House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2015, with 74% of the vote.
Employment February 3rd, 2012
Madam Speaker, the national unemployment rate in January rose to 7.6%. Over 2,200 jobs were lost in Atlantic Canada alone. In my home province of Nova Scotia, the unemployment rate has gone up to 8.5%. Hashtag: Tories suck at job creation.
What will get worse is the massive cuts to government positions. We have seen already that the minister responsible for Service Canada has crippled her department. She is sleepwalking through a crisis. Canadians are hurting and need their money--
Canada's Worst Driver February 3rd, 2012
Madam Speaker, I have risen in the House many times to pay tribute to constituents from my riding of Cape Breton—Canso. I have congratulated Grammy Award winners, Giller Prize winners, star athletes, political figures and humanitarians, but today I must recognize a resident who has achieved some truly unique distinction.
Last month, Shirley Sampson, from Port Caledonia, was named Canada's worst driver. Shirley was chosen from almost 1,000 Canadians who auditioned for the show and when the competition was over, it was clear that Shirley Sampson is Canada's worst driver. Shirley's daughter Janis had nominated her mother, noting that her biggest issues were backing up, using mirrors and also had problems with rotaries and intersections.
The show offers professional coaching to the contestants. Although the host often tells the winners they should never drive again, Shirley got the green light to stay on the road.
I offer my congratulations to Shirley on this dubious distinction. For the residents of Cape Breton—Canso, I offer this warning: “Heads up if you see Shirley coming”.
Business of Supply February 2nd, 2012
Mr. Speaker, the opposition parties are being accused of fear-mongering because of this discussion around pensions. For anybody who has watched this Parliament and paid attention since there has been a majority Conservative government, I think they would have seen time and again that when the Conservatives want to do something, they just go ahead and do it. They have invoked closure a record number of times. They say there is nothing on the books yet about increasing the age to 67, but we know that when they decide to do it, it will be rammed through.
The important aspect of this debate today is to make Canadians aware of what is going on here. We need to make Canadians aware of the Prime Minister's long-standing agenda.
Does the member concur with the train of thought that we have to ready the Canadian public for what is coming down the pike from the Prime Minister?
Business of Supply February 2nd, 2012
Mr. Speaker, I always appreciate the member's colleagues in the House.
The member only had 10 minutes. I know that if he had 12 minutes, he would have wanted to go on and remind Canadians that the three pillars we have talked about, old age security, CPP and guaranteed income supplement, although supported by many in the New Democratic Party and some who were seated in the New Democratic Party, were brought in by Liberal governments. If he had 12 minutes, I know he would have wanted to mention that.
I want to ask him about what was said in a scrum yesterday, and that was why the opposition was being so exercised when there was no legislation for the change from age of 65 to 67. It is not out there yet.
I would also ask my colleague to comment on this. We have seen closure executed so many times in the House under the government. Where there is smoke, there is fire. When the comments were made in Davos, we can certainly expect to see legislation coming forward. Therefore, our responsibility as opposition is to ensure that Canadians know what is coming down the pike.
Does my colleague share that nervousness, that concern of what may be coming from the government next?
Business of Supply February 2nd, 2012
Mr. Speaker, I agree with the vast majority of the member's comments.
Governments do need to make decisions. We know that an extremely large amount of capital will be expended on the renovations to the West Block here on the Hill in the next number of years. Another significant amount of capital will be invested within this chamber to accommodate an additional 30 MPs, which will have ongoing costs going forward to Canadians. Could that money go to seniors?
Madam Speaker, as eloquent as my colleague, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment, might be reading the department's speech, I doubt that she has convinced one other member of this chamber tonight that the job is being done in the processing centres right now. I guess it is noble to try to move toward automation but when automation is not getting it done, Canadians are still being hurt.
When we see centres being shut down in Gander, Newfoundland where the unemployment rate is 18.5%, and when we see centres being shut down in Glace Bay and Sydney where the unemployment rate is about 16.5%, but we see centres being kept open and the work being moved to Halifax where it is about 7% unemployment, and to Edmonton where it is about 6.5% unemployment, and the turnover rate there is far greater, the retention rate is much higher in smaller communities, does she see a misguided approach to the movement of this work to those centres?
Madam Speaker, I stand this evening to further try to find some rhyme or reason with regard to the situation the government has created with the closure of EI processing centres. We know that 600 employees are going home over the next number of months because of the cutbacks in that particular department.
The unfortunate part is that under the Conservative government we know that more and more Canadians are finding themselves unemployed. We know there is duress, strain and stress that is created with being out of work. It is truly an unfortunate situation. However, when people file an EI claim, the stress is increased as some people are waiting six, seven, sometimes eight weeks. My office has dealt with cases where people have gone eight weeks without any income. These people are waiting to fill their fridge, fill prescriptions, fill their oil tank, whatever it might be, but they are without income. It puts a further stress on the family unit, which is truly unfortunate.
Hopefully I will get some kind of direction from the parliamentary secretary, the designated hitter today.
The fact is that the minister did not understand or recognize the extent of the problem. As a matter of fact, she dismissed the problem in a letter to the Charlottetown Guardian in saying that cheques were being sent out within 23 days. We know that is not a fact. We know that is not true.
A notification of processing goes out and that is received within 28 days. Within that period, some people receive a cheque. The ones that flow through the system with no problem get a cheque within 28 days, and that does happen. However, if there is the least thing, such as a hyphenated name with the hyphen left out, or the wrong postal code, or the record of employment does not match up with the application, or anything that might be outside the norm the least little bit, that application is spit out and it could be five, six, seven or eight weeks before the person receives any kind of income. That is a hardship for the most vulnerable.
The minister, before she even tries to attempt to fix it, has to realize that there is a problem. However, she does not realize there is a problem because she does not understand the process. When she appeared at committee and we pushed her on this particular point, it was a revelation. As a matter of fact, she could not answer the question. The deputy minister had to come in and explain the situation to her.
How can we address a problem if a minister does not understand the responsibilities within his or her portfolio? It is shameful and Canadians are being hurt.
Does the minister understand now that people are not being paid within 28 days? There is a notification, some are getting cheques, but a great number are being vetted out of that process and are not receiving cheques. They are getting notification of non-payment. Does the minister understand that now?
Questions Passed as Orders for Returns January 30th, 2012
With respect to Canada Pension Plan (CPP) and Old Age Security (OAS) call centres: (a) for CPP/OAS Call Centre Access I calls, what is (i) the service level standard, (ii) the corresponding results achieved, broken down by CPP/OAS call centre, for the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011 to date; (b) for CPP/OAS Call Centre Access II calls, what is (i) the service level standard, (ii) the corresponding results achieved, broken down by CPP/OAS call centre, for the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011 to date; (c) if the National Service Level standard for Access II calls at CPP/OAS call centres changed in the last six years, what was the reasoning for the change; (d) what has been the CPP/OAS Call Centre agent Occupancy target and result, broken down by CPP/OAS call centre, for the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011 to date; (e) for CPP/OAS Call Centre High Volume Messages (i) what is the service level standard, (ii) what are the corresponding results achieved, broken down by CPP/OAS call centre, for the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011 to date; (f) what was (i) the total number of calls received by CPP/OAS call centres, (ii) the total number of CPP/OAS Call Centre Interactive Voice Response (IVR) Busy calls, broken down by CPP/OAS call centre, for the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011 to date; (g) have the service level standards for CPP/OAS call centre call-backs changed in the last six years, and, if so, (i) when, (ii) why; (h) what was the total number of CPP/OAS call centre staff, nationally and in each province, in the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011 to date; (i) what was the staff turnover at CPP/OAS call centres, broken down by province, in the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011 to date; and (j) what was the total cost associated with training new CPP/OAS call centre workers, broken down by province, in the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011 to date?
Questions Passed as Orders for Returns January 30th, 2012
With respect to Employment Insurance (EI) Processing Centres and EI Call Centres: (a) what was the statistical median and mode for EI application processing times, nationally and broken down by province, for the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011 to date; (b) what is the total number and percentage of EI claim applications, nationally and broken down by province, that did not get paid within 28 days, for the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011 to date; (c) for the claim applications that take longer than 28 days to process, what is the statistical average, median and mode number of days, nationally and broken down by province, that it takes for payment to occur, for the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011 to date; (d) what was the percentage of automation achieved in EI processing, for the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011 to date; (e) what was the number of EI processing staff, nationally and broken down by province, for the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011 to date; (f) what is the bonus or incentive structure concerning EI application processing times achieved, for (i) workers, (ii) management; (g) for EI application claims that take longer than 28 days to process, is there a bonus or incentives structure to encourage that the application be processed as quickly as possible, for (i) workers, (ii) management; (h) what are the service standard policies for claims that take longer than 28 days to process; (i) have the service level standards for EI claims processing changed in the last six years, and, if so, (i) when, (ii) why; (j) what was the average EI processing worker salary, nationally and broken down by province, for the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011 to date; (k) what was the total EI processing worker salary cost, nationally and broken down by province, for the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011 to date; (l) what was the total number of EI Call Centre staff, nationally and in each province, for the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011 to date; (m) have the service level standards for EI Call Centre call backs changed in the last six years, and, if so, (i) when, (ii) why; (n) why did the National Service Level for Access II calls answered within 180 seconds change from 95% to 80% in 2008 at EI Call Centres; (o) what is the EI Call Centre agent Occupancy measure and what is the government's rationale for this measure; (p) what has been the EI Call Centre agent Occupancy target and result, nationally and broken down by province, for the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011 to date; (q) what was the target for EI Call Centre High Volume Targets for the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011 to date; (r) what was the total cost associated with training new EI Call Centre workers, broken down by province, for the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011 to date; (s) what is the average speed of answer for EI Call Centre calls, broken down by EI Call Centre, for the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011 to date; and (t) what is the abandonment rate for calls at EI Call Centres, nationally and broken down by EI Call Centre, for the fiscal years 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011 to date?
Questions Passed as Orders for Returns January 30th, 2012
With respect to the last hiring process that took place for the position of Director General, Regional Operations for Prince Edward Island (PEI) (Mr. Kevin MacAdam) at the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency (ACOA): (a) when was the job position posted; (b) where was the position posted (i.e., website, newspapers, etc.); (c) for how long was the position posted in each medium; (d) was it an external or internal posting; (e) what information appeared in each posting medium; (f) who specifically developed and approved the job posting qualifications; (g) was this a newly created position, and, if not, what information appeared on the posting for the previous compeition for the position (i.e., that of Mr. MacAdam's predecessor); (h) what was the job description for this position prior to the last hiring process; (i) what is the current job description, if it is different from the description in (h); (j) what is the pay scale for this position; (k) has the pay scale for this position changed with the new hiring of Mr. MacAdam; (l) what were the French-language requirements (i.e., levels of proficiency A, B, or C) for this job when it was originally posted; (m) have the French-language requirements (i.e., levels of proficiency A, B, or C) changed with the latest hiring process for this position; (n) is there a Director General, Regional Operations position in ACOA for each of the other three Atlantic provinces (i.e., New Brunswick (NB), Newfoundland and Labrador (NL), and Nova Scotia (NS)), and, if yes, what is, for each position, (i) the pay scale, (ii) the job description, (iii) the French-language requirements (i.e., levels of proficiency A, B, or C); (o) are there any positions with ACOA for which bilingualism is a requirement to be hired, and, if so, what are they; (p) in the last five years, in how many cases and for which positions have newly hired ACOA employees started their employment by being required to receive full-time French training; (q) does ACOA utilize any language training facilities in PEI, NL, NB or NS for employee French-language training, and, if so, which ones; (r) how many ACOA employees have received second-language training in each of the last five years; (s) what was the average length of second-language training over last five years; (t) what was the average cost for second-language training per employee in 2010-2011; (u) what is the expected budgeted cost of second-language training for the current Director General, Regional Operations for PEI (Mr. Kevin MacAdam), broken down by specific cost categories (e.g., tuition, travel, accommodations, meals, books, incidentals, etc.); (v) what is the duration of French-language training that Mr. MacAdam is required to take, broken down by (i) months, (ii) hours; (w) what levels of French-language proficiency (A, B, or C) must Mr. MacAdam achieve; (x) is Mr. MacAdam receiving his full salary during his French-language training, and, if not, how much is he being paid during this period; and (y) what is ACOA’s policy on the second-language training of its employees in terms of (i) effects on trainees' salaries, (ii) special compensation or benefits available to trainees during second language training, (iii) requirements to perform work duties, if any, during second-language training?