House of Commons photoLost his last election, in 2011, with 35% of the vote.
Product Labelling June 8th, 2009
Once again, I would like to remind members why the government wants to clarify this situation and establish what is a product of Canada and what is processed in Canada. The purpose is to let consumers know what they are getting.
We moved in this direction after conducting consultations, which does not mean that we ignored the comments of processing associations and others.
Employment Insurance June 3rd, 2009
Mr. Speaker, once again, this is a perfect example of the work we are doing to support people who are losing their jobs. During an economic crisis, a person could have worked 20 years for a company, when it is suddenly shut down. These people need much longer training. We are offering them this training through the program we set up this week. That is $500 million that will ensure that workers are paid for two years while they receive training.
In addition, there are 3,300 companies that take advantage of job sharing right now. We are taking action. We are helping our workers and people who lose their jobs.
Employment Insurance June 3rd, 2009
Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois members certainly do not know how much money we are putting towards supporting our workers while there is a recession and other major economic difficulties. This year, we have put $7.3 billion towards supporting workers. Furthermore, we have taken action to make changes, by adding five weeks to EI, among other things. They were offering two. We offered five, and they even voted against it.
Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act June 2nd, 2009
Mr. Speaker, I have listened to the hon. member's speech, as well as those from several representatives of the Bloc Québécois.
The hon. member said that it was not good for the Canadian economy to have a free trade agreement with Peru and other countries. If our country produced goods just to meet the needs of Canadians, does he think that he and I and those watching us would have a more prosperous life? The answer is no.
Canada's strength is that we are very productive and in a position to export our products throughout the world, which gives us an economy that is far stronger than that of other countries.
That said, I travelled to Peru when I was Minister of Labour to discuss, among other things, the side agreement on labour rights. From my discussions with my Peruvian counterpart, the labour minister of the day, as well as other representatives of that country, I understood how well Canada was perceived internationally as far as workers' rights are concerned. I also understood the leadership role Canada could play in these countries.
The hon. member is likely not aware that between 50% and 60% of companies in Peru are currently not registered with the state, which means that the state does not collect any kind of taxes and is unaware of working conditions. With this agreement, businesses will now have to be registered and this will be to the advantage of the people of Peru and the workers. What is more, the agreement respects—
Supply Management June 1st, 2009
Mr. Speaker, when we begin discussions with the European community, our aim of course is to increase exports overall in these countries, especially since we are an exporting country. That said, I want to remind the member that the House of Commons has decided to protect supply management and government has adopted this position.
Supply Management June 1st, 2009
Mr. Speaker, I would once again point out that this House passed a unanimous resolution to protect supply management. And we are doing so in our negotiations with the WTO and in our discussions with the European Union. Our intention remains to protect supply management.
Employment Insurance May 27th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, our measure gives an additional five weeks of employment insurance benefits. That means that a person who was entitled to 30 weeks will get five more weeks with the measure the Conservative government has put in place.
Do we know the estimated number of persons who were going to benefit from that measure? It has been estimated at 400,000. They were proposing two additional weeks, which would have meant those people would have had nothing more. We are giving five more weeks—
Employment Insurance May 27th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, once again, the Bloc Québécois are continuing to be unreasonable. On the one hand, they are criticizing the size of the deficit, while on the other they are constantly proposing measures to make it bigger still.
The Bloc Québécois cannot attack us by saying we have not done anything for the unemployed. First of all, we have added five weeks of employment insurance. Second, we are giving 18 more weeks of work-sharing, and third we are giving $3 billion for training, $500 million of which we have just announced. This will enable laid-off workers to receive up to two years of employment insurance.
They voted against it.
Employment Insurance May 26th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, I will address those listening to us. According to their proposal, a worker who becomes unemployed and is entitled to 30 weeks of employment insurance, would receive the same 30 weeks of benefits, but the benefits would start two weeks earlier and end two weeks earlier. With our proposal, if a worker unfortunately becomes unemployed and is entitled to 30 weeks, they will receive an additional five weeks at the end. This represents about $2,000 for someone receiving weekly benefits of $400.
The Bloc voted against our proposal providing an additional five weeks. They were against it.
Employment Insurance May 26th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, I would like to again remind this House and the Bloc Québécois members, who do not understand anything, that our employment insurance system works as follows. If the unemployment rate is higher in a given region, a shorter period of employment is usually required in order to qualify for benefits. However, if there are practically no unemployed people or the unemployment rate is low in a region, a longer period of employment is required to qualify for benefits.
Here is what one journalist had to say today in Le Devoir: “The 360-hour measure would result in considerable costs and a higher deficit, which—”