Jean-Pierre Blackburn

[Employment Insurance, March 8th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, this past year, while our country was facing a recession, we introduced a series of measures to support those who lose their jobs.

These measures included, first, an additional five weeks of benefits for the unemployed and, second, between five and twenty additional weeks for older workers. Then, we introduced measures to support self-employed workers, who now have access to sickness and compassionate care benefits.

In addition, we froze EI premium rates for employees and employers.

Why is it that, whenever we introduce such fine measures, the Bloc Québécois votes against them?

[The Budget, March 8th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, in the last budget, we put in place a number of measures to support workers. Our program includes work sharing, which I just spoke about, as well as other measures.

The member forgot to mention the improvements we have made to the registered disability savings plan, which allow an RRSP to be transferred to an RDSP.

[The Budget, March 8th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, once again it is interesting to see the Bloc Québécois members concerned about the benefits we are giving to those who have lost their jobs given that every time we propose a measure they rise and vote against it.

We have given an extra five weeks of employment insurance benefits to help people get through this recession. In our budget, we have added 26 extra weeks for those who wish to take advantage of work sharing. Businesses asked for this measure and I believe people are quite happy with it.

[Veterans Affairs, March 4th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind Canadians that Canada's last known veteran of the first world war, John “Jack” Babcock, passed away on February 18, 2010, at the age of 109.

I attended a private memorial service for Mr. Jack Babcock this past Saturday in Spokane, Washington, along with his family and friends, and the Chief of the Defence Staff. It was a moving tribute to a man who lived to a remarkable age.

At the tender age of 15, Mr. Babcock did not hesitate to answer the call for Canadians to serve in the first world war.

From the time that he emigrated to the United States in the 1920s until 2008, when his Canadian citizenship was reinstated, Mr. Babcock always insisted that he was a Canadian at heart. He was always very proud that he was able to serve his country when his country needed him.

Mr. Babcock was not the only one who eagerly served his country. More than 650,000 brave Canadians and Newfoundlanders defended our country during the first world war. Tragically, more than 68,000 of them lost their lives, and more than 170,000 were injured. The entire country, all regions of Canada and Newfoundland, were in mourning.

Despite the terrible price, ordinary Canadians like Mr. Babcock were determined to protect our shared values of freedom, democracy and human rights. In doing so, they defined our nation and provided us with a true sense of what it means to be Canadian.

This is our rich history. The proud and noble tradition passed on to us from the Canadians who served in the first world war, and whom we honour and commemorate today.

And now we mourn the loss of an entire generation. Let us never forget the courage, sacrifices and achievements of these men and women who served our country.

We have announced our plan to mark the end of this era. The Government of Canada will organize a national commemorative ceremony honouring all of Canada's first world war service men and women to pay tribute to their achievements and contributions. This ceremony will be held on Vimy Ridge Day, Friday, April 9, 2010, in Ottawa at the National War Memorial.

We extend our deepest sympathies to the family and friends of Mr. Babcock. We join them in mourning the passing of a great man and a great generation.

[Provincial Choice Tax Framework Act, December 8th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, I would like to come back to what my colleague said and talk again about the harmonized tax.

We believe that the provinces should be treated equitably and have the right to make their own decisions. Why would this Parliament object to the idea of a province harmonizing its sales tax with the federal tax? On what basis should we tell British Columbia and Ontario that we will not let them harmonize their tax with the federal tax?

It is healthy and democratic, in a country that wants the system to work, to enable the provinces to make things easier for taxpayers to understand and to harmonize their taxes. We are not forcing them to do this. They asked us to bring in legislation that would let them harmonize their sales tax if they wanted to. That decision will be up to the governments of British Columbia and Ontario.

I would also like to quote some statistics, because my colleague also said that the country was not in good shape. He mentioned the unemployment rate. Not only did the unemployment rate go down from 8.6% to 8.5% in November, but 80,000 jobs were created in this country. That is significant. It means that the economic action plan is working and is producing tangible results. We do not wish anyone ill, but while Canada gained 80,000 jobs, the United States lost 15,000 jobs. That shows that this government made the right decisions to help workers and stimulate the economy. All sorts of statistics prove it.

I would remind this House that the government has introduced four different measures to support unemployed workers, in addition to new measures to help self-employed workers. Because of a whole series of actions we have taken, Canada's economy is in relatively good shape at present. Of course, it is still fragile, but at least we made the right decisions in taxpayers' interests.

[Provincial Choice Tax Framework Act, December 8th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, since we are talking about economic statistics, I would like to remind my hon. colleague that, according to the numbers for the month of November, the unemployment rate dropped by one tenth of a percentage point from 8.6% to 8.5%. Experts predicted that 15,000 jobs would be created in November, but in fact, 80,000 jobs were created, which means that, in fact, our economic action plan is producing results for the country. I think that if the member wants to talk about the government's record, he should take that into account.

[Employment Insurance, December 7th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, again, the transition assistance envelope is $500 million. We are offering this program to the provinces so that long-tenured workers who have lost their jobs and want to get new training, or make a transition, can benefit from employment insurance during that period.

I repeat: this is a provincial jurisdiction, but we are making money available to the provinces to help workers who lose their jobs. We invite the Government of Quebec and the other provinces to promote this program among workers who have lost their employment.

[Employment Insurance, December 7th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, our transition assistance program allows those who have lost their employment to get employment insurance while receiving training for two years.

We are working together with the provinces since this is a provincial jurisdiction. We invite the Government of Quebec and the other provinces to promote this program in order for more workers or people who have lost their jobs to benefit from it.

[Point of Order, December 2nd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, during question period, I answered a question about self-employed workers and I gave the wrong percentage. When comparing amounts deducted by the government, $1.36 per $100 of earned income, and amounts deducted by the private sector, the latter amount is 19 times greater. It is not the 30% figure that I used.

[Employment Insurance, December 2nd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, we want to offer benefits, such as sickness and compassionate care benefits, to self-employed workers in Quebec. In the private sector, it would cost 30% of the individual's income to get the same protection we will offer. In fact, self-employed workers will have to contribute $1.36 for every $100 of insurable earnings, instead of 25 times more. It will be much less expensive for self-employed workers in Quebec.

Why are they trying to prevent us from offering something that self-employed workers want—benefits when they are sick or when they must take care of a sick child or family member?