Jane Stewart

[Human Resources Development, November 20th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for providing me with the documentation with which he has some concern. Indeed, I will undertake to review it with my officials to ensure that employees are working within the code of conduct that is respectful of individuals and of course the Privacy Act.

I also want to thank the hon. member, however, for recognizing and supporting those members of my department who have the responsibility to ensure that those who apply for employment insurance are indeed eligible for it.

[Employment Insurance, November 20th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, what I find scandalous is that the member continues to ask about expanding benefits in the employment insurance fund when it is he and his party who voted against Bill C-2, a bill that was specifically brought in to support seasonal workers.

I would ask him what he says to the 340,000 Quebecers who are now receiving money as a result of that bill being passed when they ask him why he voted against it.

[Employment Insurance, November 20th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, on this side of the House we have taken a balanced approach to managing the employment insurance fund. That means on the one hand watching employment insurance premiums come down every year since 1994 where they began at $3.07 and are now at $2.25. On the other hand, where study and proof warrants, we make and expand our benefits.

At a time when more Canadians are turning to the employment insurance fund, I believe that that balanced strategy pertains today as well as earlier.

[Employment Insurance, November 19th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, let me say again that the government has continued to take a balanced and prudent approach to managing employment insurance.

I would remind the House that as a result of Bill C-2 we have changed the system to benefit seasonal workers. If the Bloc would have had its way, that bill would never have passed and the 340,000 Quebecers who are now benefiting from those changes, from the elimination of the intensity rule, for example, would not have received their repayments if it had been up to the Bloc.

[Employment Insurance, November 19th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I would remind the hon. member that in the annual monitoring assessment report done by the Employment Insurance Commission, it indicates that fully 88% of all Canadians in paid employment would be eligible for employment insurance should they need it.

I would also point out that our government has continued to take a prudent and balanced approach to managing the employment insurance fund. I would suggest that in these uncertain economic times that formula continue to be the one we should follow.

[Committees of the House, November 9th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, in accordance with Standing Order 109, I am pleased to submit two copies, in both official languages, of the Government of Canada's response to the report of the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, entitled “Interim Report: Access to Higher Education and Training”.

Mr. Speaker, in accordance with Standing Order 109, I am pleased to submit two copies, in both official languages, of the Government of Canada's response to the 4th report of the Standing Committee on Human Resources and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, entitled “A Common Vision: Interim Report”.

[Employment Insurance, November 8th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I say again that changes were made. They can be found in the changes in Bill C-2. They can be found in the decisions that we made to make the small weeks pilot project permanent and in changes to undeclared earnings.

What is also very important to understand is that our members of parliament are working with their communities to find new ways of diversifying their economies because Canadians want jobs.

[Employment Insurance, November 8th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, the commitments that we made were kept. As a result of decisions taken by the government, improvements to the employment insurance system have been made.

I want to point out to that side and to the House that the Bloc chose to vote against those changes. It chose to vote against support for seasonal workers in the Gaspé and right across the country.

[Employment Insurance, November 6th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, as a result of consistent monitoring and prudent changes, the employment insurance system is there and is stronger than ever to support Canadians should they need it.

I remind the hon. member that the government has taken a balanced approach, consistently reducing employment insurance premiums while increasing the benefits. The government will continue that approach and it will serve us well in these difficult times.

[Employment Insurance, November 6th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, we are concerned about the potential impact of the recent decision on workers in the softwood lumber industry. As I have said in the House before, we anticipate the majority of workers in the softwood lumber industry will be eligible for employment insurance should they need it.

Aside from income support the hon. member will know that we make significant transfers to the provinces for use in the active measures, the part 2 benefits for individuals. Now is the time to use those benefits should the workers need them.