CANADA House of Commons Debates VOLUME 145 Ï NUMBER 081 Ï 3rd SESSION Ï 40th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Monday, October 18, 2010 Speaker: The Honourable Peter Milliken CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) 4961 HOUSE OF COMMONS Monday, October 18, 2010 The House met at 11 a.m. A surplus of nearly $60 billion has built up in the employment insurance fund over the years, yet workers who have paid into that fund for years are not being compensated. Often, these workers are not to blame for the situation they find themselves in, yet as a result Prayers of a long lockout, they cannot receive EI benefits. This is intolerable. I mentioned the workers at the Domtar plant in PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS Lebel-sur-Quévillon who learned in December 2008 that they would be losing their jobs as a result of a lockout and would not be Ï (1100) receiving any EI benefits. Since the lockout had gone on for more than 104 weeks, and the workers had not worked any hours during [Translation] that time, they did not qualify for employment insurance. EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT Mr. Guy André (Berthier—Maskinongé, BQ) moved that Bill I will leave it to my colleague from Abitibi—Baie-James— C-395, An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act (labour Nunavik—Eeyou to talk more about the social and economic impact dispute), be read the third time and passed. of this dispute. And I am not talking about how the workers feel about this government, which is building up numerous surpluses, yet He said: Mr. Speaker, I am very interested to speak once again left these workers, who had put in many years on the job, with no about a bill that I introduced, Bill C-395, which is at third reading. income when the plant closed. This bill would amend the Employment Insurance Act so that people who have lost their jobs because of a lengthy labour dispute, be it a Suffice it to say that these people did not qualify for employment lockout or a strike, can qualify for EI. insurance. It is shameful. We need to make sure that this unfortunate This bill is at third reading, and it is clear that this bill must move situation never happens again. forward because it has made it all the way through the House with the support of the majority. The next step is royal assent. Before that, Ï (1105) I want to try yet again to convince the Conservative members that, as we have mentioned many times, this bill would correct a major gap I would of course like to thank the opposition parties for in the act that penalizes workers when a company closes because of a supporting this bill and I would also like to wake the Conservatives labour dispute. up, since they once again seem to be opposed to improving the employment insurance program. Bill C-395 would add work stoppages due to labour disputes to the reasons for extending the qualifying period. Our proposal, which Whether we are talking about the abolition of the waiting period, would not cost the earth, is that the full length of a labour dispute be or the 360 hours that we are demanding through various legislative incorporated into the qualifying period so that it can be extended by initiatives, or Bill C-395, or the unemployed, or seniors and the 52 weeks to include the last year of work preceding the dispute. To guaranteed income supplement, the government ignores us and has qualify for employment insurance, workers would have to have been no intention of supporting those who are, unfortunately, in need. at work during the last year preceding the dispute. There have been Instead, it is investing in airplanes. It is investing billions of dollars cases where workers who worked for 20 or 25 years and paid into in the military. It is investing exorbitant amounts in all sorts of tax employment insurance did not qualify for EI benefits because of a breaks for oil companies. But when it comes time to help the poor, lockout that lasted for more than two years. That is shameful. One this government does nothing. such case was in Lebel-sur-Quévillon. Under the current Employment Insurance Act, if a labour dispute But I hope this government will reconsider and support this bill, as lasts longer than the 52-week qualifying period, workers who are it ought to. It is not fooling anyone. People will remember laid off after the dispute do not qualify for benefits, regardless of Conservative government initiatives like investing a billion dollars how many years they paid EI premiums and whether or not they in the 48-hour G20 and G8 meetings while openly refusing to have ever received EI. improve a measure that is meant to help the unemployed. 4962 COMMONS DEBATES October 18, 2010 Private Members' Business Bill C-395 is an effective and simple measure that would fix a [Translation] problem that is rare, it is true, but that is profoundly unfair for men and women. It is important to take action, but it seems as though the Mr. Guy André: Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his government does not understand this and will vote against giving us question and his support for this bill. We are pleased that the Liberals the opportunity to implement this legislation. are supporting this initiative. The fact that they are in opposition must be doing them some good and we hope this continues for years We will say it and shout it out loud in Quebec. We just want to to come. I would also like to thank the NDP. enable people to receive their employment insurance benefits, because they have contributed for many years to this fund, which regularly generates a surplus. I do not understand why the This bill simply aims to extend the qualifying period if a strike or Conservative government is stubbornly rejecting this measure I am lockout lasts more than 52 weeks. In such cases, workers are not proposing. entitled to employment insurance, even though they have paid into the system for years. This measure will provide fairness and equality In the case of Lebel-sur-Quévillon, why, after the lockout, did the for those who have paid into the employment insurance fund for workers who contributed to this fund not have the right to a single many years. cent of employment insurance? This was a lockout; the company shut down for three years. I could be wrong, of course, but I believe A distinction must be made between a strike and a lockout. A a strike or lockout is legal in Quebec and Canada. It is part of a lockout occurs when a company decides to close its doors, thereby labour relations system that is recognized by law in both Quebec and preventing its workers from coming to work. It is a strange situation. Canada. These existing measures are not illegal. A strike is altogether different. In both cases, workers should be paid Much has been said about Lebel-sur-Quévillon, but let us not EI benefits when the conflict is over. forget that it might be the same elsewhere in Quebec or Canada. All Ï (1115) workers and employers pay premiums to ensure our protection in the event of a plant or company closure. This is about protecting Ms. France Bonsant (Compton—Stanstead, BQ): Mr. Speaker, families, incomes and, often, people's homes. I would like to thank my hon. colleague for introducing this bill. Last If the members of this House found themselves without an income week the World March of Women took place to denounce gender for a year or two because of a lockout affecting this place—as it inequality throughout Quebec and Canada. In the Eastern Town- happened not so long ago under this Conservative government—and ships, working women earn only about 75% of what men earn. if that went on for two or three years, that would have an enormous Women who work part time are particularly penalized. economic, social and family impact on them. Workers have responsibilities, and it is not right for a government to act this How will this bill help these women who are calling for greater way. This is a government with some means. This is not a third gender equality? world country, but one in which we regularly see billions of dollars spent on various things. Implementing this bill would cost a few Mr. Guy André: Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her million dollars, yet the government is wilfully ignoring it and failing excellent question. to support those in need. During the World March of Women, women made a number of Sadly, this government has not yet grasped that need. It can still demands and were very active in Quebec. I participated in a number reconsider and support Bill C-395. The same is true with respect to of marches last week in Lavaltrie, Saint-Gabriel-de-Brandon, improving EI and eliminating the waiting period. These are all Louiseville and Berthierville. A number of women had many measures designed to support people in need, to whom the demands. They gathered together in Rimouski this week to make Conservatives do not seem to be showing any sensitivity right now. their demands known. Ï (1110) I once again urge the Conservative Party, at the end of this hour of Bill C-395 affects women, as do the measures to eliminate the debate, to consider not only business owners and the most fortunate waiting period and increase the eligibility threshold to 360 hours, in society, but also those who are not so fortunate.