Kellie Leitch

[Employment Insurance, September 27th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, let me be clear. Our government will continue to provide temporary financial assistance to unemployed Canadians who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own while they look for work or upgrade their skills.

We are also taking measures to match Canadians with the jobs that are available in their communities.

Our government's top priority is the economy, and we are proud of the 770,000 net new jobs that have been created since the end of the recession.

The member may not have heard this so I will repeat it. As I mentioned earlier in my speech, there will be job postings twice a day for chosen occupations within communities as well as postings for jobs that are related occupations in other geographic regions. People will be receiving those.

Our government is working to help Canadians find jobs in their local areas specific to their qualifications.

For those who need employment insurance, it will be there when they need it, as it always has been.

[Employment Insurance, September 27th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, our top priorities are job creation, economic growth and long-term prosperity for Canadians.

Our government remains committed to providing temporary income support to unemployed Canadians who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own while they look for work or upgrade their skills.

However, if there is one thing that we should do better, it is matching Canadians with the jobs that are available in their communities.

We need to ensure that Canadians have access to and are skilled enough for the jobs that are being created. Full-time jobs have been increasing across many occupations and many industries. In fact, from July 2009 to May 2012, employment grew by more than 770,000 jobs. This represents the strongest growth by far among G7 countries. Of these 770,000 jobs, 90,000 are full-time positions. Statistics Canada indicates there were 250,000 job vacancies across the country last month.

What are we going to do to help unemployed Canadians find jobs?

Our government is committed to making targeted common-sense changes to the EI program that encourage Canadians to stay active in the job market either by working or looking for jobs and removing disincentives to work.

We will provide enhanced labour market information to claimants to support their job search efforts, including enhanced online job alerts. EI recipients will now get job postings twice a day for those chosen occupations within their community, as well as postings for jobs in related occupations in other geographic regions. This will enable them to make more informed decisions about how to conduct their job search.

We will also strengthen and clarify what is required of claimants who are receiving EI regular benefits. The definition of “suitable employment” will be based on a number of criteria, such as working conditions, hours of work and commuting time. Personal circumstances will also be taken into account. EI claimants will not be expected to take a job that is hazardous to their health or physically difficult for them to perform.

Many employers have said that they are facing significant skills and labour shortages and they need to have access to temporary foreign workers.

The government will ensure better coordination with the temporary foreign worker program and the EI program. We want to ensure that Canadians who are available and have the right skills have the first crack at these jobs. It only makes sense.

For people who are unable to find employment either because opportunities do not exist or they are not reasonably matched, EI will continue to be there for them as it always has been in the past.

[Helping Families in Need Act, September 27th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the opposition parties for their support of this very important piece of legislation.

One thing we all have to keep in mind is that a substantive portion of the bill is about critically ill children. It is about ensuring that those families are well supported when they absolutely need it the most.

I do not know if any members in the House have experienced receiving a telephone call, asking them to come to the hospital to see their child or grandchild, but it is a horrible circumstance, I am sure.

I would like to ask the member opposite why he wants to mix all the messages here. I think we are all in common agreement. We all believe this is something that should be moved forward expeditiously. Why is there all the mixed messages when we should be focused on ensuring that this happens as expeditiously as possible?

[Helping Families in Need Act, September 27th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite and his colleagues for supporting this legislation.

We held significant consultations with people to find out exactly what they needed and desired. It was very evident that families with a critically ill child need help, whether that child be suffering from cancer, as my colleague from the NDP mentioned, or another serious illness. Indeed, the parents I meet in the emergency department are in need. It is a very tough time for them and we want to make sure that they are well supported. This is a specific and targeted bill to make sure that those families are supported in their time of greatest need. This legislation would benefit over 6,000 families with critically ill children and over 1,000 families with murdered or missing children.

I appreciate that everyone in the House has been supportive of this measure.

[Helping Families in Need Act, September 27th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague opposite for his support for this bill. It is greatly appreciated.

The bill is focused on making sure that families and parents are supported in their time of greatest need. I encourage all of us to focus on exactly that. That is what this is about. It is about making sure that we help parents who have a critically ill child, such as the child I mentioned, who may have been hit while running onto the street because he or she left the schoolyard, or a missing child. That is what we need to focus on here.

I agree with the member. We want to make sure that this bill is as good as possible to benefit those families who are in their time of greatest need.

[Helping Families in Need Act, September 27th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member of Parliament for Leeds—Grenville.

I am pleased to rise today in the House to speak to Bill C-44, the helping families in need act, and I thank the opposition for its support of this bill.

As a pediatric surgeon who has taken care of many families of critically ill children, whether it be from trauma or disease, I can personally attest to the need for this legislation to be passed as quickly as possible. This bill is about supporting families who are going through some of the most difficult times in their lives, both emotionally and financially. This legislation introduces new employment insurance benefits for parents of critically ill children, as was announced earlier this summer by the Prime Minister.

It also contains modifications to the Canada Labour Code to protect the jobs of parents who work for federally regulated companies, who are on leave to take care of their critically ill child or to cope with the death or disappearance of their child as the result of a suspected Criminal Code offence. In the latter case, parents would be eligible to receive a new federal income support for parents of murdered or missing children, announced by the Prime Minister last April.

Finally, it contains amendments to the Employment Insurance Act to allow parents enhanced access to EI sickness benefits if they fall ill while receiving EI parental benefits.

I will take a moment to focus on how this bill would help families who have a child under the age of 18 who is critically ill. Each year, approximately 19,000 families end up with a child in an intensive care unit. I encourage all members to think about this situation if they have a child. They get up in the morning and have breakfast with their child and their child goes to school, and they get a terrible telephone call at 2:00 in the afternoon that their child is being taken to the emergency department. The parents arrive at the emergency department to meet someone like me, with whom they have a conversation about their child being in a coma in the intensive care unit and we physicians not knowing when their child will waken.

The children have special needs in those circumstances but so do their parents. In addition to worrying about their child's health, parents are often faced with having to take unprecedented unpaid absences from work or even quit their jobs to take care of their ill child. Medical, travel and accommodation expenses only add to this burden.

Our government and, I think, all members of this House recognize the vital role parents play in comforting and caring for their children. As a surgeon, I have seen the impact parents have on the recovery rates of their children. That is why this bill introduces new 35-week EI benefits to support parents who leave work to take care of their critically ill children. As with EI parental and compassionate care benefits, parents would be able to share this benefit. The definition of a critically ill child includes those children who have life-threatening illnesses, as was mentioned by my colleague with respect to cancer-care children, or injury like those I take care of, who may be involved in various phases of their illness and need continued parental support.

This benefit would fill a gap that existed in the EI system, when parents have children who are so seriously ill they need full-time parental care but, fortunately, when their children are not at immediate risk of dying.

From my medical practice, I saw first-hand the agony this caused parents as they tried to balance their financial obligations, their work and taking care of their children. In the unfortunate situation that a child's condition deteriorates, parents or family members may also be eligible for an additional six weeks of EI compassionate care benefits, if the children are at significant risk of death within the next six months. Hopefully members would never have to utilize that benefit.

The Canada Labour Code would also be amended to allow unpaid leave for employees under the federal jurisdiction, to ensure their jobs are protected while they care for their critically ill children.

Our government has also continually championed the cause of victims of crime. In 2007, we provided $52 million for four years to enhance the federal victim strategy.

As announced by the Prime Minister in April of this year, we will provide financial support to parents who are coping with the disappearance or death of a child as a result of a Criminal Code offence. This will come into effect in January of 2013.

As announced by the Prime Minister in April, we will provide financial support to parents who are coping with the disappearance or death of a child as a result of a criminal act. It is important to know that the agony parents go through in these most difficult situations is overwhelming. While there is no way to make this situation right, we as parliamentarians can provide support to these parents so they do not need to worry about missing a mortgage payment while figuring out how to cope with this horrible situation.

To qualify for this $350 grant, parents can apply for up to 35 weeks. Applicants will be required to have earned a minimum level of income and have taken time away from work.

Workers who take a leave of absence from a federally regulated job for such an event will have their jobs protected, as will parents of critically ill children, thanks to amendments to the Canada Labour Code.

The third aspect that we are introducing in this legislation is greater access to illness benefits for parents themselves.

With this bill, parents will be able to access employment insurance sickness benefits if they fall ill while receiving parental benefits.

Currently, EI claimants cannot access sickness benefits during a claim for parental benefits because of the requirements that they be otherwise available for work or, in the case of self-employed persons, that they be otherwise working but have stopped because of illness.

The bill would amend the EI Act to waive those requirements for claimants receiving EI parental benefits.

The combination of these new measures in Bill C-44 is an example of the common sense measures that our government is taking to help parents balance work and family responsibilities. As the Prime Minister has previously stated, families are the building blocks of our society. Family and its importance is a fundamental value that truly connects all of us as Canadians.

It is time to work together and provide support for families in this country, when they need it the most.

It is time to stand together. Once again, I appreciate and acknowledge the support of the opposition for the bill as we stand together in support of families in this country when they need it the most.

[Health, September 25th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to talk more about why the NDP voted against helping parents when their child is murdered, missing or critically ill.

The member did not answer the question.

I cannot imagine how any party could stand and vote against such a measure to help families get through such hard and tragic times. I am astounded that the NDP have voted against EI for parents of sick children and at the same time want to impose a carbon tax that would raise prices on everything from gas to groceries on Canadians.

I will ask the question again. Why do the NDP members oppose parents caring for their children who are battling cancer? Why do they want to force parents to stay at work when their child has been kidnapped or murdered? Why has the NDP voted against all of our measures to help Canadian families in the toughest times that they have ever faced?

[Health, September 25th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to address the issue raised by the member for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles as it pertains to the modernization of employment insurance.

As we have said all along, the government is committed to delivering programs and services that are effective, aligned with the priorities of Canadians and financially sustainable over the long term. This means we must focus on core priorities, modernize service delivery and policy work, and streamline our operations. We are being accountable directly to Canadians for using their tax money wisely.

Automation speeds up claims processing and gets payments more quickly into the hands of people who need it, EI recipients.

Service Canada continues to closely follow the number of applications in order to ensure that we are providing the best service possible to the Canadians who rely on these benefits.

We have made significant progress and we will continue to build on this.

Over 60% of EI processing is partially or fully automated and we are on track in reaching our goal of 70%.

I also would like to talk about other ways the government has helped Canadian families in need.

Most recently, our government introduced the helping families in need act, which was tabled last week. The bill introduces necessary legislative changes to help hard-working Canadian families at the time when they need it the most. The bill would provide for a new 35-week EI benefit for parents and guardians of critically ill children. It also would provide for a non-EI benefit of $350 a week for 35 weeks for parents of children who have been kidnapped or murdered.

I have met with the parents of critically ill children in the emergency department and I know the kind of horror they face. I also recognize that families are in distress when their child has been kidnapped or murdered. In these circumstances, it is clear why we are supporting families. It is so they need not worry about their job or their mortgage payment and they can focus on what matters, that being their child and their family.

Sadly, the NDP voted against the ways and means motion required to introduce this bill.

I would like to ask the NDP member opposite why the NDP members are not willing to support families during this toughest time in their lives, a time when they face the most difficult challenge.

[Business of Supply, September 25th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, maybe we can give some more recent examples for the member from the Liberal Party of the things he has voted against that actually do harm Canadians.

The Liberals voted against the child tax credit. They voted against the national child benefit supplement. These help low-income families make sure that their children are well provided for. They voted against Helmets to Hardhats. They voted against the targeted initiative for older workers. They voted against apprenticeship opportunities for young Canadians.

I think it is a little rich for the members opposite, in particular, this Liberal member, who voted against all these initiatives for the unemployed and low-income families, to say that we have not done enough.

We are doing a great deal. We are creating jobs. They are not.

I ask--

[Business of Supply, September 25th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, we do have some interesting comments in debate with respect to committee, so I appreciate the member opposite's question.

To be clear, there have been a number of initiatives, as I just mentioned, that this government has moved forward on to ensure that individuals who are unemployed have an opportunity to reattach themselves to the workforce. The best way to fight poverty is to ensure an individual has a job. The initiatives that this government has taken in economic action plans 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 have all acted to help Canadians find jobs. Whether it be the targeted initiative for older workers, helmets to hard hats, or apprenticeship grants, these are all opportunities for Canadians to find employment and that is exactly where we are going to be focused.