Rodger Cuzner

[Public Service of Canada, May 12th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives are once again using the omnibus budget bill to bypass and weaken the rules of collective bargaining in the public service. Despite the phony pretence of open negotiations, the President of the Treasury Board has hijacked collective bargaining to impose a settlement. The reality is that he came to dictate, not negotiate.

Why will the Conservatives not respect collective bargaining and stop treating our public servants with such disdain?

[Employment Insurance, May 11th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, even though the Conservative government continues to waste money on those inane television ads especially during the playoffs here, it refused to settle EI benefits with sick moms in this country. One such mom, Jennifer McCrea, was diagnosed with breast cancer and underwent a double mastectomy. She was refused her sick EI benefits. She went to her MP, who just happens to be the Prime Minister, who did nothing for her.

Why did the Prime Minister not just go to his chief of staff and say, “Nigel, could you fix this for me? Could you make it good to go?” He has done that before.

[Business of Supply, May 11th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Guelph knows the degree of respect I hold for him not just on veterans issues, but on all issues that he brings to the floor. Certainly when it comes to working on the veterans files and his role as critic, he does an exceptional job.

It was not talked about during his speech, but I would like him to place on the record that veterans and all Canadians were amazed at the amount of money that had lapsed over the period of time since the Conservative government came to power. He did address the fact that there were 900 frontline workers in Veterans Affairs who were let go early on in the tenure of the government. The Conservatives have put 100 people back to work, but we know there was $1.5 billion that had lapsed over that period of time.

I would appreciate his insights on this. Does he think that because there were no bodies in Veterans Affairs to deliver on the programs, to make sure that veterans were being looked after and had access to those very important programs, because of the cuts that were made in personnel, would that account for the fact that those monies that should have been getting out to veterans, that amount of money has lapsed over that number of years? I would like his insight on that.

[Employment, May 7th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, the government has clawed back billions of dollars that could have helped seniors, persons with disabilities and students. What the Conservatives did not claw back was the $750 million on those self-serving TV ads.

Do members know who is going to be able to watch the TV ads? It will be the 375,000 unemployed young Canadians, because they do not have to get up to go to work the next day, thanks to the Conservative government.

Another $90 million, including money for youth employment strategies, is gone under the current government. What young people want are jobs, not state propaganda.

[Glace Bay Citizens Service League, May 7th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, last week I had the great pleasure to attend the 50th anniversary of the Glace Bay Citizens Service League. In November 1965, under the guidance of Hilda Wright, on the initiative of the United Church, a pilot project was undertaken in ecumenical social service, bringing together churches, service groups, and social agencies with the goal of improving the economic conditions and quality of life for the people of Glace Bay.

The league provides programs, like the clothing depot, furniture exchange, backpack programs, Meals on Wheels, nursery schools, babysitting courses, and seniors programs, all delivered by an army of more than 200 incredibly dedicated volunteers.

The league presented 50-year service pins to Marge Petite, Effie MacAulay, Jeanette Sternes, and the league's first and longest serving board chair, Shirley Chernin.

The talented and dedicated staff, led by executive director Susan Plath and board of directors chair Agatha MacMullin, are the first to point to the hundreds of volunteers who have given so much to the benefit of so many as the reason for the league's 50 years of success.

I ask the House to join me in congratulating the Glace Bay Citizens Service League on its 50th anniversary of giving.

[Petitions, May 4th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I stand today to present two petitions from the good folks in Pork Hawkesbury, a number from around Margaree Valley and down West Bay Road. They are very concerned about multinational seed companies that are gradually replacing the immense diversity of farmer seed. They are calling upon the Government of Canada to adopt international aid policies that support small family farmers, especially women, and recognize their vital role in the fight against hunger and poverty. Also, they would like the government to ensure Canadian policies and programs are developed in consultation with small family farmers and that they protect the rights of small family farmers in the global south to preserve, use, and freely exchange seeds.

[National Day of Mourning, April 28th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the entire Liberal caucus, I wish to extend my deepest sympathies to all families who have been affected by death or injury in the workplace. Their sacrifice and that of all their families must serve as a lesson to us all.

The National Day of Mourning is held on April 28 every year to remember those who have suffered and died on the job, and to renew our efforts for safe workplaces. Today, there is pronounced sadness and, at the same time, frustration that needless injuries and deaths can continue to occur as a result of not enacting the right law or not doing a good enough job enforcing the laws that exist.

The April 28 monuments are often inscribed with the words “Fight for the Living, Mourn for the Dead”. Today is the day we honour the dead, but also a day to remind us that, as parliamentarians, we have a never-ending obligation to make workplaces safer by enacting and enforcing laws that prevent workplace injury, illness and death.

[Business of Supply, April 27th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments put forward by my colleague from Markham—Unionville. I want to share with him a sense of warning. If the boys in short pants hear they are only reaching 40% of the Canadian electorate with their advertising, they are liable to shovel a little more at it. The rationale would be that the Conservatives are not spending enough.

There is one thing he did not mention, and most people who contact my office talk about this topic. They are most annoyed with the fact that the government, under the current Minister of Public Works, who was with Human Resources and Skills Development at the time, to much fanfare, announced the Canada jobs grant. The government had not talked to the provinces about it. There had been nothing in place, but it took out $3.5 million worth of advertising on the program. She got shuffled along and a new Minister of Employment and Skills Development. took over. He had to sit down and cobble together some kind of an agreement.

In the meantime, $3.5 million were spent on a program that did not exist. It was a ghost program. Has the member heard from his constituents about this colossal waste of taxpayer money on a program that did not exist?

[Intern Protection Act, April 20th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, let me start by thanking the member for Rivière-des-Mille-Îles for bringing forward Bill C-636. I think everyone can agree that the goals of the bill are important and well-intentioned. It is not a partisan issue. It should be something that we want to get right. All legislators should want to get this particular issue right, so I am happy to stand to speak to it today.

The bill highlights a legitimate issue that up to now has not been considered through the normal tripartite process to amend the Canada Labour Code.

We are confronted with a situation where we know that unpaid interns have been exploited and we know that the protections under the Canada Labour Code are ambiguous at best. We also know that the number of unpaid interns appears to be on the rise, with no real regulations, especially in the federal sector, to ensure that interns are truly being provided with a valuable learning experience to improve their employable skills and that they are not just a way for employers to replace paid employees to improve their bottom line.

After having consulted with many stakeholders in the federal jurisdiction, I believe there is a consensus about the goals of the bill, but I have some concerns as to the best means to achieve those goals in a fair and balanced way that would minimize the unintended consequences.

Given that the stakeholders agree on the intent of the bill, I feel it deserves to go to committee where we can hear from all stakeholders on how best to realize the goals that the bill sets to achieve.

When we talk about internships, it means many things to many people. Depending upon the jurisdiction one is in, an unpaid intern may or may not have basic labour standards protections. I think everyone would agree that an unpaid intern should be protected from an unsafe work environment or be afforded rights to rest and hours of work rules, to be covered under the employer's sexual harassment policy that is required under the Canada Labour Code.

These are common labour standards that are clear for paid employees, but for unpaid interns are very unclear. When we have weak or unclear laws that are the only protection for vulnerable groups of people, we have fertile ground for exploitation.

We know that the number of unpaid internships appears to have increased over the last decade, and especially since the recession. I say “appears” because we do not have that hard data.

My colleague, the member for Kings—Hants, has done a great job on this file. He was one of the first people to talk about unpaid interns and the need for accurate statistics, and the establishment of clear standards that would safeguard legitimate opportunities while protecting unpaid interns against exploitation.

Timely, accurate, and relevant labour market information is fundamental to good public policy, and people have been calling upon the government to track unpaid internships for several years now. During the finance committee's study on youth employment, a number of groups advocated exactly for this.

As Claire Seaborn, president of the Canadian Intern Association, and a strong advocate for better internship laws, said, “You can't fix a problem if you don't know what the problem is”.

However, we all know the current government's aversion to collecting data for evidence-based policy, preferring instead to use policy-based evidence. This perhaps explains why it has done nothing to improve data collection or strengthen intern protections.

We know that today's job market for youth is very weak. In fact, we have lost 150,000 youth jobs since before the recession, and the youth unemployment rate is almost double the national average. This has led to more youth becoming desperate for work and feeling pressured to accept unpaid internships to get work experience.

As the number of unpaid internships has grown, with no rules in place and unclear protections, so too has the anecdotal evidence of exploitation by employers. That is why Bill C-636 is needed to ensure basic workplace protections in the Canada Labour Code, with those protections being clearly extended to unpaid interns. In addition, rules on what information the employer must provide to the intern on the internship would help to clarify the relationship for both parties.

Although I agree with the intent of the bill, I do have concerns regarding the process we are using to propose an amendment to the Canada Labour Code. Labour laws are complex, and ones that work well are based on a delicate balance between the interests of the employees and the employers. They are developed through an informed, fair, and thorough consultative tripartite process that seeks, in part, to minimize any unintended consequences. The Liberals believe in the established tripartite process between labour, management, and government, which has served our federal sector well for amending the Canada Labour Code.

The private members' bill process is a poor means to make laws concerning such a complex system. That being said, the need to ensure basic labour standard protections for vulnerable youth participating in unpaid internships is something that everyone I have consulted with appears to agree on; for example, protections against unsafe work environments, unreasonable work hours, or sexual harassment.

I have consulted with many stakeholders, including employer and labour groups, respected labour law experts, and intern and student representatives. The problem is not that they do not believe unpaid interns should have Labour Code protections, but rather how best to provide these protections to ensure there are no unintended consequences in other aspects of the Labour Code that apply to the workplace.

Labour laws are complex, and when parliamentarians seek to amend them, it should be done with great care and through an established process that allows thorough review and consultation. I have concerns about amending the Canada Labour Code through this private member's bill which is outside of the established tripartite process. That being said, we are confronted as parliamentarians with the fact that we have ambiguous laws concerning unpaid interns and evidence that exploitation is taking place. It is incumbent that we move, as legislators.

We also have a government that has not yet taken any appropriate action. My colleague has said that legislation is coming forward and that the parliamentary secretary undertook an ambitious study across the country. When the government undertakes its own studies with witnesses that the government wants to hear from, obviously it is not going to get the quality of work that should be done in the committees of this House. That is where the work should be getting done. However, under the current government, we have seen that committees have been neutered. An issue as important as unpaid interns, giving opportunities to the young people in this country to gain valuable work experience, is work that this House should be seized with. Instead, we are seeing the Conservatives once again skirting this issue.

To summarize, we believe that any change in the Canada Labour Code should be done through a tripartite process. We have seen the government undertake private members' legislation, Bill C-377 and Bill C-525, to amend the Labour Code. We did not agree with them or support them.

With the Conservatives' lack of action on unpaid interns, at least we should be looking at the situation. That is why we will be encouraging our members in the House to support Bill C-636, to get to the root of it and hopefully help young Canadians who are looking for very valuable job experience.

[Canada Pension Plan, April 2nd, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow will mark the 50th anniversary of the Canada pension plan, which, along with the Quebec pension plan, was created to ensure that all working Canadians had the opportunity to retire with dignity. It sounds like common sense today, but at the time it took extraordinary vision, diplomacy, and the persistence of Prime Minister Lester Pearson to get it done.

However, in the 1990s the plan's future was in doubt, and major renovations were required to save it. Former finance minister Paul Martin Jr. built the business case, the social consensus, and the national momentum to rejuvenate the plan. As a footnote, the plan received strong support across Canada, except for the provincial NDP governments in B.C. and Saskatchewan, and our current Prime Minister and his federal Reform Party voted against it as well.

The CPP was a historic accomplishment. However, retirement income insecurity is a growing fact of life for far too many Canadians. All this is to say that Canada is once again in need of a government that will honour Lester Pearson's ambition to ensure a fair, efficient, and adequate system of retirement income for all Canadians.