Scott Duvall

[Budget Implementation Act, 2019, No. 1, April 30th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, in the member's speech she mentioned pensions. I am wondering what happened to the promise the Liberals made in 2015 that they would fix the Bankruptcy Act.

I understand they were going to do something last year. Now they say they are going to do it this year. They mentioned in the budget that they have some plans, but the experts have told us that this is nothing. This is window dressing.

We have many steelworkers here today and for the next couple of weeks who want to know why nothing happened under the Bankruptcy Act when pensions have been taken. Pensions of the people at Sears have been taken. The workers do not get any termination pay. They get no severance pay and no vacation pay. Their health benefits are gone. Nothing has been mentioned about how the government is going to fix it.

Liberals are coming out with a little window dressing. We want to know why the Liberal government has not committed to fixing the Bankruptcy Act to stop this pension theft.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2019, No. 1, April 30th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, there is one important issue happening across Canada, and that is with respect to bankruptcy and insolvency. In the last election, the Liberals said they would fix that. I know the member did not mention it in her speech, but during bankruptcy protection, the first thing that happens to the majority of people is their severance and vacation pays are taken away. Then, if the company is insolvent and has to declare bankruptcy because it is in a deficit, all the pensioners lose. Therefore, this is a huge issue.

The Liberal government said that it was going to fix it. This was the last time it could try to do that in its budget and all it did was a bit of window dressing. There is nothing in it that states that pensioners would have their pensions protected either as a secured creditor or in some type of guaranteed pension fund. I want to know why this was omitted and what the government plans on doing about it.

[Steel Industry, April 30th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, the government's talking points are not reassuring steelworkers, who are in Ottawa today to finally get some clear answers from the Liberals. The Liberals just do not seem to understand the urgency in protecting the steel industry and these good local jobs. Thousands of steelworkers have been left exposed after the Liberal government let steel safeguards expire last week. It is not complicated. The European Union has already put in place permanent safeguards to protect its workers.

Why can Canadian steelworkers not count on the Liberal government to do the same for them?

[Steel Industry, April 29th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, the current government has abandoned steelworkers once again. After steel safeguards expired last week, the Liberals failed to extend them for five crucial Canadian steel products. Now thousands of steelworkers are left exposed to even more uncertainty, thanks to a government that removed protections and has now allowed foreign dumping to flood our Canadian markets.

The European Union has already put in place permanent safeguards. Instead of spending its time protecting the interests of its rich friends, why will the government not get to work and protect the jobs of Canadian steelworkers?

[Budget Implementation Act, 2019, No. 1, April 10th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I have to agree with my hon. friend's comment that there are many shortcomings. One interesting one I was looking at, and one my colleague mentioned in his speech, was about the BIA and the CCAA under bankruptcy protection.

The Liberals promised that they were going to fix this and were going to have consultations. The experts gave the government some ideas on how to make sure that workplace health benefits would not be taken away anymore during bankruptcy protection. They also recommended that the government have a pension guarantee fund. They also wanted pensioners to be considered secured creditors and not unsecured creditors.

It was interesting to read what those experts gave the government as great recommendations. They told the government the best way to do it, and it required everyone involved to act in good faith. That is on page 67. That is how the government is going to fix the act. That is how we are going to keep pensioners from being ripped off.

Does my friend agree that this is a great way to fix the act to make sure that pensioners across Canada will no longer be ripped off, with just a handshake and people acting in good faith? I would like his comments, please.

[Pensions, April 9th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, Canadian workers, retirees and seniors hoped their lives would improve with the election of a new government in 2015. Unfortunately, they have been let down.

While small changes to the GIS were helpful, changes to the CPP will cost workers a lot more and do not take full effect for another 40 years. It is not much help for those in need today.

Promises made to fix Canada's bankruptcy and insolvency laws to avoid another tragedy like Nortel or Sears have not been met. Instead we have an industry minister who likes to monitor the situation, a seniors minister who prefers endless consultation over meaningful action, and a Prime Minister who tells Sears workers facing loss of pensions, benefits and severance pay that they can rely on EI and CPP.

ln the coming months, many more promises will be made. Again, Canadians will be told that help is on the way. However, as seen in the recent budget, the government has mastered the art of making bold gestures without any concrete plans to back them up. Canadian workers, retirees and seniors need action to protect their pensions, not more empty promises. I hope Canadians—

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, April 9th, 2019]

With regard to consultation called “Consultations on enhancing retirement security” in which Employment and Social Development Canada has been involved: (a) what is the total number of stakeholders consulted, broken down by (i) provinces, (ii) electoral ridings, (iii) organizations representing pensioners, (iv) organizations representing workers, (v) organizations representing employers; (b) how many submissions were received; (c) how many analyses were carried out by those responsible for the consultation; (d) how much research has been done by those responsible for the consultation; (e) how many targeted outreach activities were carried out by those responsible for the consultation; (f) how many stakeholders raised the issue of the tight deadline for submitting documents; and (g) what was the total amount spent on the twitter hashtag #YourFutureMatters?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, April 9th, 2019]

With regard to pensions for the Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) of federal agencies or any other federal organization, since November 2015: (a) how many CEOs are deemed not to be part of the public service for the purposes of the Public Service Superannuation Act, broken down by (i) CEO, (ii) organization; (b) how many times has the Governor in Council ordered a CEO to participate in the public service pension plan, broken down by (i) year, (ii) CEO, (iii) federal organization; and (c) for each of the CEOs deemed not to be part of the public service for the purposes of the Public Service Superannuation Act, what are the detailed justifications for their non-participation in the public service pension plan for the purposes of the Public Service Superannuation Act?

[Questions on the Order Paper, April 9th, 2019]

With regard to consultations on retirement security conducted by the Minister of Seniors between July 18, 2018, and November 22, 2018: how many stakeholders were directly consulted by the Minister, broken down by (i) provinces, (ii) electoral ridings, (iii) organizations representing pensioners, (iv) organizations representing workers, (v) organizations representing employers?

[Pensions, March 22nd, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals have failed on their promise to protect pensions and benefits in cases of corporate bankruptcy. The Prime Minister had one last chance to deliver on his promise in budget 2019, but he chose to leave Canadian workers and retirees without protection.

Despite having seen the damage that Sears has caused to Canadian workers and retirees, the Liberals want us to rely on the good faith of rich corporations to protect pensions. What? Are they serious?

Canadians are not buying that. Why are the Liberals more committed to protecting shareholders and rich banks over Canadian workers and retirees?