Human Resources committee  Thank you very much.

Human Resources committee  For us, there will be no positive effects. We are heading towards a process that is defined as tripartite, but which is not, in reality. We will not have representatives who know the environment. There are differences between the situation of an unemployed person in Alberta and a

Human Resources committee  Yes, it has to be separate. I would like to add a comment, because there is an important element to consider, which is that this does not meet the needs of workers. It's true that things were done during the pandemic. Mr. Vachon wondered what would have happened if the same meas

Human Resources committee  Thank you for your question. What would happen if Bill C‑19 did not pass? In the short term, we'd be left with the same system. That would be a problem, but it would be an even greater problem to make the wrong changes to the bill. This is what Mr. Vachon just said. We need to

Human Resources committee  We believe the appeals process needs to revert back to the way it was before 2013. At the time, actual labour representatives were the ones making the appointments. Each of the groups had real representatives. This meant that everything was in line, decisions stood unchallenged a

Human Resources committee  Thank you, Ms. Chabot. Why consider clause 32 of Bill C‑19 separately? It has been said, the bill is huge. It covers a lot of ground. We believe this section, which deals with employment insurance, should be dealt with on its own because of its importance to Canadians. We saw

Human Resources committee  You will understand that we focused our presentation and our analysis essentially on division 32. We did not consider division 27, as it concerns seasonal workers, and we don't have any of those. I'm really sorry to give you an answer of so little use. The other two witnesses wi

Human Resources committee  Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I want to begin by thanking the committee for giving as an opportunity to speak. My presentation today will essentially focus on division 32 of part 5 of Bill C‑19. My name is Luc Beauregard, and I am secretary-treasurer of the Centrale des synd

Finance committee  Thank you for your question. Right off the bat, I would say that it doesn't have much to do with the initial project announced in 2015. The request to address the matter separately was made because the social partners were supposed to have been consulted, but were not. The unio

Finance committee  Thank you for your question. If the changes are made, that's all well and good, but I think that further changes need to be made to employment insurance. I don't think it would prevent us from having a discussion about it. So why not remove this part of the bill? It would allow

Finance committee  Yes. That's an excellent summary of what it took us five minutes to present. That's precisely what we want. As you just said, it's a very specialized area, and we think that it requires a separate analysis. My headset went wonky in the middle of my presentation. I apologize if

Finance committee  You're absolutely right. At the outset, we were told that a reform was planned. We were also told that the tripartite structure would return to the way it was before. That's not what's being proposed now. We believe there is a problem with it, and that's why we're asking question

Finance committee  Thank you. For a long time, before 2013, people came in person to defend their case. They could see the interveners properly and there were people there from their community. In Quebec, there were between 15 and 20 regions represented, and they too were people from the same kind

Finance committee  Definitely. The answer is clear, neat and precise. We are hoping for a return to the way things were before.

Finance committee  Our opinion is that division 32 of part 5 does not meet them. As I pointed out, the structure looks tripartite, but it is basically not.