Debates of Sept. 29th, 2020

Motion that debate be not further adjourned

[Carla Qualtrough, Liberal, Delta, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we are trying as much as possible to parallel these new benefits to the EI system, because that system has many benefits, such as providing the incentive to work and transitioning workers back into the workforce, as well as the ideas of working while on claim and accessing training. We announced last week a $1.5-billion investment in training to be delivered through our workforce development agreements with the provinces and territories.

The plan was laid out last week in the Speech from the Throne. We have an ambitious goal of creating a million new jobs. That will be done in a number of ways, whether it is by shoring up and fortifying jobs, or filling the jobs we have in this country that are available. A lot of that is due to a skills mismatch. We want to create strategies to develop new jobs with appropriately skilled workers. One thing we hear time and time again, both nationally and internationally from employment ministers, is that training has got to be at the heart of any economic—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

The hon. member for Shefford.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, once again, we cannot oppose this legislation because we need it. Our local businesses are asking that the CERB be changed to include an incentive to work, something the Bloc has been requesting for weeks, even months.

Once again, there is the issue of cynicism. The Liberals are putting parliamentarians back to work and then taking their work away as we return from a period of prorogation that took its toll on our economy and democracy. Upon our return, the government introduces major legislation but limits the time for debate. Do the Liberals like this culture of cynicism? Do they enjoy limiting our role as parliamentarians?

[Carla Qualtrough, Liberal, Delta, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we have put a lot of effort into ensuring that there are no disincentives to work. These new benefits really work like employment insurance: People must be looking for work, be available for work, accept a reasonable job offer and be present in the country. They really need to be actively looking for work.

It is always more beneficial to work than to not work and receive benefits.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, as an opposition member of Parliament, I want to begin by thanking the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion. I am absolutely confident that she has been working diligently and very hard. She was one of the few ministers to actually say out loud that she would have perhaps handled the WE Charity scandal a little differently.

I would still like to say that I regret we have such a short amount of time to debate this critical legislation. I would like to ask the minister if, instead of constantly trying to fill the gaps, cover the holes and rescue people who are left behind, she thinks it is time to bring in a guaranteed livable income.

[Carla Qualtrough, Liberal, Delta, BC]

Mr. Speaker, as I said, this pandemic has really revealed the gaps in our social safety net. We have taken a more targeted approach than perhaps a basic income approach would have been. We are trying to give more to the people we thought needed it the most, particularly workers and their families, and the most vulnerable.

However, I think there is an important conversation to be had in this country about income support, about how we can seamlessly incentivize transitioning to work instead of putting barriers in place that prevent people from actually working because they so desperately need the services, programs and supports they get when they are on social assistance. There are really important conversations that need to be had.

However, today we are talking about employment income and replacement support for workers who are impacted by COVID-19. Let us not in any way take that as me saying those other conversations are not important.

[Warren Steinley, Conservative, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I have a quick question for the minister across the way.

She talked about creating jobs. The Liberals talked about creating a million new jobs in the throne speech, which was very vague on details. Then the minister said it was going to be done through training. There would be training, and the jobs that are vacant right now would be filled.

My question for the minister is as follows. We are at 10% unemployment. We have the highest unemployment rate of the G7 countries across the world. If there are jobs that are going to be filled, why are they not being filled right now? If people are going to be trained, what are they going to be trained for? The Liberals say they are going to create a million new jobs in the new green energy industry.

What I would ask is for the government to clear the path for energy workers to go back to work now. There is 20 billion dollars' worth of private investment ready to go in Alberta and Saskatchewan. If the private sector could be harnessed, that would do a lot more good than training people for jobs that are not available anywhere in the country.

[Carla Qualtrough, Liberal, Delta, BC]

Mr. Speaker, even though we have an incredibly high rate of unemployment, there are also jobs out there. There are businesses that require appropriately skilled workers, and those are the jobs I was talking about when I was talking about filling jobs.

We know there is a skills mismatch in this country. We know that we need to have a targeted, incredibly sophisticated training strategy coming out of this pandemic to make sure that workers have the skills of the future that will get them the jobs of the future.

We also know that workers want to be properly skilled. They want to get the jobs that will provide for their families. They want to avail themselves of the opportunities to earn a good living. They can do that, and we can help by investing in skills training.

Again, these programs are delivered through the provinces and territories, and we provide the funding. It is very successful. Many of the training programs we have in this country are delivered by the provinces. I look forward to seeing what they can do with even more resources.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for her speech.

I think steps in the right direction have been taken. Access to employment insurance has been a big problem for years. The NDP has been calling for it, and we welcome it.

I have three quick questions. Since these are temporary programs, when can we expect permanent EI reform? Will self-employed and freelance workers be included? Will there be 50 weeks of sick leave for people who are sick and on employment insurance?

[Carla Qualtrough, Liberal, Delta, BC]

Mr. Speaker, in answer to those three questions, we have already started working on EI reform. We have set the stage for some very important conversations with Canadians about a new iteration of the EI system that will be more generous, more accessible and more inclusive.

These are issues we will be looking at over the coming months. We need to act fast though, because we know we need a better system. We want to include self-employed workers, but we have to figure out how to do that. It is very hard. No other country does it particularly well. However, there are some examples out there that show it can be done creatively.

Regarding EI sickness benefits, our government committed to increasing them from 15 to 26 weeks. We remain in favour of that. We will do it as soon as possible.

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Mr. Speaker, we have been cramming this debate through at the last minute when we should have brought it up over the summer, discussing it among ourselves and the members in the House.

The members opposite have talked about how they want to be part of a team, yet they do not want to hear any aspect of what is going on from the other side of the House.

I think the minister should be very familiar with the fact that Service Canada is now asking employees for records of employment. Records of employment, which are normally handed out to people once they have been released, gone on leave or are no longer working, are now sitting somewhere.

The reality is that the Phoenix organization, which the member is very familiar with, has said that if it gives out records of employment now, while people are still employed at a minimum amount, they will not be recognized after the fact for finances. These are discussions that should have gone on beforehand.

Where does the minister stand on Phoenix as it deals with people transitioning into that aspect of employment insurance?

[Carla Qualtrough, Liberal, Delta, BC]

Mr. Speaker, after still having a bit of PTSD from my time with Phoenix, one of our number one priorities was to make sure that we could deliver for Canadians. We need systems that are reliable, efficient and can deliver quickly.

We have learned a lot from our experiences with the Phoenix system. I can assure colleagues that, if we are asking for records of employment from some employees, those records of employment will not, in any way, be impacted by the workers' application for benefits.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, for several days now, our Liberal friends have been emphasizing co-operation and accusing us of wanting to pick a fight. In my view, a good way to co-operate is to admit to being wrong or making mistakes.

Why will the Liberal government not simply admit that it was wrong to prorogue Parliament and make Quebeckers and Canadians wait for six weeks? If it would acknowledge that mistake, perhaps we could start with a clean slate and work together once again.

We managed to work together for the aluminum sector. The Liberals acknowledged the mistakes they had made during the CUSMA negotiations. We worked together and came up with a solution. We can do it again.

[Carla Qualtrough, Liberal, Delta, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we were flexible when we were developing the details of our plan six weeks ago.

We understood that school was going to reopen. We did not know what that was going to look like. We did not know the August job numbers. We did not know what state the pandemic would be in when we put forward this legislation, so we signalled very clearly that there would be flexibility in our approach to these benefits.

Certainly, I have tried my best to work collaboratively with my colleagues and with my critics. I have felt, time and again, that our laws have been bettered during this pandemic because of that collaboration. I think that is what is in the best interests of Canadians.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

It is my duty to interrupt the proceedings at this time and put forthwith the question on the motion now before the House.

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Pursuant to an order made Wednesday, September 23, 2020, we will not proceed to a voice vote. I see a member rising.

And five or more members having risen:

Call in the members.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

The list of members voting by video conference has now been established for use by the table.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

As mentioned earlier, assuming that you did hear the question, if you wish to register your vote and are not able to do so due to technical difficulties, use the raise hand function and the Chair will recognize you.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #2

Proceedings on the bill entitled An Act relating to certain measures in response to COVID-19

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I declare the motion carried.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Last night at the vote, I clarified that members need to have their video on from the time the vote begins and the question is read until the end. I have a list of 25 individuals who shut their video off or were not here. While I will not read out their names nor send you the screenshots, I would remind you to remind members that in the future, as the government can rise or fall on these votes, it is critical that their video be on from start to finish.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I thank the hon. member for Sarnia—Lambton for that reminder.

I want to remind all members that the video must remain on from the beginning to the end.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have a comment in that regard.

I saw the member for Calgary Nose Hill leave and come back in during the vote. I do not know whether that is allowed, so this should be clarified. I also saw the deputy leader of the Conservative Party come in and then leave.

I am not blaming anyone. We are in a situation where we are all learning together. Is this allowed or not? I can more readily overlook this than some who refused to return to the original vote as requested yesterday by the Bloc Québécois member. We have more class than that.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

The hon. member for Calgary Nose Hill would like to respond.