Jean Augustine

[Petitions, May 10th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I have several petitions from Newfoundland asking Parliament to establish national policies to control and contain the incidents of chronic fatigue syndrome and multiple chemical sensitivities in Canada, and to ensure, care, treatment, comfort and dignity for persons afflicted with these illnesses.

[Poverty, May 9th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, 1996 has officially been declared the United Nations international year for the eradication of world poverty. Can the secretary of state tell the House what Canada is doing to play its part in the international arena to help eradicate world poverty?

[Privilege, May 6th, 1996]

Yes, Mr. Speaker.

[Privilege, May 6th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on this question of privilege because I feel an unfair and inaccurate portrayal of my actions has been made in the House by the member for North Vancouver, as reported in Hansard , May 2, 1996, pages 2276 and 2277.

Never have I heard in the House a member identified by their riding and their colour.

In terms of the remarks made by the member for Nanaimo-Cowichan, the member for North Vancouver identified me as the member for Etobicoke-Lakeshore who is black, portrayed me as being visibly very angry about the remarks made by the member for Nanaimo-Cowichan, and portrayed me as yelling very loudly in the House, screaming and appearing hostile.

I did not scream or yell. I have had no occasion to speak with the member to show any hostility. I walked over to a member I identified as someone I thought might want to separate himself from the clipping that was circulating and said "have you seen this?" I then walked across the floor. Whatever shouting went on may have taken place by Reformers on the other side of the House or members on this side of the House.

[Employment Insurance Act, May 2nd, 1996]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to speak on the report stage of Bill C-12, an act to amend the employment insurance act.

I want to speak on the intensity rule. The government believes steps had to be taken to protect the integrity of the employment insurance system, to ensure the millions of workers who contribute premiums continue to have confidence in a system which is both equitable and sustainable.

In seeking a solution which is fair and balanced I have proposed two very necessary amendments to Bill C-12. I am pleased to stand before the House today to report on these two amendments and to encourage opposition support for these two necessary amendments. These amendments will increase fairness and will help those people most in need. Those are the people the opposition members also should care about.

The first amendment I proposed would exempt claimants in receipt of the family income supplement from the intensity rule. This would affect claimants and families with annual earnings of $26,000 or less.

The second complementary amendment would see the provision of a credit to those who receive a reduced benefit as a result of working while on claim. An example of this would be if individuals claimed benefits for 24 weeks but due to working while collecting benefits their actual benefits are reduced by 50 per cent. These individuals would then be assumed to have accumulated only 12 weeks of benefits for the purpose of the intensity rule. Therefore the next time they file for employment insurance benefits they would not be affected by the intensity rule.

When considering this legislation we examined carefully ways to introduce reforms that are fair to people facing hardships. We tried to maintain incentives that would encourage people to take work when it is available, while at the same time ensuring all regions in the country are treated fairly and equitably.

It is worthy to note that to achieve this balance and fairness minimal cost is involved. We sought a way to ensure this legislation would help those people most in need. Other amendments to Bill C-12 will bring changes to the gaps in earnings, to the divisor, which will mean people with low incomes and in high unemployment regions are not punished for circumstances often beyond their control.

As a part of this package of amendments, my colleagues agreed with me the intensity rule change was necessary. I believe that rule was treating too harshly low income families, particularly those living in high unemployment regions. Under the original proposal the intensity rule would reduce the benefit rate by 1 per cent for every 20 weeks of regular benefits collected in the past five years up to a maximum of 5 per cent.

The family income supplement will benefit 350,000 Canadians. I consider this supplement to be one of the many positive features of this legislation. It will ensure that claimants most in need of assistance will have the means to fulfil their family responsibilities. It will mean that low income claimants, perhaps with young families, will be able to obtain employment insurance benefits worth up to 80 per cent of their work income instead of the 55 per cent normal benefit rate.

Having fought for and won the inclusion of this basic income benefit level for low income families, I did not want to see this value undermined. We did not want to subject vulnerable members of our workforce to an intensity rule that would erode the value of their benefits by as much as five percentage points.

Studies show that 188,000 claimants, ,or 54 per cent, receiving the family supplement would be affected by the intensity rule.

While accepting the importance of maintaining the integrity of our employment system, it is important that we exempt family supplement recipients from the intensity rule, therefore protecting those Canadians most in need. To my mind, any family living on an income of under $26,000, which is the threshold for the family income supplement, has because of its difficult circumstances, sufficient incentive to take whatever work is available.

The object of this reform is to help Canadians find and keep work. By exempting them from this rule, these claimants would on average see their total benefits increase by $128. Overall benefit payouts would increase by $24 million.

The family supplement, by providing a somewhat larger benefit to low income claimants with children, will mean a bit of extra money available for those individuals to spend on such things as child care, in order to participate in employment benefits or to take additional training that would lead to a good job.

We have also recognized the intensity rule is meant to provide an extra incentive for people to work as much as they can. It is a reality that many people work while they are collecting insurance benefits. Over a period of time claimants on EI may collect half of what they are entitled to because they may have earnings from part time work or small jobs.

Under the initial bill, if a claimant collects 50 per cent of what the claimant is entitled to collect while on EI for 24 weeks, the entire 24 weeks would count when the intensity rule is applied to this person's future claim. We have agreed this part of the intensity rule is not only unfair but is an unintended disincentive to work. My Liberal colleagues have agreed with me on this.

My second amendment to Bill C-12 would give people credit for work while on claim. By changing the intensity rule to account for work while on claim, we are encouraging claimants to accept whatever work is available, whenever it is available. This recognizes the principle that no matter how little or how much work is actually available, it has to pay people to work.

The vast majority of people would rather be working than receiving benefits. I see this change to the intensity rule as a positive and fair measure. Claimants subject to the intensity rule who work while on claim will earn work credits which will be prorated to reduce the impact of the intensity rule on future claims.

This amendment will encourage a trend toward a greater work effort creating more jobs for Canadians.

These amendments agreed to by my Liberal colleagues show that if we fix the gap, if we adjust the divisor, if we change the intensity rule, we will have a better bill. We will do something for Canadians.

I am encouraging support from my opposition colleagues. We will come a long way to increase fairness in the employment insurance system both to individuals and to regions, to provide additional incentives to work, recognizing the lack of work opportunities in high unemployment regions.

An amended Bill C-12 with the gap, the divisor, the intensity rule all amended will create a system that will help create more jobs, that will help get more people back to work, that will support the federal job strategy. An amendment to the intensity rule will, most of all, create a system that is fairer for those in the workforce and for those who are not.

I urge my colleagues to please support these amendments, which will make this a fair and equitable bill for all Canadians in the workplace.

[Human Rights, April 30th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, a member of the House has made many statements that are offensive to Canadians and many members of the House. The Reform Party whip is quoted as saying he would fire or move to the back of the shop a homosexual or a black employee who offended racist or bigoted customers and caused him to lose business.

Would the Minister of Justice please explain about human rights legislation in Canada that would protect individuals like me from discrimination in employment?

[Breast Cancer, April 29th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, "Survivors in Search of a Voice: The Art of Courage" is a

unique collection of art works inspired by the stories of pain, hope, fear and courage of breast cancer patients and survivors.

This internationally acclaimed art exhibit of 24 of Canada's top women artists appearing this week at the Government Conference Centre was inspired by 100 breast cancer survivors who told the artists of their life and death struggles with cancer. It is from these moving experiences that this show's powerful images emerge.

Breast cancer strikes one out of every nine women in Canada. "Survivors in Search of a Voice" has become a monument to the courage of women and their families in their fight against breast cancer.

We can numb to the realities of the daily battles for life that happen around us, but I encourage members of the House and of this community to support much needed breast cancer research, education, programs and services by taking the time to view this exhibit and to become a partner in this endeavour.

[Etobicoke North Byelection, March 26th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, good news, good news. A new Liberal swept to victory once again last night in the Etobicoke North byelection. This proves once again that the people of metro Toronto have faith in the direction of the Liberal Party and its ability to govern this country.

It is interesting to note that in this byelection the Reform Party gained only eight more votes than it received in 1993. Only eight more votes despite a considerable sum of money and a great amount of energy put into trying to win voter support in Etobicoke North.

I ask you, Mr. Speaker, is this a strong second? It is not even striking distance. The voters of Etobicoke North have spoken. They support the policies and vision of the Liberal government. They recognize the Liberal government is good for Ontarians and is an excellent government for the people of Ontario.

Welcome to the member for Etobicoke North.

[Racism, March 21st, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, March 21 marks Canada's eighth anniversary of observing the international day for the elimination of racial discrimination. Today we are reminded that racism still exists and of the challenges we face each day to take a stand for the values we hold dear as Canadians: mutual respect, understanding, equality of opportunity and justice.

This year's fourth anniversary of the end of apartheid in South Africa is a poignant reminder of the will of the people to end the oppression of racism. Today we join with the citizens of the world who represent every religion, colour and racial origin in a mutual commitment to end discrimination and racism.

Through education true respect for each other's differences and an awareness of each other's strengths and struggles can be achieved. Let all of us of every colour, race and religion pledge ourselves on this day to live together in united harmony as one people of many colours under one flag.

[Communications, March 14th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, good news. The Etobicoke community world wide web line is now in operation.

The community web site will serve as a free storage resource for youth, community groups, small business or anyone facing barriers to access to the web.

The Etobicoke Board of Education, in partnership with the Etobicoke Joint Adjustment Committee, have created the world wide web site to enable individuals to gain an understanding of how to operate within the Internet system and to provide the potential for new opportunities in the highly competitive business world.

With access to the world wide web becoming a necessity in today's rapidly changing technological world, the Etobicoke community world wide web site will promote economic development within the global multimedia market.

By surfing the Internet in Etobicoke-Lakeshore we are creating jobs and building a smarter community.