Debates of April 13th, 2021

Canada Labour Code

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, work is what makes the world go around. Work produces buildings, buses, tools, a great meal at a restaurant or a concert. These are all ways that people improve the world around them. It is work that clothes and feeds children and takes care of our elders, whether it is in the home or in personal care homes. However, there can be a tendency to value work, particularly paid work, to the point where we forget about other important things in life, like the relationships we have or the effect of the loss of a loved one in the case of Bill C-220.

It is a lesson that the pandemic has very much taught us when we consider some of the culture around going to work when sick, for instance, in the pandemic. We have a tendency to put paid work up on such a high pedestal that other important things like not spreading a virus to members of our communities suddenly do not get the priority they should. As a society, we sometimes have a tendency to put paid work on such a high pedestal that we neglect the other important things in life, whether it is the health of our friends and colleagues in the workplace or ensuring that our colleagues, friends and ourselves take the time we need to grieve in the event of losing somebody really important.

The great virtue of this bill is that it creates a little more space for that kind of humanity to enter into the Canadian economy, to recognize that work is very important and paid work is also very important, but there are other important things in a human life that need to be given their proper due with the time it takes to give them that due. We heard some examples earlier in the debate of the kinds of tasks that have to be accomplished, the kind of work that needs to be done when we lose loved ones as well as the importance of taking the time to grieve and appreciate both the loss of loved ones and the gift they gave in their time with us.

That is why New Democrats are quite pleased and proud to support this initiative. We look forward to follow-up from the government to ensure that the employment insurance compassionate care leave is modified appropriately to ensure that this gift of time for those who have suffered loss is not just a gift for the wealthy, those who can afford it and those who already have the resources to take the extra time without worrying about their rent or putting meals on the table. That is why following up on those employment insurance reforms is going to be very important.

I hope that some of the non-partisanship around this issue, which recognizes the need to take a step back from a sometimes frantic work culture to recognize important things about the human experience, might equally be applied to an effort to get 10 legislated days of paid sick leave for Canadian workers in the same spirit of recognizing that sometimes paid work is not the most important thing. Even though it continues to be important, it is not always the most important thing, and our economic structure has to allow for people to take that time out.

I look forward to this kind of non-partisan co-operation and collaboration and some leadership from government when it comes to the EI sickness benefit, which currently is only 15 weeks. The House of Commons has stated its intention very clearly on a number of occasions, including once by unanimous consent, that the period ought to be expanded to 50 weeks. It was a campaign commitment of the government to expand it to 26 weeks. We need to move forward with that.

What we have seen in the context of this bill is what it can look like when parties come to the table in good faith, recognize some of these things and try to move the ball forward. We wish to see that same spirit of collaboration and swift passage when it comes to other important reforms that may not be particularly about bereavement, but are part and parcel of what I take to be the most important insight behind this, which is that, yes, paid work is important, but it is not the only thing that is important.

We need an economy that recognizes those other things that are important, and we need to give some space and room to those things so people can live a life that recognizes the importance of all those other things and the kinds of work that happen in our society that are not paid but are nevertheless very important to people's lives and to the communities we all live in.

It is in that spirit that New Democrats have collaborated in order to have this bill go as far as it can under the existing rules of Parliament and to try to get it through as quickly as we can so this change might take effect before this Parliament expires.

[Emmanuella Lambropoulos, Liberal, Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for the opportunity to speak on this very important bill. Bill C-220, an act that would amend the Labour Code regarding compassionate care leave is one that, if passed, would make a major difference for so many Canadians at one of the most difficult moments of their lives.

Most Canadians have been a situation where they have lost a loved one or have experienced grief due to the loss of a loved one. Anyone who has experienced knows there is no way of getting around certain things. At the very moment one loses someone so important to them, who has likely been a major part of their life for so long, one has to take care of arrangements one hopes one would never have to make.

It goes without saying that work is the last thing on one's mind when they are going through the death of a family member. There is no way to be productive when one is experiencing such a loss, at least not so soon, and yet grieving employees often return to work before they are ready. Doing so only has a negative impact on their work performance, productivity and careers. We are talking about absences, career interruptions and unplanned resignations.

Our government can do more to support grieving employees. One thing we can do is provide time off so that employees can deal with the stress of losing a loved one. Bill C-220 could provide more time. In fact, this piece of legislation was strong in the beginning and is even stronger now with the amendments that have been adopted.

What is compassionate care leave? Allow me to explain. Compassionate care leave is unpaid leave under part III of the Canada Labour Code that allows an employee to take up to 28 weeks of leave within a 52-week period to provide care and support to a family member who has a serious medical condition with a significant risk of death within a 26-week period, as attested to in a medical certificate.

Employees on compassionate care leave could also be eligible for corresponding employment insurance compassionate care benefits for up to 26 weeks. Currently, compassionate care leave as well as corresponding employment insurance benefits end on the last day of the week in which the person being cared for dies.

Our government recognizes that we have a role to play in providing workers in federally regulated workplaces with the support they need following the death of a family member.

The government provides this assistance mainly under part III of the Canada Labour Code, which provides for a number of types of leave and other support measures for employees.

For example, part III of the code provides for up to five days of bereavement leave, including three paid days for employees who have completed three consecutive months of continuous employment. This leave may be taken during the period that begins on the day on which the death occurs and ends six weeks after the latest of the days on which any funeral, burial or memorial service of that immediate family member occurs.

Next, there is personal leave of up to five days, including three paid days for employees who have completed three consecutive months of continuous employment. It can be taken for various reasons, particularly in case of an emergency, such as the death of family member.

There is also up to 17 weeks of leave without pay for medical reasons if the employee is unable to work for health reasons, including psychological trauma or stress caused by the death of a family member.

Also, there is a right to request flexible work arrangements, which allows employees to request a change to the terms and conditions of their employment related to the number of hours they work, their work schedule and the location of their work. Employees who have completed six months of continuous employment with an employer are entitled to make this request.

Let us get back to Bill C-220 and its amendments.

Bill C-220, an act to amend the Canada Labour Code with regard to bereavement leave, is now stronger and more equitable, and that is thanks to some important amendments. These amendments were recently passed at the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. The amended Bill C-220 would extend bereavement leave by five days, for a total of 10 days, as opposed to extending compassionate care leave, as the bill was originally drafted. This would ensure that all federally regulated employees can get additional time off if they lose a loved one, regardless of whether they are on leave at the time.

The adopted amendments also ensure that a broader group of employees would be entitled to take bereavement leave. Employees on compassionate care leave or leave related to critical illness who are caring for a non-immediate family member who passes away would also be entitled to the 10 days of bereavement leave. This secondary amendment was necessary because those employees concurrently only take bereavement leave when it pertains to an immediate family member. This is not the case for compassionate care leave or leave related to critical illness. The definition of “family member” under bereavement leave does not include non-immediate family members, whereas under compassionate care leave and leave related to critical illness it does. Without the adopted amendment, employees who take compassionate care leave or leave related to critical illness in respect of a non-immediate family member who passes away would not be entitled to bereavement leave.

As amended, Bill C-220 would support all employees in dealing with the loss of a family member, not only those who are on compassionate care leave. This is in line with the government's commitment to provide leave for those who need it most. No Canadian should have to choose between grieving the loss of a loved one and working.

We are very pleased that the amendments were accepted, as they make Bill C-220 more equitable and more consistent in how the government supports employees who experience the death of a loved one.

Thanks to the amendments we adopted, Bill C-220 will give federally regulated private sector employees who lose a loved one more time off to grieve and attend to practicalities, such as making funeral arrangements and sharing the news with family and friends.

This is why it is really great to see that all parties seem to be in support of this bill. Like my colleague before me, I am very happy that our Conservative colleague who came forward with this bill did so in such a non-partisan fashion. I am glad that all parliamentarians are working together to make sure Canadians can properly grieve, have the chance to grieve when they need to, and not be negatively impacted in the workplace.

With that, I invite my colleagues to vote in favour of Bill C-220 as amended so we can support Canadian workers from coast to coast to coast.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege for me to have the opportunity to participate in this debate. This is my sixth year as the member of Parliament representing the great people of Nepean, and in these six years, only a few times have I seen members of all political parties, belonging to various political spectrums and with different ideologies, come together to work as one collaborative team. We did so to produce this legislative product, and I am so privileged to participate in the debate today.

We all agree that losing someone we love is very difficult, to say the least. Time is necessary for grieving and for taking care of things such as planning a funeral and contacting banks and service providers. Having to deal with all of this can make things even more difficult, especially if one has to think about returning to work. To quote Kelly Masotti, vice-president of advocacy for the Canadian Cancer Society, “Imagine being a caregiver every day to your loved one, managing their day-to-day care and, following their passing, being expected to return to work immediately afterwards”. She also said, “Family members, potential recipients of compassionate care leave, may need support as they grieve the loss of a loved one and try to manage numerous strains and stresses on their mental health.”

It is our responsibility as the government to continuously work to make sure that our labour standards reflect our country's evolving workplaces. It is our responsibility to provide workers with the support they need when they need it.

With its adopted amendments, Bill C-220 now has the potential to provide workers with more of the support they need when they lose someone they love, and we are not the only ones to think so. To quote Ms. Masotti one more time, “The proposed bill does just that. It amends the existing framework to better meet the needs of Canadians, to be more practical and to address grief and bereavement.” Moreover, as Mr. Paul Adams from the Canadian Grief Alliance said, Bill C-220, “will create a right for a significantly large number of Canadians to a more generous period to grieve, to collect themselves and to rejoin the world of work.”

In recent years, the government has made several changes to the Canada Labour Code to modernize labour standards. Some of these changes include improving existing leaves and introducing new ones to better support grieving workers. Part III of the Canada Labour Code now provides for a number of leaves that employees can use following the death of a family member. For example, we increased bereavement leave from three to five days. An employee can take this leave during the period that begins on the day on which the death occurs. The right to this leave ends six weeks after the latest of the days on which any funeral, burial or memorial service of the immediate family member occurs. The first three days of leave must be paid if the employee has completed three continuous months of employment. All employees are entitled to five unpaid days of bereavement leave, regardless of their length of service.

We also introduced a new personal leave of up to five days, of which three days are paid for employees with three months of continuous employment. The employee can take this personal leave for various reasons, including in the event of an urgent situation such as the death of a family member.

Finally, employees have access to an unpaid medical leave of up to 17 weeks. The employee can take this leave if he or she is unable to work due to health reasons, including psychological trauma or stress resulting from the death of a family member. We made all these changes to make sure that federally regulated private sector employees have access to a robust and modern set of labour standards.

As for employment insurance, since 2015 we have made substantial legislative changes to better support families. We made changes to make EI benefits for caregivers more flexible, inclusive and easier to access. We also amended the Canada Labour Code in order to ensure that employees have access to job-protected leave when they avail themselves of the enhanced EI benefits.

In 2017, we introduced a benefit that allows eligible family caregivers to receive up to 15 weeks of income support to provide care for an adult family member who is critically ill or injured. In addition, immediate and extended family members of children who are critically ill now have access to up to 35 weeks of benefits that were previously available only to parents.

There is also the compassionate care benefit, which provides up to 26 weeks of benefits to individuals who are away from work to care for or support a family member who has a serious medical condition with a significant risk of death in the next 26 weeks.

As I said earlier, it is our responsibility as the Government of Canada to continuously work to make sure that our employment insurance benefits and labour standards reflect our country's evolving workplaces. To do so, we have always worked with all of our partners.

The bill before us today represents an opportunity for all of us together to provide workers with the support they need when they need it. Now Canadian workers need this bill to pass. For over a year now, too many Canadians have been losing loved ones to COVID-19. Too many Canadians have been grieving, while at the same time trying to deal with the economic hardship and all of the practical business that comes along with that.

We are making sure that all federally regulated employees can get additional time off in the event they lose a loved one, regardless of whether they are on leave at the time of death.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank all of the members who have spoken today. It certainly is rewarding to see so many people from across the aisle not just work in the bipartisan fashion we have seen through this piece of legislation, but be extremely complimentary of each other in their ability to do that. I think it was the member for Elmwood—Transcona who said in his remarks that he hopes that it serves as an opportunity to see beyond partisan lines sometimes so that we can continue in the spirit of moving legislation forward like this.

It is an honour for me to add some remarks to this piece of legislation as well, particularly with what has been going on over the last year with COVID-19. I lost my father-in-law in the late fall of 2020. Losing a loved one is incredibly difficult right now, given the circumstances, if that person is in the hospital suddenly toward the end of their life. It truly has been a struggle and there is not a better time for a piece of legislation like this to come forward than right now, given everything that has been happening.

I think that we can all agree that workers who experience the loss of a loved one can feel shock and grief in addition to having their well-being and effectiveness at work impacted. Quite often the amount of time that people are expected to receive off, or are expected to rebound in, after the loss of a loved one is extremely short, in terms of what is expected of people and based on what we know that people get. We can all agree that more time is quite often needed.

I would point out that our government has taken steps to ensure that workers who experience a tragic event have supports in place for them. We brought in a number of leaves and other protections for employees in federally regulated workplaces, as some of my colleagues have said, following the death of a family member. These included extending the bereavement leave to five days and introducing five days for personal leave. Of course that is with respect to federally regulated workplaces.

That is one of the unique circumstances that the federal government finds itself in. Through acts of Parliament, we are responsible for so many people who work for the federal government: for making sure they are given the resources that they need from a human resources perspective and from a support perspective. We are also responsible for putting forward and implementing legislation that impacts people who are beyond the scope of being directly employed by the federal government.

Although the measures that I just mentioned were brought into place by the federal government, this piece of legislation seeks to fill a huge gap in terms of the workplace outside of and beyond the federal government. To that end, I applaud the member for bringing forward this piece of legislation.

The efforts that we did introduce together, collectively, were the recent changes provided the right to a request for flexible work arrangements in the existing 17 weeks of unpaid medical leave. These demonstrate our commitment, in my opinion, to protecting Canadian workers when they experience a tragedy. However, as I indicated, there is still more work to be done, and it is for that reason that the government supports Bill C-220, an act to amend the Canada Labour Code (bereavement leave).

The amendments that have been spoken about today help to ensure that caregivers who have suffered a loss have more time to grieve and focus on practical necessities, such as funeral planning.

I mentioned earlier that in the fall of last year, my father-in-law passed away. It was not sudden. It was several months coming, but nonetheless, the planning and everything one needs to do at that time can truly become overwhelming. Therefore, it becomes extremely important to make sure that time is given and people have the resources they need in order to go through that process without worrying about what it means to their employment.

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands will have four minutes remaining in time for his remarks when the House next gets back to debate on the question.

The time provided for the consideration of Private Members' Business has now expired and the order is dropped to the bottom of the order of precedence on the Order Paper.

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

Health

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I was watching a CTV panel of journalists, I believe it was in February, and the host asked one of the journalists if they thought it was a strategic error that the government did not do more to ramp up domestic manufacturing capacity for COVID-19 vaccines on either the mRNA or viral vector-based platforms. The answer from the journalist was very simple. They said, “Yes, absolutely.” However, that is water under the bridge, and here we are.

I think all parliamentarians would share my concern that we do not have an adequate vaccine supply in Canada right now. The government can put forward all sorts of talking points, but the reality is that we do not have adequate supply at this moment, so we have to ask how we can move forward. There was news today that the latest shipment of Moderna is once again delayed, and it may be delayed again next week. That vaccine is very important, being an mRNA vaccine, given that the government has advised against giving the AstraZeneca vaccine to those under the age of 55. Supply is an issue.

Also, the Australians today said that they would not be using the AstraZeneca vaccine in their vaccination program against COVID, and the Americans just announced a pause on using the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. At the same time, we have heard reports that the European Union is undertaking potential export restrictions on vaccines and India may consider the same.

Of course, countries around the world are all scrambling to find vaccines, and Canada does not have domestic manufacturing capacity at this moment, so it really becomes a question of how we shore up our ability to procure vaccines from other countries. The government has not been clear on how the confluence of all of these factors is going to affect Canadian supply in the coming weeks. That will really have deadly consequences if there is no clarity on that. The targets change from week to week. Moderna today is a perfect example of that.

The government has not been forthcoming on the question of assurances from our main export partners, and I have a few questions. Has the European Union provided written exemptions to Canada, as it has for other countries? I am talking about a written exemption, not an assurance over the phone, or a wink and a nod, that we would be exempt from export restrictions of vaccines. Has the government also obtained any sort of written assurance from the United States of potential additional doses of vaccines from that country? As well, has the government received written assurances from the Government of India?

I am looking for a very simple response. I hope the answer to all three questions is yes, but we certainly need some assurance, given that the government has not secured domestic manufacturing capacity, that we will be able to get those vaccines in a week's time.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Small Business]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague opposite for her work as opposition critic on the health file and for raising what is the most important issue facing our country at the moment; that is, procuring enough vaccines for all Canadians.

I would like to begin where my colleague opposite began, which is to point out that the domestic manufacturing of vaccines has hardly been a silver bullet for any country. We just need to ask Australia and look at the problems it is dealing with right now.

On the specific issue of the Moderna shipment that was delayed, if my information is correct, it was delayed by about 24 hours. We did receive 150,000 Moderna vaccines today. I would just like to make those two points right off the bat.

The issue my colleague opposite is raising more particularly is with respect to the European Union and where things are with the export restrictions. I am happy to provide some further details with respect to that.

The question of whether Canada has a written exemption is a bit misleading. The only countries in the world that have been put on an exemption lists are low-income countries. There is not a single high-income country on the planet that has received an exemption.

What we have received, as I stated several times in the House and I am happy to repeat it again, are consistent assurances have been received by the both the Prime Minister, from the President of the European Commission, as well as the Minister of International Trade, who received several very strong assurances from her counterparts in both countries in the EU from which we are receiving shipments of vaccines.

I would also point out that these are not just verbal assurances that people can set aside. The proof is really in the pudding. We have received all the export authorizations for which we have ever asked. They have been consistent and timely. Our shipments have not been delayed by these new export restrictions to date, and we have not had any issues in that regard. When there have been some small delays in receiving shipments, which is behind us we hope, they were on the side of the manufacturers because the companies had problems with production.

With the short amount of time I have left, I would like to say this. As much as I am deeply engaged with the file for vaccine procurement and know it is of concern to Canadians, I would point out that Canada is now number three among the G20 countries in total vaccination coverage and is number two among G20 countries in vaccinations per capita, per day, behind only the United States. The United States has indeed vaccinated more people than any other country in the entire world, and I know that is very impressive. Certainly it has had a very strong vaccination rollout campaign, but the reality is that even today the daily death rate in the United States is still three times higher than Canada on a per capita basis. Therefore, we also need to be very careful in our comparisons.

The Government of Canada has taken extraordinary measures to protect Canadians. Their health and security is the number one concern of this government. We are in the middle of a third wave at the moment, and that is obviously very concerning to all of us, so it is important to ensure we continue to focus on what really matters, which is Canadians.

I would like to ask my colleague opposite if she has changed her position since seeing the very disastrous effects of this third wave, and maybe regrets, in some way—

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

The time allocated for the hon. member has expired.

The hon. member for Calgary Nose Hill.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary said, “domestic manufacturing...has hardly been a silver bullet” in addressing the vaccine shortage. That is really shocking. Then she referenced Australia, which closed its borders early instead of suggesting that closing the border was racist or xenophobic. Does she honestly believe Canada's domestic manufacturing capacity is adequate to deal with the vaccine shortage? She might want to retract that statement. It was a little alarming, perhaps misleading and promotes a lot of fear, as her party has been doing on this issue.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I think the only fear that is being promoted is that by the opposition. The actual fact is that a lot of countries that do have domestic manufacturing also need to import vaccines. That was the point I was making.

I noticed that my colleague opposite did not answer the question. She signed a letter urging MLAs in Alberta to go back on lockdown restrictions that are protecting the health and safety of Albertans.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Point of order, Mr. Speaker.

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

There are no points of order in adjournment debate. We have a few seconds left for the hon. parliamentary secretary, and we will let her finish up.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as I said, the health and safety of Canadians has been the Government of Canada's top priority. I really hope that the member opposite agrees and that she retracts her previous signature to a letter urging a provincial government to remove their lockdown restrictions in order to protect their safety.

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the COVID-19 pandemic has had an unprecedented impact on global travel and migration.

Canada’s immigration system came to a grinding halt. Families awaiting reunification, as well as workers, students, caregivers and refugees alike are all deeply impacted. My office continues to hear from an increasing number of frustrated PR applicants who have been in limbo for months, with their applications marked as “complete”, but still processing and awaiting finalization.

These applications have far exceeded the expected processing time. To make matters worse, many of their supporting documents, such as medical documents, have expired as a direct result of the delays.

Similarly, prospective Canadians who have gone through the full process of having their PR application approved are prevented from coming to Canada because their previously approved certificates of permanent residence are also expiring, and they find themselves without a home in their country of origin and unable to make a new one in Canada.

The deputy minister of immigration advised committee members that the department is undertaking a process of individually reaching out to each person whose CoPR has expired and asking if they are still interested in coming to Canada, before taking next steps to renew their CoPR. She herself indicated that this is “labour-intensive.”

Instead of re-processing applications that have already gone through all the steps of being approved for PR, I am calling on the government to automatically renew and honour CoPRs that have expired. I am further urging the government to take the unprecedented step to automatically renew or extend the deadline for other documents that may have expired over the course of the pandemic.

As well, the travel restrictions for CoPRs issued after March 18, 2020, need to be removed so that people can get on with coming to Canada and putting down roots. This would not only reduce the frustrations and uncertainty experienced by the applicants, it would also decrease the demand on IRCC, allowing for IRCC resources to be better used on other application streams struggling with processing delays.

Other immigration streams such as migrant students and workers are also being punished through no fault of their own. As their work or student permits expire, many find themselves out of status. For workers with an employer-specific work permit, they are particularly hard hit. Immigration status precarity makes workers more vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. Many caregivers, for example, due to COVID, are now required to work and live in their employer’s home. This isolation elevates the risks of abuse experienced by the caregivers.

I have talked to caregivers who were infected with COVID by their employer without their employer informing them that they were COVID-positive. One caregiver was even fired after she got COVID from her employer. Some have lost their jobs because their employers were also impacted by the loss of income.

This interrupted time in the caregivers’ employment also penalizes caregivers in their eligibility to meet the two-year work requirement in order to apply for PR and to reunite with their families. With the delays, they risk having their children age out, which means they cannot be part of the PR application.

Action needs to be taken to honour the work of caregivers. They all deserve landed status now.

On processing delays for caregivers, it is startling to learn that caregiver PR applications went from nearly 2,000 in January alone down to only a scant total of six since March. It means that thousands of applications are sitting in the mailrooms gathering dust.

There also is a tenfold increase, from 38 days in February 2020 to 344 days in January 2021, for caregivers to just get an acknowledgement of receipt for their PR application. This further reinforces the fact that processing caregiver applications is not a priority for the government.

This needs to be dealt with. I would note that when the interim program closed, there was a stark reduction in caregiver applications. The barriers for caregivers to meet the eligibility criteria are significant, and it is time for change.

We need to step up and do better.

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for the chance to address the question from the hon. member. Let me say, to begin, that as the newly appointed parliamentary secretary for Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, I very much look forward to working with the hon. member in the coming weeks and months.

The COVID-19 pandemic has been a challenging time for everyone. To protect the health and safety of Canadians, Canada has had to take necessary measures that have had an effect on immigration. However, in terms of restoring operations and increasing application processing capacity, we have made significant gains since last spring. In fact, IRCC has introduced measures to support the processing of permanent resident applications, including spouse or common-law partner sponsorship applications, and is providing applicants additional time to provide documents. Family reunification continues to be a priority for this government. It is key to Canada's future, and we know that, especially as we work to recover from COVID-19. It is important for families to be together in this difficult time, and we are reuniting families by allocating additional resources, streamlining our processes and moving paper applications to digital.

Last year, we introduced a pilot project aimed at digitizing spousal applications. This will allow officers in Canada and abroad to remotely process spousal applications faster and more efficiently. Just last month, we expanded our case processing centre in Sydney and added 62 new staff, who will be primarily assigned to family class applications.

In September, to speed up processing and reduce the wait for couples to reunite in Canada, we increased the number of decision-makers on spousal applications by 66%—

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

I will ask the parliamentary secretary to hold for a moment. We seem to have lost his audio. We will try to get it back.

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Can you hear me now, Mr. Speaker?

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

Yes. We have the audio back now. Perhaps the member could pick it up from the last three sentences. We will carry on, and we will not take away from his time.

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in September, to speed up processing and reduce the wait for couples to reunite in Canada, we increased the number of decision-makers on spousal applications by 66% to reach the goal of nearly 49,000 application decisions by the end of 2020. In fact, no spousal or common-law permanent resident application that is in progress will be closed or refused because of document delays resulting from pandemic-related closures.

As the hon. member is aware, to better support families in Canada, the government has updated its rules to make it easier for immediate family members of Canadian citizens and permanent residents to travel to Canada while respecting all public health protocols and measures, including quarantine. Immediate family members no longer have to prove that they are coming for an essential, non-discretionary purpose. Provided they are admissible, people coming to join their immediate family members need only prove that they are staying in the country for at least 15 days and have a valid passport and travel document. Extended family members are eligible to travel to Canada as long as they meet the criteria and get authorization from IRCC, and this includes people in exclusive long-term committed relationships and their dependent children, as well as adult children, grandchildren and grandparents.

There has been extremely high interest in these two family-related exemptions to travel, and in cases where applications are complete, we are not only meeting our 14-day processing service standard, but exceeding it, with 80% of applications processed within five business days. So far, 35,000 extended and 26,000 immediate family applications have been processed. That is over 60,000 families who are together once again.

We will continue to find innovative and compassionate ways to reunite families, always informed by the advice of our public health experts, who remind us that COVID-19 is still very much a risk to the health and safety of Canadians.

The government has been efficient and nimble in the area of processing and has developed virtual landings and virtual citizenship ceremonies. Canada is the first country in the world to offer online citizenship testing. This will serve us well as we continue to welcome newcomers and strengthen Canada through immigration.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to say congratulations to the parliamentary secretary. I look forward to working with him.

I have to say, though, that caregivers deserve landed status now. To create better efficiencies for IRCC, what the government can do to free up resources is simply automatically renew and provide extensions of current work permits, study permits, visitor visas, expired PR documents, expired certificates of PR and so on. This would save time and resources for IRCC so that it can get on with doing other work that is so urgently needed. The streams the parliamentary secretary talked about in terms of some work being done, I appreciate that, but there is so much work that needs to be done, and the issues that I highlighted earlier are some of those that continue to be outstanding.

On the issue around reunification for family members, the government should suspend paragraph 179(b) so that those who want to bring their loved ones here to be with them while their PR applications are being processed under the spousal sponsorship application would be able to do so.

I urge the government to take action so that we can truly create a system that meets the needs of the community, allows for loved ones to reunite and ensures that caregivers and temporary foreign workers are treated appropriately and fairly.

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in our operations and processing, we have made significant progress, and we are going to continue to work to better serve Canadians and the loved ones they are trying to reunite with.

We have introduced measures to streamline the processing of permanent resident applications, including spouse or common-law partnership applications, and provided applicants additional time to provide documents if need be, if they are faced with challenges due to local COVID-19 restrictions. We introduced a pilot to digitize spousal applications so officers in Canada and abroad can process them remotely, and we increased the number of decision-makers on spousal applications in Canada to reduce couples' wait time. In addition, we have developed virtual landings, citizenship ceremonies and citizenship testing.

We are on track to return to our pre-pandemic processing times, and we will continue to reunite families based on advice from public health experts. I look forward to working with my hon. colleague to move this forward in the most efficient way possible.

Tourism Industry

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to talk today about the tourism communities in the riding of Kenora.

We know that many tourism communities have been very hard hit by COVID-19, and my riding is no exception. The livelihoods of many tourist outfitters, camp and hotel owners and guides, as well as businesses such as restaurants and retail stores, are all reliant on visitors from outside of our region. Canadian tourism operators have already lost a full summer season due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and even if the government is able to meet its vaccination targets, it appears that another season, or at least the majority of another season, will be behind us before the majority of Canadians has access to a vaccine.

We know it is not the case in many other countries, including the United States. I note this as important, because in the Kenora region we rely a lot on tourists from the United States. Many of our regular visitors to the region have already received their first dose of the vaccine, or in some cases are fully vaccinated, so tourism operators in the Kenora riding are very reasonable in hoping that they will soon be able to safely welcome American clients back to their facilities. They are reasonable in hoping that large-scale vaccinations will bring an end to increased restrictions here in Canada and will allow our economy to reopen, so that is why I have been pressing for some clarity and some transparency from the government on when and under what circumstances we can expect to be in a position where those hopes can turn into a reality.

Above all else, these businesses are truly looking for clarity on whether they will have a season this year. I have heard from so many people who say to me that if they are losing another season they just need to know. Obviously, they would prefer not to lose another season and they would love to be able to operate, but their main concern right now is clarity. If they are losing another season or the majority of another season, they hope they can have clear information from the government that will allow them to plan ahead and make the adjustments necessary for that.

We need to have answers to questions such as whether fully vaccinated foreign nationals will be exempt from quarantine restrictions. We need to know how many Canadians must be vaccinated before restrictions can be lifted for our citizens, and we need to know what additional health and safety measures businesses might have to put in place to be able to safely operate this summer. There are many questions along those themes that need to be answered.

In November, I asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance if she could provide any details on the modelling, projections, public health advice or benchmarks that could help answer some of those questions. Unfortunately, she was not able to provide that information at the time. I put forward this question once again in question period not long ago and also did not receive a response. I am not saying that every cabinet minister should have this answer off the top of their head, but the government does have access to public health advice and public health experts who are guiding these decisions, and what we need is transparency from the government on how it is making plans based off of that information.

That is why I am asking, once again, if anyone on the government side can answer any of the questions that I have outlined based on the public health advice that they are following.

[Terry Sheehan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages (FedNor)]

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to respond to the comments made earlier by the hon. member for Kenora regarding the very important tourism sector.

Our government understands how hard hit the tourism sector has been by COVID-19. That is why, since the very beginning of the pandemic, we have been there for the people in the small and medium-sized businesses that make up this vital sector of our economy.

From the very beginning, we have used every tool available to us to support people in businesses who have been deeply impacted by COVID-19. Thanks to our actions, we have introduced programs like the Canada emergency response benefit, the Canada emergency business account, the business credit account program, the Canada emergency wage subsidy, the Canada emergency rent subsidy and the regional relief and recovery fund. Taken together, these programs have helped provide $10 billion of assistance for this very important tourism industry. That is $10 billion to help people survive the crisis, help tourism operators protect jobs and stay in business.

Ten billion is a very big number, so let me break that down further and just focus on the regional relief and recovery fund, the RRRF. To date, the RRRF has provided more than 3,700 tourism businesses and organizations support. In northern Ontario alone, we have helped over 300 businesses stay afloat during this unprecedented crisis. We know that this crisis is not done yet and that is why we will continue to be there for Canadians at home and at work. As we announced in the economic statement in the fall, we have increased the total RRRF funding to more than $2 billion, of which 25% will go to the tourism industry.

We have also introduced another very important measure, the highly affected sectors credit availability program, which provides guaranteed loans from the government that are low interest and up to $1 million for businesses in the hardest hit sectors, like tourism and hospitality.

As we move forward and look toward the end of this historic challenge, we will continue to introduce new measures and adapt existing ones to ensure we are there for Canadians when they need us the most. We will continue to work with our partners on all levels to gather evidence, data and guidance to ensure we keep Canadians safe. We will continue to help our businesses meet the challenges of COVID-19 and be ready for the recovery once it comes.

We are fortunate enough to live in the most beautiful country in the world and Canada's tourism operators help us show off this incredible asset. We are looking forward to the day when it is safe to travel again, but until then Canadians know that we have their backs.

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments from the parliamentary secretary, but unfortunately they once again did not answer my questions.

We know that public health officials and experts are guiding a lot of the decisions on safe reopening but, what I am asking for is transparency from the government. We are asking for clear answers based on the public health advice it is getting on how we might be able to work toward a safe reopening.

In fairness, I originally asked this question five months ago and then again just a few weeks back. The government really has had plenty of time to do its homework, to check with its departments and to figure out some answers on this. If it does not have the answers right now, could someone on that side of the House please start asking these questions and report back to the House? It is very important for the tourism sector, as I am sure the member knows, and this information is badly needed.