits. It seems to thrive on giving little boutique tax credits to certain groups, and we have seen that this has not worked. It has not actually resulted in what the government wants.

I like to say that this particular plan by the finance minister is right up there with the brilliant plan, with a $13-billion surplus left by a Liberal government, to cut the GST by two percentage points, which cost $13 billion. One does not have to be an economist to know that 13 from 13 is zero, so the current government ended up with a zero balance at the time it needed it most, because a year later, there was a recession. The government was unable to deal with this. We have seen the snowballing consequences of what the government does.

If the Conservatives really mean to do well by Canadians, it is important that they pay attention. We are not asking to take all the credit. We are saying that if they do it, we will back them up. We will support them on this, because in this House, this is not about playing politics. Sometimes, yes, we do play politics. We are in politics, after all. However, it is most important, at a difficult time in our history, for us to come together, all political parties, to do the best thing, based on evidence and based on what the outcomes are going to show us we will achieve. We would work together to do the right thing to create jobs at this particular time, when people are losing jobs and suffering as much as we know they are.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for her speech. Hearing the 1990s recast in a completely different light was quite enlightening to me.

I do think, as the member has mentioned, that evidence-based policy should be a goal of all parties. I agree with that. Let us start with some evidence from the 1990s. They cuts transfers to provinces. At the same time, the economy was rising, so there were more revenues coming into government coffers.

If we contrast that with the way the government has acted, we have increased and held all our obligations to the provinces in transfers. We also have seen lower revenues for the government because of the recession, the great recession. By the same token, we have kept taxes low and actually have been able to replenish the EI fund, which bore such a toll, going into a negative balance, and made sure that the support of EI during the great recession was there for the people who needed it. To see that fund replenished and to now be able to offer some money back I think is a good thing.

Now, I would like to ask the member a question. Does she really believe that a small-business owner is going to look at firing someone, thereby creating costs and severance and the letting go of a skilled worker just to be able to claim $2,500? To me that seems backwards.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know if the hon. member really understands anything about how policies have consequences for people.

If we have small and medium-sized businesses, which, as we well know, create about 70% of the jobs in this country, and we are using a policy to create these jobs, surely to goodness we want to ensure that these small and medium-sized businesses hire people. If, as the member says, they will not fire people, at least they will not hire anyone, because it will increase their threshold over $15,000. Therefore, this is a disincentive.

I do not know if the member completely understands this. This is not about what we write on a piece of paper. It is what actually happens in terms of people getting jobs.

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

Mr. Speaker, I think that member needs to get a calculator, because the Liberal proposal could be expected to cost as much as $700 million.

Let us hear what Jerry Dias, the president of Unifor, had to say. He has slammed the Liberal plan to misuse the EI funds, saying, “it's as scandalous as recent #CPC changes to make it even more difficult for ppl to qualify”.

I can tell members that in White River, Ontario, right now, they are looking for workers, full-time workers. The problem is that between the 10 years under the Conservatives and the 13 years under the Liberals, they have made it more difficult for people to be trained, for people to go out there and search for jobs, and for people to make a living.

I wonder if she can answer one simple question. Why should Canadians rely on them, when they are the ones who were responsible for the sponsorship scandal and for raiding the EI fund in the first place?

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Mr. Speaker, as a physician, I have to tell members that when we treat a patient or we intervene on a patient, what we look at is what the outcome shows.

When the Liberal government came in, in 1993, there was a $43-billion deficit. We had a 14% unemployment rate, reaching 18% for youth between the ages of 18 and 24--

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

We just have to look at the stats now.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

We are looking at the body on the floor, all right.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Mr. Speaker, shall I sit down, or shall I answer? Will the hon. member allow me to answer? If I am asked a question, I want to answer it.

What we saw was that we actually got rid of that deficit within three years and started to post 10 years of balanced budgets, with surpluses. We put in the largest amount of money ever put into health care, $41.2 billion. It was by Paul Martin, in 2004, for the 2004 health accord.

Money was being spent, innovation was moving, and jobs were being created. Canada was number one in 2000, according to The Economist. It was number one in the world in economic growth.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to address the points raised by the hon. member opposite with respect to the employment insurance credit the government is offering small and medium-sized enterprises, and more generally, what this government has done to create more and better jobs for Canadians in addition to the small business job credit.

Let us start with the obvious one.

Canada has had a remarkable job creation record in recent years. Our prudent management of the nation's finances and careful targeting of incentives to spur our economy's job creators, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises, are, in large part, the drivers behind this success.

The core strength of the Canadian labour market became especially evident following the recent global recession. Despite a weak economic framework, the Canadian economy is one of the strongest in the G7 in terms of growth, production and job creation. Over 1.1 million net new jobs have been created since the beginning of the recovery in July 2009. Today, the number of jobs in Canada has increased by over 675,000 since the pre-recession peak.

That is not all. Over 80% of all jobs created in Canada since July 2009 have been full-time positions. Nearly 80% are in the private sector, and over two-thirds are in high-wage industries. However, while we are extremely proud of our job creation record, as long as there are still Canadians looking for jobs, our work is not done.

Since the end of the great recession, Canada's employment growth has been second only to that of the United States among the G7, at 6.6% compared to 7.3% south of the border.

In light of this, I am pleased to inform the House that the government has a clear plan to do even better. That is imperative given that there are still too many Canadians who are out of work or unable to find a job in their area at a time when skills and labour shortages are emerging in certain sectors.

The need for increased employment and better jobs is the reason why the government published the Jobs Report earlier this year.

The results speak for themselves. Despite significant labour mobility in Canada, Canadian firms are having more difficulty in hiring than the unemployment situation would normally warrant, with imbalances between unemployment and job vacancies persisting in certain regions and occupation groups.

Our government believes that the solution requires a more mobile, flexible, and highly skilled labour force to keep up with rapidly advancing technology and increased worldwide competition.

At this point, I would like to say that I will be splitting my time with the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment and Social Development.

The solution also requires putting small and medium-sized businesses in the best position to create new jobs for Canadians. These businesses play a key role in the economy, and our government recognizes that one way to create jobs is to limit the barriers preventing small businesses from flourishing and becoming more effective job creators.

This brings us to the motion today. The Liberals will suggest that our recent small business job credit will not create jobs and growth but will instead provide a financial incentive for employers to lay off workers. Let me begin by saying how absurd this assertion is.

It is only our government that clearly recognizes the fundamental importance of small businesses in fueling the Canadian economy.

Our government is taking ongoing steps to support jobs and growth, particularly in small businesses. We have frozen EI premiums in order to give small businesses certainty and flexibility. We have cut red tape by eliminating over 800,000 payroll deduction remittances to Canada Revenue Agency by thousands of small businesses in Canada. We have increased the income threshold for small businesses to $500,000. We have reduced the small business tax rate from 12% to 11%.

All in all, small businesses have, in total, seen their taxes reduced by 34% since 2006, but there is more. A recent small business job credit will lower EI payroll taxes by 15% and save small businesses over $550 million over two years. In addition, we have made certain that beginning in 2017, premiums will be set according to a seven-year break-even rate, ensuring that premiums are no higher than they need to be. It is estimated that this measure alone will create 25,000 person-years of employment.

Therefore, I am a bit confused why the Liberals would accuse us of not creating jobs when the facts speak quite the opposite. It reminds all members here today how they just do not understand small businesses. To suggest that small businesses would cut jobs to receive this credit is, frankly, insulting to small business owners across Canada.

I would like to share two quotes that reiterate how out of touch the Liberals are with small businesses and their needs. The Canadian Federation of Independent Business had this to say about the Liberal accusation:

Some have suggested companies will lay off staff or hold off hiring just to stay under the threshold to receive the credit. I’ve got news for them, a small business owner doesn’t have time to research the eligibility requirements and then carefully manage their payroll to receive a few hundred dollars over two years. But $550-million in the hands of Canada’s entrepreneurs instead of the federal government just can’t be a bad thing.

If the Liberals do not feel like listening to the CFIB, they should listen to Canada's largest trade and industry association, which stated:

The cost of labour is one of the top five challenges hurting Canadian companies.... The Small Business Job Credit will help a powerhouse—the thousands of small businesses—of the Canadian economy become more competitive.

Our government is not saying that this is the only thing that we are doing to connect Canadians with good-paying jobs. However, it is a major step in the right direction. I am proud that our government is taking practical measures to help Canadian employers and workers. We are listening to experts, and we are definitely not taking any lessons from the Liberals.

These are the same Liberals who raided the EI account of nearly $60 billion when they were in power. Premiums paid by hard-working employees and businesses, they used as a political slush fund. It is these same Liberals and the NDP attacking job creators with massive tax hikes and ideas like a 45-day work year that would drastically increase EI premiums by 35%, at a cost of over $4 billion.

Today, as the Minister of Finance noted at the recent G20 meeting, many challenges remain and they are no less important than the recent global downturn. With a fragile global economy, we must stay the course with our low-tax plan for jobs and growth.

Canada's labour market has succeeded in meeting recent challenges and performs extremely well compared to most other nations in job creation, yet we can continue and will continue to do better for Canadians. The small business job credit is part of our economic efforts, but as I have described, it is only one very important part. We have demonstrated yet again how we are lowering payroll taxes for 90% of businesses, which is why our government will remain focused on the policies we put in place to create an environment conducive to new investment, economic growth, and most importantly, job creation.

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

Mr. Speaker, this is a very passionate issue for me.

I can say that in White River, Ontario, right now the service industry, the retail industry, the mill, and the construction industry are all looking for workers. I was just at the Canadian Cattlemen's Association's fall picnic here at East Block and it talked about the fact that it has labour shortages as well.

Looking at what my colleague has said, the fact of the matter is that the Liberals took over $50 billion out of the EI fund and these guys here helped them. I am wondering where the member finds the nerve to boast about giving small businesses a $550-million credit on their employment insurance premiums after wiping out a $57-billion surplus that was already in this account.

This is workers' money. It should be used to ensure that they have access to it when they need it the most. Why is it that the Conservatives are taking that money and putting it elsewhere?