Madam Speaker, I am honoured and pleased to speak to the motion moved by the leader of the Bloc Québécois, which is now before the House under business of supply.
This motion is as clear as can be and deserves the unanimous support of all parties in the House. The government should be guided by logic and compassion on this matter, and it should set aside partisan imperatives that detract from this extremely important issue. Let me therefore say that I sincerely hope we will come together to adopt this motion, making it the first step toward a major change to the Employment Insurance Act.
The wording of the motion is very simple:
That the House call on the government to increase the special Employment Insurance sickness benefits from 15 weeks to 50 weeks in the upcoming budget in order to support people with serious illnesses, such as cancer.
As we all know, the government is currently holding extensive pre-budget consultations aimed at informing the Minister of Finance's reflections on the important budget speech he will deliver in the House before too long. This important exercise includes its share of issues that are fundamental to the well-being of the population. It is time for the government to seize this opportunity and show some compassion for people with serious illnesses, particularly cancer. I could build a very detailed and convincing argument in that regard and I am confident that common sense would prevail amongst the members of all parties.
The motion we are debating is quite simple. EI has always been at the core of the concerns and progressive positions developed by the Bloc Québécois over the years. The Bloc Québécois has always fought to improve and enhance the EI system, including creating an independent fund, eliminating the black hole, improving access to regular benefits, ending the classification of unemployed workers based on the claims submitted to the program and, obviously, increasing all types of benefits.
Right now, anyone who has been around a person diagnosed with cancer can see that the special EI benefits for serious illnesses are baffling and absurd. No one in the House can say they have never faced this difficult, stressful reality.
The current system is blatantly unfair to different categories of EI recipients. Some colleagues have already raised concerns or questions about our proposal to extend the existing benefits system from 15 to 50 weeks. I do not think it could get any simpler than that. It is a matter of social justice and equity.
Speaking of equity, I would like to talk about a problem faced by one of my constituents with a serious illness. She was diagnosed with two autoimmune diseases. Her life was turned upside down in a matter of six months. She was entitled to 15 weeks of EI sickness benefits, but that was not enough. After the 15 weeks were up, she ended up on social assistance. That is completely unacceptable. She was battling her illnesses and also battling the system to get benefits so that she could pay her rent and grocery bills. This situation is unacceptable.
According to an in-depth study on the issue by the Parliamentary Budget Officer, the 15 weeks of special EI sickness benefits were originally based on survey data from the Department of Employment and Social Development. According to those data, roughly 23% of claimants return to work immediately following the 15 weeks of benefits. Of the remaining claimants, 82% would take an additional 16 weeks off or more before returning to work. This is a serious situation, as everyone will agree. These people have to struggle not only with illness, but also with immense stress due to financial insecurity. Living on a reduced income is stressful for anyone, but for someone who is also facing a life-threatening health problem, the stress can become unbearable.
As its name suggests, the employment insurance system provides insurance of a certain income threshold in the event of job loss or forced absence due to extraordinary circumstances.
Since the creation of the special sickness benefits program nearly 50 years ago, the labour market as a whole has evolved significantly. The day-to-day reality of millions of individuals has transformed, but very little has changed in terms of the urgent challenge of achieving work-life balance.
Currently, a person who is laid off is entitled to regular employment insurance benefits. The birth or arrival of a child also triggers maternity leave or parental leave. However, if a worker finds out they have a serious illness that requires frequent or prolonged leave, the current system provides the same number of weeks of benefits as for a worker who has to take leave to recover from a physical injury such as a fracture, which ultimately will not jeopardize their long-term future or general health.
This is where there is a problem with the program, and this results in blatant unfairness for people who only want to get better as quickly as possible. No one wants to be ill. No one wants to go through such a challenging situation. It is unthinkable that anyone would want to be ill, to be diagnosed with cancer. I keep coming back to cancer, but the situation and the state of mind is the same for any long-term chronic illness. Cancer is a prime example because it affects almost everyone. It is a real tragedy.
This difficult reality means that a person who receives such news already has to deal with the shock, which can take many weeks to internalize. There are immense emotional consequences. It is not difficult to imagine the range of terrible emotions that overwhelm an individual when they receive that kind of diagnosis. This is when the full scope of the problem comes into play as does the compassionate approach long recommended by the Bloc Québécois.
This is not the first time that our party has called for better access to EI benefits for constituents dealing with a serious illness. The Bloc has taken action at least three times in the recent past by introducing bills to overhaul the act and to enhance benefits.
Members may recall Paul Crête fighting tirelessly for this for years and former Bloc Québécois MPs Jean-François Fortin and Robert Carrier picking up where he left off. Right from the beginning of this important debate, the Bloc was equally open to other parties, calling for a non-partisan approach to this crucial issue that would seek only to correct a terrible injustice.
For example, we supported a similar bill sponsored by Denis Coderre when he was in the House. We can all agree that a lot of water has flowed under the bridge since then and that this is not a new cause for the Bloc.
Unfortunately, we have always come up against unwillingness on the part of both Liberal and Conservative governments to consider fixing this serious problem. Worse still, recent governments have been influenced by financial considerations, citing budget cuts to justify the unjustifiable. Just imagine the cold heartlessness of that approach when a person's health or very life is at stake. It is abominable, despicable even.
I could also highlight another disappointing aspect of the current program by describing in detail the accessibility of caregiver benefits. There is a huge contradiction in compassionate leave. It is easy to imagine the insecurity and distress that a diagnosis of cancer or severe illness causes to the person's family. That is precisely why the caregiver benefits are an integral part of the benefit program.
The reality is quite different. Comparatively speaking, the benefits for caregivers are currently more advantageous than the framework established for someone who is seriously ill. A caregiver providing end-of-life care can technically receive benefits for longer than the current 15 weeks that patients with cancer or any other serious illness are allowed. How very ironic.
All avenues must be explored, and I would humbly submit that we consider the astronomical surpluses in the employment insurance fund. Everything leads us to believe that a fair balance is within reach. We just need everyone's goodwill in order to achieve it.
I firmly believe that there is a strong spirit of collaboration in this House that the Prime Minister cares deeply about. He has a golden opportunity right in front of him.
For the sake of the sick, we must do the right thing. We must demonstrate compassion and fairness. The House must unanimously pass the motion sponsored by the leader of the Bloc Québécois.