HUMA Committee Meeting

37th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION

Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Thursday, May 9, 2002

Á

1110

The Chair (Mrs. Judi Longfield (Whitby--Ajax, Lib.))

Mrs. Stewart

Á

1115

Á

1120

The Chair

Hon. Ethel Blondin-Andrew (Secretary of State (Children and Youth))

Á

1125

Ms. Jane Stewart

The Chair

Mr. Monte Solberg (Medicine Hat, Canadian Alliance)

Ms. Jane Stewart

Á

1130

Mr. Monte Solberg

Mr. Alan Winberg (Assistant Deputy Minister, Finance and Administrative Services, Department of Human Resources Development)

Mr. Monte Solberg

Mr. Alan Winberg

Mr. Monte Solberg

Mr. Alan Winberg

Mr. Monte Solberg

Mr. Alan Winberg

Mr. Monte Solberg

Mr. Alan Winberg

Mr. Monte Solberg

Mr. Alan Winberg

Mr. Monte Solberg

Ms. Jane Stewart

Mr. Monte Solberg

Ms. Jane Stewart

Á

1135

Mr. Monte Solberg

Mr. Alan Winberg

Mr. Monte Solberg

Mr. Alan Winberg

Mr. Monte Solberg

Ms. Jane Stewart

The Chair

Ms. Diane St-Jacques (Shefford, Lib.)

Ms. Jane Stewart

Á

1140

Ms. Diane St-Jacques

Ms. Jane Stewart

Ms. Diane St-Jacques

Ms. Jane Stewart

Á

1145

The Chair

Mr. Crête

Ms. Jane Stewart

Mr. Paul Crête

Á

1150

Ms. Jane Stewart

Mr. Paul Crête

Ms. Jane Stewart

The Chair

Ms. Raymonde Folco (Laval West, Lib.)

Á

1155

Ms. Jane Stewart

Ms. Raymonde Folco

Â

1200

Ms. Jane Stewart

The Chair

Ms. Lill

Ms. Jane Stewart

Â

1205

The Chair

Mr. Joe McGuire (Egmont, Lib.)

Ms. Ethel Blondin-Andrew

Â

1210

Mr. Joe McGuire

Ms. Ethel Blondin-Andrew

Mr. Joe McGuire

Ms. Ethel Blondin-Andrew

Ms. Jane Stewart

Â

1215

The Chair

Mr. Monte Solberg

Ms. Jane Stewart

Mr. Monte Solberg

Ms. Jane Stewart

Mr. Monte Solberg

Ms. Jane Stewart

Mr. Monte Solberg

Mr. Alan Winberg

Mr. Monte Solberg

Mr. Alan Winberg

Mr. Monte Solberg

Ms. Jane Stewart

Mr. Monte Solberg

Â

1220

Ms. Jane Stewart

Mr. John McWhinnie (Assistant Deputy Minister, Insurance, Department of Human Resources Development)

Ms. Jane Stewart

Mr. Monte Solberg

Ms. Jane Stewart

Mr. Monte Solberg

Ms. Jane Stewart

The Chair

Mr. Alan Tonks (York South--Weston, Lib.)

Â

1225

Ms. Jane Stewart

Mr. Alan Tonks

Ms. Jane Stewart

Â

1230

Mr. Alan Tonks

The Chair

Mr. Paul Crête

Ms. Jane Stewart

Mr. Paul Crête

Ms. Jane Stewart

Mr. Paul Crête

Â

1235

Ms. Jane Stewart

Mr. Paul Crête

Ms. Jane Stewart

Mr. Paul Crête

The Chair

Ms. Anita Neville (Winnipeg South Centre, Lib.)

Â

1240

Ms. Ethel Blondin-Andrew

Ms. Jane Stewart

Â

1245

Ms. Anita Neville

The Chair

---

CANADA

Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities

---

NUMBER 064

l

1st SESSION

l

37th PARLIAMENT

---

EVIDENCE

Thursday, May 9, 2002

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Á  (1110)  

[English]

    The Chair (Mrs. Judi Longfield (Whitby--Ajax, Lib.)): Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to our guests for today. We're convening the 64th meeting of the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities.

    We are reviewing the main estimates, and we have before us the Minister of Human Resources Development, the Honourable Jane Stewart, and the Secretary of State for Children and Youth, Ethel Blondin-Andrew.

    Ladies, we will have you make your initial presentation, and then we'll turn it over to the members of the committee for a question and answer period. I'm sure you've decided between you which one is going to start, so without further ado, please begin.

[Translation]

    Hon. Jane Stewart (Minister of Human Resources Development): Thank you, Madam Chair and greetings to my colleagues. I welcome this opportunity to bring you up to date on activities at Human Resources Development Canada. The past year has been very productive for our department. I am proud of our progress on a number of fronts, progress that is detailed, at length, in our Main Estimates submission.

[English]

    I would be very pleased to speak on any of these issues following my formal remarks; however, I'd first like to focus on the topic that has dominated our activities over the last 12 months. I'm referring to the development and launch of a national skills and learning agenda, as part of Canada's innovation strategy, that will create the skilled workforce Canada needs in the 21st century.

    When we last met, our department had just initiated a series of research projects and consultations, including three national round tables. They were set up to explore the scope and impacts of the skills challenges confronting our country in the face of a technology-based, knowledge-driven economy. We sought the insights and advice of researchers, subject experts, stakeholders, community representatives, and provincial and territorial governments on a broad spectrum of policy issues. These activities confirmed that the fundamental economic issue facing Canada today is the quantity and quality of our labour force.

    Our comprehensive consultations culminated in the release on February 12 of Knowledge Matters: Skills and Learning for Canadians, the companion piece to Achieving Excellence, investing in people, knowledge, and opportunity issued by Industry Canada. Taken together, the two papers comprise Canada's innovation strategy.

    The complementary policy papers profile the twin engines driving economic growth and social development in Canada today. They highlight that increasing Canadian skills is integral to our country's economic performance, because knowledge is now the currency of the economy.

    A country with a workforce that knows a lot creates a lot, introducing innovative products and services to the international marketplace. So skilled workers are crucial to Canada's strength and continued competitiveness in the global context. Skills are equally essential to inclusion and social cohesion within our own borders. Not only the economy, but society as a whole is strengthened when Canadians have the necessary skills to contribute to their communities. Those without such skills are at risk of being left behind.

    Knowledge Matters outlines a national skills and learning framework. It establishes goals and milestones for people of all ages and stages of life, to help all Canadians achieve their full potential. I won't take time to outline each goal and milestone, but let me give you a snapshot of some of the priority areas for action identified in Knowledge Matters.

    Among other things, the paper proposes a set of measurable milestones that would see Canadian schoolchildren score among the top three countries in the world in mathematics, science, and reading; twice the number of Canadian youth graduating from high school with a working knowledge of both official languages; and double the number of apprentices certified within a decade.

    While Knowledge Matters underscores the need to address Canadians' learning needs at every stage of the life cycle, the pressure of the 21st century economy calls for urgent action in a couple of key areas. For example, the looming demographic crunch will create both labour supply and skills shortages within the coming decades. By the year 2020, Canada could be short nearly a million workers as baby boomers retire. Long before then, by 2011, immigration will account for all net labour force growth. Add to this challenge the rising skill requirements across all sectors. By the year 2040, 70% of all new jobs in Canada will require some form of post-secondary education, whether it be a university degree, a college degree, or an apprenticeship certification. All these factors focus on the need to maximize labour force participation.

    There are several population groups that we can turn to in seeking a solution to this challenge. Let's look first at Canadian youth, the next generation of workers and taxpayers. Fortunately, we're starting from a position of strength. Today's generation of young Canadians is the best educated in our history. Yet although most students perform well, a significant minority of high school students and graduates are not developing the skills and ability to learn that which will help them reach their full potential. The consequences are critical, both for individual youth and our country as a whole. Youth who have not completed high school have an unemployment rate of more than 18%, compared to 7% for those with a university degree.

    We have had a youth employment strategy in place since the mid-1990s that is actively addressing school-to-work transitions and skills development issues. However, we recognize that more work needs to be done. That's why Knowledge Matters proposes as one of our national goals that all students who graduate from high school achieve a level of literacy, including computer literacy, sufficient to participate in the knowledge-based economy.

Á  (1115)  

    Having achieved that goal, we want to ensure that 100% of high school graduates have the opportunity to participate in some form of post-secondary education. Over the next decade we want to see 50% of 25- to 64-year-olds, including an increased proportion of individuals from at-risk groups, with a post-secondary credential, up from our current 39%.

    We also want to explore how we can improve the youth employment strategy to make it more responsive to changing labour market conditions, to better assist youth facing particular labour market barriers, and to help youth develop their skills to make successful school-to-work transitions.

    My colleague the Honourable Ethel Blondin-Andrew, Secretary of State for Children and Youth, will comment further on some of our planned activities to involve young Canadians, as well as aboriginal Canadians, in the skills and learning agenda.

    The other largely untapped pool of potential talent includes many adult Canadians currently on the outside of the labour force looking in. We have to make a greater effort to target skills development initiatives to populations at the greatest risk of exclusion, including aboriginal people, Canadians with disabilities, skilled new immigrants, and people with low levels of skills. Such efforts make good economic sense and are consistent with our Canadian values. We have to reach out to those who are not fully participating if we are to alleviate our skills and demographic challenges.

    Responding to the needs of new Canadians will be especially important, as they will soon constitute the majority of our labour force growth. We have established several national goals geared specifically to adult learners. Within five years we want to increase by one million the number of adult learners in Canada throughout all segments of society; within five years we want to see businesses increase by one-third their annual investment in training per employee; and within 10 years we want to reduce the number of adult Canadians with low literacy skills by 25%.

    Clearly this is not something that governments can accomplish alone, nor are these necessarily the only national objectives we should be striving to achieve in our quest to provide lifelong learning opportunities for all Canadians. So during the second phase of the engagement process we're asking Canadians, especially key partners and stakeholders, what we can do to meet the skills and learning challenge. We want to engage Canadians through a number of streams that reflect the themes explored in Knowledge Matters.

    We're holding six expert round tables across the country. The first one, on post-secondary education, will be held in Halifax on June 5 with the Canadian Association for University Continuing Education.

    In the next few months we'll be hosting a round table on youth, as well as one with aboriginal people. My colleague Madame Blondin-Andrew will touch on those in a moment.

    But we are also using best practices fora, like the one on e-learning and innovation in Calgary on May 6, as part of the Conference Board of Canada's education and innovation conference.

    In addition, I'll be consulting with sector council stakeholders on May 23 in Ottawa and the apprenticeship community at the conference hosted by the Canadian Apprenticeship Forum on June of this year in Vancouver. We want to look for ways to achieve milestones in such areas as skilled trades, foreign credential recognition, and literacy and learning communities.

    As this engagement process rolls out, we hope to accomplish several things. Our first priority during these events is to look at ways to move this agenda forward, leading to working with our partners to translate the policy paper's goals into concrete action plans. In fact, we'll be counting on members of this standing committee for your feedback to Knowledge Matters. We encourage you to examine carefully the ideas and our discussion paper. We believe you can play a vital role in our engagement rollout as you consult with Canadians in the course of this committee's business.

    That brings me to our second and equally important objective, that is, a call to action. We want to know what contributions our partners are prepared to make as we take on this national challenge, because the reality is, Canadians' complex skills and learning needs demand a national response. The challenges affect the entire population in one way or another, hence drawing on the skills and resources of all partners would work to everyone's advantage. We'll be looking to all areas of Canadian society, including industry, labour, educators, the voluntary sector, and communities to develop complementary action plans that will improve skills and learning opportunities and increase Canada's innovation performance.

Á  (1120)  

    I will also continue to work closely with my provincial and territorial partners both bilaterally and through multilateral fora such as the Council of Ministers of Education Canada and the Forum of Labour Market Ministers. We want to identify those areas where we can effectively collaborate on our common agenda.

    The third priority in this engagement is to maintain a continuous dialogue and to develop the data, lessons learned, and research results to ensure the skills agenda will be responsive as new issues and resources emerge. For example, we hosted a national research conference in late January that brought together policy and research experts across a broad cross-section of sectors. We'll be conducting targeted research activities as this engagement process unfolds.

    We'll also work with our partners to develop measures to track success and report results to Canadians on an ongoing basis. At the end of this process, we'll be able to say, here are some real, meaningful actions we can take in all sectors to achieve our goals and milestones and ensure Canada can fully capitalize on the potential of the 21st century knowledge economy.

    Finally, we want to ensure that our engagement process complements and reinforces the important work being undertaken by my colleague, the Honourable Allen Rock. HRDC will participate within Industry Canada in regional community engagement activities across the country as part of our joint effort to frame some concrete directions for the future.

    The result of all these engagement activities and the months of hard work will be rolled up in the fall and synthesized into some positive directions for the future.

    I'm genuinely excited about the momentum that I see building all across the country as people start to understand both the challenges and the opportunities for Canada in this 21st century knowledge economy. There's clearly a determination to act on this national priority to ensure Canada remains competitive in the global economy.

    While we've made a good start in developing a long-term strategy, it's just that, a good start.

[Translation]

    There is much more work to be done in family discussions, in the workplace, union halls and corporate boardroom tables all across the country.

    And of course, I welcome input from the members of this Standing Committee.

[English]

    We all have a role to play and a contribution to make as this important undertaking, this national priority, moves ahead. I look forward to your guidance and your support.

    I would at this time, if colleagues would agree, ask my Secretary of State, Ethel Blondin-Andrew, to give you a fuller sense of some of the undertakings that we wish to proceed with.

    The Chair: Madam.

    Hon. Ethel Blondin-Andrew (Secretary of State (Children and Youth)): Thank you, Madam Minister.

    Madam Chair, I want to reinforce the necessity and value of the work we are engaged in to equip Canadian youth and aboriginal peoples with the skills they need to succeed in the 21st century.

    As you are aware, the Government of Canada identified skills and learning opportunities for young people as one of its earliest priorities. Since 1997, we have helped over three million young Canadians through the youth employment strategy and other targeted youth programs.

[Translation]

    These initiatives are helping to assist youth facing labour market barriers and address growing skills gaps in a wide variety of employment sectors.

[English]

    In the 2001 Speech from the Throne, the Government of Canada reaffirmed its commitment to youth by pledging to work with its partners to ensure support for youth who particularly need help staying in school or getting their first job. In 2001-2001 the youth employment strategy will invest over $400 million to help youth prepare for, obtain, and maintain employment. Knowledge Matters also confirmed that young Canadians remain a priority population and laid down some important markers in terms of our national goals and milestones for this age group.

    Knowledge Matters commits the Government of Canada to examine ways to improve the youth employment strategy. We must try to make it more responsive to changing labour markets, better assist youth facing particular labour market barriers, and help youth develop their skills to make successful school-to-work transitions. As part of that commitment, we are organizing a youth round table that will include about 30 Canadian youth aged between 16 and 29 from across the country and with different backgrounds who reflect Canada's linguistic, ethnic, regional, and educational diversity. These young people will represent a cross-section of Canadian youth, including aboriginal youth, recent immigrant youth, youth with disabilities, and visible minority youth.

    They will be asked to share their perspectives on ways of making the youth employment strategy more effective. For example, youth will be asked to suggest ways the strategy could better respond to changing labour market conditions: how it could assist youth facing particular labour market barriers and help them make the transition from school to work. They will also be questioned on how young people can develop the motivation to continue learning throughout life, because this will be the reality throughout their lives.

    It is our hope that the round table will deepen our understanding of the learning and skills challenges facing youth and assist us in achieving our goals.

Á  (1125)  

[Translation]

    When I speak about Canada's aboriginal population, I am also talking about a largely young population.

[English]

    Aboriginal youth are the fastest growing demographic group in the country. By the year 2016, the aboriginal working-age population will have grown to 755,000, almost 37% over its present size. It is important to note that this will also be the time when Canada will desperately need every last skilled worker this country can produce.

    If we equip this new generation with the skills and ability to keep on learning, which will be required throughout their lifetimes, we can advance several national objectives. We can increase the inclusion of aboriginal people while creating a more productive economy that improves the quality of life for all of us. To explore how we can achieve this goal, HRDC plans to host a round table on aboriginal skills.

    The purpose of the round table is to obtain an aboriginal perspective on the goals and milestones in knowledge matters. We will consult with aboriginal experts and opinion leaders on how to improve the integration and successful participation of aboriginal people in the labour market. The round table will also focus on possible future aboriginal skills initiatives. We will be looking for input on the length of time and the steps needed for the aboriginal population to achieve the milestones.

[Translation]

    I want to echo Minister Stewart's comment that I am very excited about the potential of these roundtables to build momentum that will lead to lasting change.

    Thank you very much.

[English]

    Ms. Jane Stewart: Madam Chair, I'm looking forward to hopefully having some dialogue with the committee on the skills and learning agenda and on any other aspect of the programming in my department to that end.

    I would introduce my support team in the department--a great team. With me today is Alan Winberg, who is my ADM for financial issues and services, the guy who keeps us straight and provides great support to us; my associate deputy, Maryantonett Flumian; John McWhinnie, who is responsible for employment insurance programs; and Paul Migus, who is responsible for our pension programs.

    We're all here to respond as frankly and openly as we can to our questions.

    The Chair: Good. Thank you.

    We're going to start with six-minute rounds. Mr. Solberg, you have the honour of being the first questioner today.

    Mr. Monte Solberg (Medicine Hat, Canadian Alliance): Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and welcome, Minister and Secretary of State, and your officials. It's great to have you here.

    Strangely, I won't engage you on labour or training issues right now. I want to talk about advertising. I want to ask you a couple of fairly specific questions. I hope you'll be able to provide the answers, appreciating that they are specific.

    First, I assume you have a large advertising budget for such a big department. I wonder if you could give me an idea of what that budget is, and, second, how is it administered? Is it run through Canada Communications Group?

    Ms. Jane Stewart: Thank you, Mr. Solberg, for the question. It is not unanticipated. When it comes to being involved in the contractual relationships with communications, I'm not at the ground level. I'll have Mr. Winberg talk about that.

    But I think one of the things that's clear is that the Auditor General has shown an interest in working with all departments to determine what our relationships are. We will absolutely, as we always do, work cooperatively with her in this regard.

    Alan, can I ask you to respond to some of the specifics? Further, as is always the case, if there are detailed questions and numbers that the committee is interested in receiving, we're prepared to bring them back to the committee at a later date.

Á  (1130)  

    Mr. Monte Solberg: Is Mr. Winberg ready to reply?

    Mr. Alan Winberg (Assistant Deputy Minister, Finance and Administrative Services, Department of Human Resources Development): Yes, for sure.

    Much of the first part of the question was about what is our budget. In 2000-2001 we spent $15.7 million in advertising. The year before that, $14 million. So it varies depending on the various advertising campaigns that are run.

     You'll recognize some of our campaigns, such as the youth employment strategy, which is designed to help youth get jobs, and the Canada student loan program. We've recently done a major change to that program.

    Mr. Monte Solberg: Sure. I don't want to interrupt you, but time is so short. If I could really zero in on a couple of things--and I apologize because I don't mean to be rude. Can you tell me, does it run through CCG? And in these programs, do you specifically work through the sponsorship program or the visibility program?

    Mr. Alan Winberg: The process we use to manage these contracts is through the Public Works and Government Services agency that's set up to assist us with that. We manage our contracts in a manner completely consistent with the Treasury Board regulations.

    Mr. Monte Solberg: But just to be clear, that is CCG, Canada Communications Group; it's from Public Works through CCG.

    Mr. Alan Winberg: Yes. It's the group that is assigned this job within Public Works. CCG was one of the agencies. I understand they've made changes, but I can't speak for Public Works.

    Mr. Monte Solberg: Do you direct whether or not this money goes to the sponsorship program, for instance?

    Mr. Alan Winberg: No, we do specific advertising campaigns within the context of specific programs of our department.

    Mr. Monte Solberg: Do you do value-for-money audits of how effective those programs are? I'm seeing a nodding of the head; that's good enough for me.

    Is it possible to get some of the agreements, correspondence, contracts that have been struck between Public Works, your department, and Canada Communications Group, CCG, and the people who they in fact contract with? Is it possible to get those?

    Mr. Alan Winberg: Certainly we have the contractual documents, which we'll make available to the committee through the normal process.

    Mr. Monte Solberg: So I can be specific about that, what is that process? Can we have them by a specific date? I realize we can't have them tomorrow, but....

    Mr. Alan Winberg: We will assemble the information as quickly as possible and provide it to the chair.

    Mr. Monte Solberg: Could you give us some assurance that that would be before the House rises for the summer, for instance?

    Ms. Jane Stewart: I can't make assurances on the timing, but indeed there are the processes that exist through access to information as well as responding to requests of the committee.

    Mr. Monte Solberg: I think the committee is requesting it, or at least I am. So hopefully you would honour that in the spirit with which it's asked for.

    I want to move on a little bit, because I know I don't have a lot of time. Can you tell me whether or not all these contracts are actually on paper? Are there any verbal contracts that we should know about with anybody?

    Ms. Jane Stewart: I can say, in the context of our work in communications, I'm quite confident that the management of our work in the department is solid. Certainly we're welcoming the Auditor General to come and look at our history and our contracts with these programs, which really have been quite well received by the Canadian public.

    I think part of the questioning is really about outcomes. In that context, I would also appreciate commentary from the table on the quality of the ads you do see that are made public and are there to share the work of the Government of Canada with Canadians. Because they are there, you see them, whether they be the ads, as Alan mentioned, for our youth programming, our ads for the parental benefit, our new ads that you may have seen on the hockey games for the guaranteed income supplement....

    My view is that the work we have will stand the test of time. As I say, the Auditor General could come and provide more advice to us if necessary.

Á  (1135)  

    Mr. Monte Solberg: Sure. Those value-for-money audits would tell us to some degree how effective they are, and I assume we could see those as well. We'd like to see those as well. I'm sure that's possible.

    There's no response. Are you saying yes to that?

    Mr. Alan Winberg: We have an audit plan that we've been through with parliamentary committees, and included in that plan there is a planned audit of procurement. It's to start in about 18 months. We would be happy to provide all the documentation related to that audit. There's an audit plan and there are audit standards. That would be the audit we are planning to undertake. Perhaps we'll look at whether that can be advanced in our audit and evaluation committee.

    Mr. Monte Solberg: Do you know offhand whether there has been any work done with Groupaction and Polygon? Has the department, through CCG, done work with those two particular companies?

    Mr. Alan Winberg: The two advertising agencies of record for the work we do in our department are Allard Johnson and Vickers and Benson. I'm not aware of the other companies' work for our department.

    Mr. Monte Solberg: Let me ask one question that has nothing to do with that. You made a commitment in the past, Minister, to post the list of grants and contributions on the Internet. I don't believe they're there any more. I'm wondering what's happened with that.

    Ms. Jane Stewart: Actually, we're just preparing the next dump for the year ending 2000-2001. It should be on the website, I expect, by the end of June. That is our anticipated timeframe.

    Indeed, I think one of the great and positive outcomes of our work on grants and contributions has been a recognition of new opportunities to provide information, particularly over the web. So that next massive dump of programs and services you'll find in every one of your ridings will be available, I anticipate, by the end of June.

    The Chair: Madame St-Jacques.

[Translation]

    Ms. Diane St-Jacques (Shefford, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair.

    My question concerns the senior population. It's a fact that many seniors live below the poverty line. Some time ago, your department revealed that many persons were unaware of their entitlement to the Guaranteed Income Supplement. Subsequently, I worked with the HRDC office in my riding to get this information out to all of the local organizations that work closely with seniors so that they could help them complete the necessary paperwork to begin receiving the GIS.

    You mentioned earlier that the government was running advertisements about this during hockey games. However, I'd like to know what other steps you have taken to inform people. Perhaps you can give us a report. It's important this information get out to people. Further to your efforts, can you report on whether the information has in fact reached its intended audience or if some people still remain uninformed?

[English]

    Ms. Jane Stewart: I'd first start by recognizing and thanking the committee for the excellent work they've done in their most recent report. Coming out of that, the government has positively responded to the vast majority of the recommendations that were developed by this committee.

    In that context, the department, as you know, had already started to take action in connecting more directly with seniors so that this important piece of the pension structure would be as well known to them as possible.

    In 1996 we started providing information about OAS and GIS to seniors before their 65th birthday. In 1999 we changed the income tax form so they could check off the desire to have an automatic reassessment of their guaranteed income supplement eligibility.

    Thanks to the work of the committee, I think we got some good clarification from the privacy commissioner about the ability of departments to work together more effectively to identify those who may be eligible for the guaranteed income supplement in particular. As a result of that partnership with CCRA--Canada Customs and Revenue Agency--we've developed a very simple form that we have sent out to well over 100,000 Canadian seniors, basically telling them that if they meet these criteria, all they have to do is sign. It's come back to us, and now we are processing those documents. A good number have responded very quickly. We're going through them. And this working relationship with CCRA has given us access to potentially eligible seniors that we really, more generally, wouldn't easily connect with.

    As you point out, Madame St-Jacques, we are also increasing our direct communications with seniors, partnering with community organizations, with those working in homelessness, and with those who are providing support for those without permanent addresses. We have the new electronic connections, through media, through television, for seniors.

    I know many of you as members of Parliament are doing your own outreach, and I applaud you in that regard. But fundamentally, we feel we have expanded the information connections with seniors because this is a very important program.

    I would note that this is not an entitlement program like the old age security; it is a specific social program and it is there to assist seniors at a point in time when they need to have their incomes augmented.

    I guess this is a time to remind the committee that this is the 75th anniversary of public pensions in Canada, something we should be very proud of. If we look at the impact the pension structures in Canada have had on the levels of poverty amongst seniors in Canada, since 1980, the incidence of poverty among Canadian seniors has been reduced from about 22% to about 8%. So we're on the right track, but we have to continue to be vigilant and do more.

Á  (1140)  

[Translation]

    Ms. Diane St-Jacques: However, sometime in the near future, will we be getting a report on the government's efforts to connect with people? When can we expect such a report? Next year perhaps? Are you working to a deadline?

[English]

    Ms. Jane Stewart: Actually, I can provide you some right now, if my memory will serve me. In the context of the work that's come out of our partnership with CCRA, we've received, I think, 65,000 forms from Canadian seniors. We're processing those and finding the vast majority are eligible for the guaranteed income supplement.

    I'd be pleased to provide the committee the final outcome of that particular initiative, which has been very useful.

[Translation]

    Ms. Diane St-Jacques: Still on the subject of seniors, but younger seniors, I'd like to focus on pilot projects developed for seniors who lose their job at an age when it is difficult for them to reposition themselves in the labour force.

    Are these pilot projects still ongoing? Are any new ones planned? I don't know if you can answer that question in only a few seconds.

[English]

    Ms. Jane Stewart: The relationship we built with the provinces and territories was specifically to focus on older workers and some pilot projects that responded directly to opportunities, jurisdiction by jurisdiction.

    That $30 million opportunity is over a two-year period, and the pilot projects are developing in every jurisdiction. Some jurisdictions have been quite slow to bring forward their ideas. For example, New Brunswick is just now coming forward with theirs. The Province of Quebec has been very aggressive in using the structures. British Columbia is now getting theirs in place. We are anticipating getting results from those pilots over the coming years. It has turned out to be a very good working relationship with our provincial and territorial partners.

    When we look at the employment statistics, the opportunities for older workers have been increasing almost more rapidly than for other groups in the economy, which is fascinating to know. Their increase in employment opportunity is about 6.4%, if I'm not mistaken--somebody can correct me, John, I'm not sure--so older workers are finding new opportunities.

    In the context of the skills and learning agenda, we have to really come to appreciate the strategies and means of ensuring that as we live longer and are healthier, we can contribute for a longer period of time. What are the techniques to ensure that older workers have the opportunity to continue to contribute and mentor new entrants into the workplace in an effective fashion?

    Ms. Diane St-Jacques: Okay, thank you.

Á  (1145)  

    The Chair: Mr. Crête.

[Translation]

    Mr. Paul Crête (Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, BQ): Thank you, Madam Chair. Good day, Minister. I'm pleased that you could be here today, although I wish you had been here yesterday for our session on employment insurance which resembled a chamber of horrors. You would have had an opportunity to hear from self-employed people, seasonal workers, pregnant women and older workers who made some major demands. This month also marks the anniversary of the committee's unanimous report on employment insurance. Therefore, it would have been an interesting meeting for you to attend. However, I'm still pleased to welcome you here today.

    My first question concerns the looming softwood lumber crisis. It's coming. The tariff will come into effect on May 23 and we're likely to have a few very difficult years ahead of us.

    Has a particular plan of action been developed, one that includes changes to employment insurance provisions? Do you have any plans to dip into the EI reserve fund? I think the money in the fund - which I believe it's something in the order of $700 million - does not go to the provinces, but rather is kept in reserve by the department. The money could be used to take a proactive approach to training these workers even before they are laid off.

[English]

    Ms. Jane Stewart: In response to your opening comments, I'm sorry I didn't make it to your salon yesterday, but I did get all the paperwork.

    I was very interested to see that the Bloc were very positive and glad that the Government of Canada had made all these modifications--and were even trying to take credit for them, when in many circumstances you voted against them, Mr. Crête. So it was kind of fascinating to see that development. Thank you for recognizing that we have made considerable improvements to the system, not the least of which are changes to support seasonal workers.

    With direct reference to the question on the softwood lumber industry, there's no question the government and I are preoccupied with the potential impact of the trade dispute on workers in the softwood lumber industry. I can tell you we have been very aggressive in working with the industry and the unions, and right at the community level. My local HRCC managers are connecting directly with employers, community by community, so we can really follow the impact of this.

    The industry itself is quite complex, as you know. There are many variables that impact the employment cycle within the industry. There are employees who work in the forest, employees in the sawmills, and those who are working with the remanufacturers. It's not that easy to determine the normal cycle of employment-unemployment and how it's being impacted specifically by the trade dispute, but it's something we are developing systems to respond to.

    At this time, we are pleased that the employment insurance system is strong and by and large will be there to assist those who may find themselves in layoff circumstances. Those who are laid off will have access to benefits, in many cases for many months.

    But I want to be able to follow the circumstances of the claims and see how the programs are responding. We have, within the government, a strong partnership across ministries and with different provinces, because there are provincial opportunities to help mitigate the challenges. But I can tell you we haven't closed any doors, and we very much want to be responsive to the impacts of the trade dispute.

    So the bottom line is, do we see this as a priority file for us? Absolutely. We will be working aggressively with our partners to follow it and be responsive.

[Translation]

    Mr. Paul Crête: Thank you, Minister. To be quite honest, in the case of Bill C-2, for example, we couldn't vote in favour of proposed legislation that would legalize the diversion of surplus funds in the EI account. If the Liberals have decided to incorporate into this bill measures that we have long been demanding, then we're very happy about that. We hope that some of our other efforts, like our forum, will lead to other changes.

    More specifically, my question concerns a recommendation formulated by the Law Commission of Canada in its report Beyond Conjugality. Let me quickly read recommendation 15 to you:

The Employment Insurance Act should be amended so that employment by a relative is not treated as presumptively uninsurable.

    In other words, in the case of a small business where an employee is a relative of the owner, the Law Commission of Canada, recognized by the federal government as a competent authority, supports the position I put forward in the bill tabled yesterday, which calls for an end to discrimination and for employment of this nature to be insurable from the outset, subject to a subsequent investigation of whether fraud is involved or not.

    Do you have any plans to implement this recommendation formulated by the Law Commission of Canada, possibly by supporting the bill that I introduced yesterday?

Á  (1150)  

[English]

    Ms. Jane Stewart: In the context of employment insurance, the department has a responsibility to make sure that those who receive benefits are indeed eligible for benefits.

    When we're talking about family owned businesses, where the employer is a family member and the boss is deciding when someone is hired and when they might be laid off, we have to ensure that there is an arm's-length relationship and that indeed the decision for layoff is reflective of the economic realities.

    In that context, as you know, the system we have in place now has the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency make an assessment as to the arm's-length relationship as it exists. At this point, my review tells me that in the vast majority of cases that are reviewed, employment insurance benefits are made; the eligibility has been found to be true.

    John, it's, what, about 92% or 97%? Anyway, a significantly high percentage of cases are found to be at arm's length and the benefits are there.

[Translation]

    Mr. Paul Crête: Let me clarify that. The Law Commission of Canada examined the question of conjugality and charter compliance and concluded that the existing legislation was discriminatory in that it held family employment was not insurable. The Law Commission of Canada maintains that this practice is unacceptable and in violation of charter rights and that changes are warranted. This recommendation was contained in a recent report. The Commission says an evaluation can be done to determine if employment is insurable, not because the person is a relative, but because fraud may be involved.

    You've told us how it works, but the fact remains that the process is initially discriminatory. Persons must prove that there is no fraud involved and the Law Commission of Canada maintains that this is discrimination. Do you intend to follow through on this recommendation? I can give you a copy of a news release issued by the Commission. I also have a letter, which unfortunately for the committee, is in French only but can always be translated, supporting the passage of this bill.

    The Law Commission of Canada is a federally constituted organization. It is not partisan and its recommendations are substantive in nature.

[English]

    Ms. Jane Stewart: At this point, I would tell you, I haven't plans to look at the system to make changes. I would repeat that the results of the analyses under the system we have now tend to be that a significant majority of the cases reviewed received benefits. Finally, I'd be happy to receive your documentation--no need to translate it--and to consider it.

    The Chair: Thank you. You'll get a second round, Mr. Crête.

    Madame Folco.

[Translation]

    Ms. Raymonde Folco (Laval West, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair.

    Minister, Secretary of State, welcome to our committee. I have a question concerning the black hole, Madam Minister.

    Given our country's climate and geography, a number of workers fall into this black hole. Problems are prevalent in such seasonal industries as lumber, fishing and tourism in particular and in areas in which the only jobs available are tied to these industries. When seasonal employment ends, workers become entitled to employment insurance. However, they did not receive EI benefits up until the day they return to their seasonal work. This is what is commonly referred to as the black hole.

    It's a shame really that the person who has been most vocal about this issue is not here today. This has been an extremely important topic of discussion. I'm sorry, but Mr. Crête has also discussed this matter at length.

    Madam Minister, what steps have you taken thus far, and what steps do you plan to take in the near future, to assist these workers who run out of benefits before they return to their seasonal jobs, particularly those workers in regions where seasonal jobs are the only kind of jobs available? There are no stores or industries in these regions. The only kind of work available is seasonal.

Á  (1155)  

[English]

    Ms. Jane Stewart: Merci, madame.

    The question of seasonal workers has been a great focus of the government in the context of employment insurance.

    I think I would start, first, by pointing to the success of the changes in 1995 in directly impacting seasonal workers. The move to an hours-based system has been positive for seasonal workers. In fact it has increased their entitlement, because all their hours count.

    Second, we're finding the percentage of benefit has increased, to the point where seasonal workers are receiving about 8% higher supports than other beneficiaries.

    In this context, however, there are still issues. In response to the good advice of this committee and our caucus, we looked at some of the changes that weren't working very well, like the intensity rule, for example, and the challenges associated with the clawback. We made changes in that part of the legislation, particularly in response to the impact they were having on seasonal workers. I think that was very positive.

    In the context of some of the other data we're reviewing--and which we see every year in the monitoring and assessment report--we're finding the benefit duration, by and large, is working well. Even for seasonal workers, about 75% of the entitlement is used on an ongoing basis. Some people, as you point out, Madame, do maximize their whole entitlement. In some cases they do have space between the benefit and when they go back to work.

    That's why in parts of Canada, where seasonal work is a large part of the employment opportunity, we've set up community working groups. I'm thinking of those in the provinces of New Brunswick and Quebec. The groups themselves are building partnerships with employers and unions, and with other community opportunities and local employers, to find ways and means of building on the shoulders of the season. They are also finding other opportunities--perhaps for older workers, like Madame St-Jacques was asking about.

    I had the benefit of being with our colleague, Mr. Crête, in Rivière-du-Loup, where we announced a positive response to that community's work, with an innovation program and an older workers program, particularly in the area of the forestry. I was in Chicoutimi, where we announced a new strategy for tourism. Again, we were building on the shoulders.

    So there are a number of different strategies we're taking to recognize the reality of employment for seasonal workers. But on balance we're finding the system works well, and there are things we can do to look at diversifying the economy and providing shoulder opportunities. I think these will be valuable to us in the short and medium terms. We recognize the important contribution seasonal workers make to the Canadian economy, and the job we have together to help the industry understand how best to ensure a steady stream of entrants into the labour force, and how to manage that labour force as effectively as possible....

    With our sector councils, we have an increasing number of these sectors covered. I think we'll see some positive results out of their work. Together they're looking at what it means to be in the forestry industry or in the tourism sector and whether there are ways we can manage human resources more effectively than we have in the past.

[Translation]

    Ms. Raymonde Folco: Madam Minister, can you give us some assurances that in the very near future, you will continue to implement these pilot projects which target the individuals as well as communities? You mentioned Chicoutimi. A pilot project is planned for Chicoutimi, and perhaps another for Trois-Pistoles and other communities across Canada. Do you intend to pursue this type of initiative?

  (1200)  

[English]

    Ms. Jane Stewart: Oui. One of the things I address with these community groups all the time is that sometimes they start in a particular sector and say, “Okay, we've been able to find some programs that are useful in forestry.” Then the question is, what about agriculture? I say, “Look, if we can do the same thing, let's keep pushing the envelope.” If I'm not mistaken, I just signed a project--oh, if I can only recall; it's in Quebec again--that is looking at new initiatives hopefully to deal with the shoulder issues in forestry. So, yes.

    The Chair: Good. Thank you.

    Ms. Lill.

    Ms. Wendy Lill (Dartmouth, NDP): Thank you very much for coming to talk about the skills and learning agenda.

    I'd like to take just a minute to give you a snapshot of the situation facing youth with disabilities in Nova Scotia. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say there's a crisis in education for children and youth with disabilities there. There is not enough funding in the special education envelope at the provincial level. It's leading to a lack of teachers' assistants, resource teachers, speech therapists, and psychologists, and a lack of in-service training. Because of the lack of supports, there is a growing resentment--by teachers, by families of children without disabilities--towards youth with disabilities. They are saying, we do not want them in the classroom; we do not want to see them there; they don't belong there.

    Right now, in Digby, Nova Scotia, there is a crisis around a ten-year-old boy with Down's syndrome at a local school. He has become the target of incredible nastiness and polarization, essentially because the education system has failed him and his family, has not met its responsibilities to him to educate him to his full potential and to uphold the values of the Charter of Rights of Canada.

    Closer to home, I am very familiar with a 17-year-old with a disability who is moving towards a brick wall after high school--to the training area. He is one of hundreds of youths with disabilities who need skills for the 21st century, who do truly want to contribute and want to work. But there aren't the job coaches, there aren't the training programs, and there aren't the jobs out there.

    You talk about working with your provincial partners, but I'll tell you that the provincial partners I work with, such as the Minister of Education, will say they don't get enough money from the federal government. They do not have enough money to fulfil their responsibilities towards the education and training of children and youth with disabilities.

    So I'm very eager to hear from you specifically what I can say to the Minister of Education in Nova Scotia, to the hundreds of parents who are very eager to know what skills, what training, is there today and tomorrow and a year from now for their kids. They really want them to be part of this society, to be part of the vision you have. I'd really like that spelled out to me, and I'd like it in writing, too, so I can take it home and tell people how we're going to move ahead there. Boy, we really need to move ahead, because we're moving backwards right now.

    Ms. Jane Stewart: Ms. Lill, I think your question really gets to the heart of the importance of the skills and learning agenda and why it is a national agenda. I think it gets to the heart of why it's clear that there isn't one single partner, whether it be the Government of Canada, other governments, or whomever might be at the table, to advance this agenda on its own; that it really is going to be a partnership amongst all of us as a country to recognize the issues that are associated with skills and learning in the 21st century, and the specific group of citizens to which you refer, Canadians with disabilities, at whatever stage in their life cycle, have to be included in the work that we do.

    The benefit of the framework that we've presented is one that looks at the whole life cycle so that the children at the point that you're speaking about, those at the K-12 system, the youth, then will have to transfer from the formal education system into what?There is a recognition that as adults they have contributions to make, and we have to have the systems in place that speak to their needs as well as to the needs of other groups of Canadians so that we all move ahead together, and fundamental is the importance to Canada of ensuring that all people who are interested and are able to make a contribution have the wherewithal to do it.

    So in terms of specifics, the one thing that you do have is the paper, which I would appreciate you taking back to your community and having an assessment made of it. The paper is written in an inclusive fashion, recognizing that all partners have to come to the table and that we all have different pieces to respond to in the agenda, sometimes based on our jurisdiction.

    The question you ask about the 10-year-old in the K-12 system would be a provincial jurisdiction, but we're encouraging the provinces to come and look at this assessment, some based on a strength in partnership. The question of the young person who is disabled, making that transition, is exactly the topic that we're discussing at the table of social services ministers, where we are looking at the labour market's plan for Canadians with disabilities. So across jurisdictions we are trying to work more effectively to understand the services that we have available jointly, how best to provide those to Canadians with disabilities, and what we can do to focus on that transitional requirement.

    For me, understanding this piece of public policy in a way that is inclusive of all Canadians is a fundamental priority. I, for one--and my sense is that this is becoming much more the norm--do not accept the idea of having satellite agendas for Canadians with disabilities or for aboriginal people, but rather, as we build a piece of public policy that is as important as this one, everyone sees a response to their needs and issues in the context of the same policy. With commentary like yours, it just reinforces why that is so important.

    Are there questions, and do we have to look at the programs that exist now for Canadians with disabilities and make them more effective and expand them? Yes. I don't think there's any argument there.

  (1205)  

    The Chair: Mr. McGuire.

    Mr. Joe McGuire (Egmont, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair. I have two questions, one for the Secretary of State as to the amount of money that's being spent on the youth employment strategy.

    As you say, you're spending $400 million to help youth prepare for, obtain, and maintain employment. But in Atlantic Canada we have sustained a cut in the amount of money expended there, and the demand is greater this year than it ever was. Even in the summer placement programs, we have a reduced number of dollars and an increase in the demand. I'm wondering why this is happening and what can be done about it.

    Secondly, to the minister, on the skills training for Canadians, you've prepared papers, and you say:

Skills are equally essential to inclusion and social cohesion within our own borders. Not only the economy, but society as a whole, is strengthened when Canadians have the necessary skills to contribute to their communities.

    How are you going to do that when we have basically signed over the majority of our dollars to provinces through the LMDAs, and how can we get national objectives and a national plan?

    Provinces tend to respond to their own needs, not to the national needs, and even within a province, some areas had been treated more fairly and equally when we were providing the training. That application is no longer there. So I'm wondering how you're going to do both, set national agendas when we're giving away the dollars and the means to individual provincial governments.

    Ms. Ethel Blondin-Andrew: Thank you, colleague.

    I'd like to deal with the issue of the youth employment strategy.

    It would appear in the way the funding is allocated and delivered in the Atlantic that there's been a cut, but there hasn't been. The total allocation you had previously is the same. It's the delivery mechanism. We've gone to a constituency-based approach, which allows greater participation for all MPs. The way that has adjusted the numbers is that it appears there is not as much money as there used to be. The total allocation for the Atlantic is still the same. It's just that there's been an adjustment in the way the money was allocated previously.

  (1210)  

    Mr. Joe McGuire: Most constituencies are saying they have a cut.

    Ms. Ethel Blondin-Andrew: Well, we maintain that there is not a cut. There may have been other leveraging in previous years that is not possible at this time. That might be from other sources. I'm not sure exactly.

    What I would say is the way in which the programs are delivered has changed. We've gone to a constituency base to allow for greater participation by MPs. When you make any kind of adjustment in the allocation of funds, the adjustment does not necessarily serve all the purposes that the members of Parliament might want, even though it gives them greater involvement. It would appear there's less money, but there isn't. The total allocation we previously had for the Atlantic is still the same.

    Mr. Joe McGuire: But in the allocation of those funds, the priority is to.... For example, in my riding, when they grade the summer programs, when you apply the criteria, a company like Wal-Mart gets taxpayers' money. They're the second largest corporation in the world and they qualify for summer career placement, while a community group that basically has to have these kinds of funds is graded much lower. I think there's something wrong with the criteria when Wal-Mart can qualify at the highest level while somebody in the community who's running a youth recreation program for the summer can't make it.

    Ms. Ethel Blondin-Andrew: We can take any concerns that you have in detail. We have so many of these agreements across all of Canada, and I would say the Wal-Marts are the exception. I do a review of the lists that come forward, and generally speaking, those are all small groups. Not all, but the majority of them are small and are community and constituency based. The members of Parliament have a greater involvement with those groups.

    I can't speak for each and every one of those, but I can assure you that if there is a problem that is endemic to the whole youth employment strategy and summer career placement, we can look at it. We can undertake to look at that.

    Mr. Joe McGuire: Okay.

    Ms. Jane Stewart: The value of members of Parliament being involved is right there.

    On the broader question, Mr. McGuire, about the skills and learning agenda and a relationship with the provinces, particularly vis-à-vis labour market development agreements, I would start by commenting that the paper Knowledge Matters and the framework we present are about a lot more than just specific labour market interventions for employment insurance recipients. It's a framework that really spans the life cycle; it talks about the importance of working effectively with all partners on behalf of our youngest citizens, right through to finding ways of ensuring that older workers have the opportunity to contribute. So it's an expansive life cycle framework.

    Specifically with relationship to labour market development agreements, they are one piece of the puzzle, focused on employment-insurance-eligible Canadians who can have access to part II measures, the active measures that assist them with resumé writing, job training, skills development, that sort of thing. So it's one piece, one tool, that's available for us to respond to this national priority of building an active skills agenda.

    The place where I discuss labour market development agreements is at the Forum of Labour Market Ministers. Interestingly enough, in the context of the skills and learning agenda, they have come back to me and said there are some things they'd like to work on, new developments in the labour market agreements. I too have some issues I would like to speak with them about, particularly around the questions of accountability and the investments that are made. Are there best practices and common elements of investment that we should explore more broadly to make sure there is, by and large, the same kind of investment being made jurisdiction by jurisdiction?

    Recently, Alberta hosted a best practices symposium on the labour market development agreements, with some very interesting outcomes that we want to build on.

    So there are two messages. The LMDAs are one particular tool that's available to us to utilize. In terms of encouraging skills and development, there are so many other things that are part and parcel of the overarching plan, but it's all important.

  (1215)  

    The Chair: You'll have to use those in the next one because our time has gone.

    Mr. Solberg.

    Mr. Monte Solberg: Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

    Just to follow up on an earlier line of questioning, does the department contract out for reports and studies?

    Ms. Jane Stewart: Yes, very often. In terms of the analysis of our programming, we have a third party who comes in and makes the assessments.

    Mr. Monte Solberg: But not just the analysis. I'm not just talking about auditors, for instance; I'm talking about somebody producing a report on the EI system or whatever.

    Ms. Jane Stewart: Yes, indeed we do.

    Mr. Monte Solberg: Would it be fair to say you do quite a few of those? I would think you probably have a quite a few different--

    Ms. Jane Stewart: Well, in the context of skills and learning, we have a number of contracts with organizations like the Public Policy Forum and the Conference Board of Canada.

    Mr. Monte Solberg: I really wasn't thinking of those. I was thinking more of the independent types. I'm just talking about this in the context of the Auditor General's report yesterday. I'm concerned that there are reports being produced that really are of no value at all. I'm wondering if it's possible to get a list of these reports and who is providing them. I'm sure that wouldn't be a problem.

    Mr. Alan Winberg: First let me say that we can produce such a list.

    Back to your other question, we'd be happy to give you a list of all recipients of our communications, contracting and e-mails, within 30 days.

    Mr. Monte Solberg: Perfect.

    Mr. Alan Winberg: With regard to what you're asking about, the list of our service contracts, we'll be happy to do the same query in our information systems and produce that list. It will give you the name of the company that has the contract and the amount of the contract.

    Mr. Monte Solberg: Thank you. That's great.

    Now I want to move on to the EI system. In the House, we have asked a series of questions about overpayments. At the time, I think you said the problem had been fixed. There was a problem with people receiving overpayments and then having to pay huge penalties and fines and whatever. I don't want to get into that issue, but I do want to ask you something.

    Does it makes sense to you that part of the problem is that the EI bill itself is so complex? If you can understand that, you should be designing rockets for NASA, because it is almost impossible to understand. I think you made a commitment at one point--or perhaps it was your predecessor--to bring in a plain-language EI bill. Where is that at?

    Ms. Jane Stewart: There's no question the Employment Insurance Act is complicated. However, if we are to be as responsive as possible to Canadians, we are going to have complex measures. I also have great confidence in the capacity of our public service to respond to those complexities, Mr. Solberg. I believe that a piece of our continued improvement in providing that important service, the income support as well as the active measures that go along with it and the research that is done, has to be a significant portion of continuous training and upgrading of our staff.

    In the context of the plain-language document, we have made a commitment.

    John, how close are we to completing that? Within a year.

    Mr. Monte Solberg: The reason I raise that is when people do get caught on this, it's a tragedy for them. I appreciate that public servants are getting trained. But if somebody makes an honest mistake, they face huge consequences. We've all had correspondence from these people whose lives are turned upside down while they deal with this. I just want to emphasize how important that is to various people.

    I want to switch gears for a moment to social insurance number fraud. You had about 2,600 cases that you identified. Can you give me a sense of how much these people defrauded the government in terms of EI cheques, CPP, or whatever, using these numbers?

  (1220)  

    Ms. Jane Stewart: Mr. McWhinnie, I'm not sure if you have numbers.

    Mr. John McWhinnie (Assistant Deputy Minister, Insurance, Department of Human Resources Development): I don't have actual detailed numbers on how much in total, but I could speak to it, if you'd like.

    Ms. Jane Stewart: I don't know if you want some broad commentary around the importance of managing that or if you're just interested in a particular number. If you are, we can do an assessment.

    Mr. Monte Solberg: I am interested in the management of it. I'd like to know how we're dealing with it.

    Ms. Jane Stewart: Actually, the committee did a considerable amount of work on the social insurance number after the review by the Auditor General. That was in 1998 or 1999. The subsequent report by the Auditor General in 2000 focused on the social insurance number, and it was very positive about the undertakings by the department in managing the integrity of the social insurance number.

    We've done a number of things, which I can list for you. Probably one of the most important ones was tripling the number of investigations that were undertaken. We've done a complete review and kicked out of the system around 300,000 numbers that couldn't be active because the people were dead. So we've done a cleanup there.

    At the table of ministers responsible to develop strategies in response to September 11, the issue of government documentation is on the agenda, including the social insurance number.

    What I can say to you, Mr. Solberg, is that I'm quite happy about the response of the department to the work of the committee and the Auditor General in this regard, and we will continue to be responsive to the issue.

    Mr. Monte Solberg: I have one more question, really a comment, and I'll be very happy to hear what you have to say about this. In the fall of 2000, I think it was, the Auditor General referred to the wisdom of having MPs involved in deciding where grants should go in the riding, and I'm wondering if it isn't time to reconsider this process. I see the appearance of possible conflicts of interest. In the context of what's happening now with the Auditor General, isn't it time to get away from that completely and let a professional public service deal with that? If we're going to be in the grants business, shouldn't we get away from that, when individual MPs really don't have the resources and skills to sort through dozens and dozens of applications for grants?

    Ms. Jane Stewart: I think there are different philosophies on that. I think many members of Parliament feel they know their communities extraordinarily well. When we're talking about investments, for example, in the case of the summer student program, they know their organizations and their young people and where they'd like to put an emphasis. For many people, having the input of a member of Parliament makes a lot of sense. The appropriate things that can be supported are in the terms and conditions, and I think that information can be provided effectively by the department. I think there are lots of constituents who would expect a member of Parliament to have some responsibility in that regard, and I think we can find the mechanisms to ensure there isn't a circumstance of conflict. I think that as members of Parliament we have to take some responsibility for understanding our communities and making sure that the programs and services of government are available and used effectively and properly in our communities. There are different points of view on that. Not all of our programs include direct involvement, but certainly the summer career placement program is one where it is used.

    The Chair: Thank you.

    Mr. Tonks.

    Mr. Alan Tonks (York South--Weston, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to the deputation today.

    I'm interested in pursuing the line of questioning with respect to sector councils. On behalf of the committee, I'd like to have you outline how, in particular in Ontario, where there is an absence of a labour market development agreement, you see the sector councils can be the most effective instruments in skill development issues.

    I think everyone on the committee would take it as self-evident that the demographics can be characterized as a ticking time bomb with respect to skills shortages, particularly in the high-tech and building industries. The effectiveness of those sector councils and how you see those as part of this vision to meet that skills development issue problem are what I'm particularly interested in hearing about.

  (1225)  

    Ms. Jane Stewart: There are two things. First, with respect to the fact we don't have a labour market agreement with Ontario, I don't want anyone to think that the services from the part II funds are not being implemented, because they are. The department is still there, and HRDC is responding to the needs of employment insurance beneficiaries in that regard.

    Specifically with regard to sector councils...I can really get going on this strategy because I am so excited about it. The idea of bringing together at one table the employers, the private sector interests, the unions, the educational institutions that can provide curricula development or human resource information, individuals, and governments for a particular sector of the Canadian economy to focus specifically on the human resource interest is extraordinarily powerful.

    We've had almost ten years of experience here. We've had some partnerships that didn't gel at the first go-round for a number of different reasons but others that have just gone gangbusters. I think of the tourism sector council, the biotechnology sector council, and the textile industry council, which just started in 1996 and which has just taken off and responded to the question of skilled trade shortages in an extremely interesting, effective way, using web technologies. They're now, with the benefit of the council and the investment of the Government of Canada, developing web-based technology that is winning awards around the world, and they are selling it across the world. The opportunities that exist there are, from my point of view, tremendous.

    In the most recent budget we identified additional funds to be invested in those exemplary sector councils to take them to the next plateau. They usually start by doing an assessment of who they are. They ask, what are our standards of occupational requirements within the sector? What are the streams of entry? How do we continue to develop and improve the streams? We want to take those sector councils to the stage where they are even more thoughtful about inclusion, about involving aboriginal people and Canadians with disabilities.

    We want them to look at the different realities facing small, medium-sized, and large employers. We want them to look at the questions of whether it's part of their sector of apprenticeship and whether there are more effective ways of jointly developing apprentices so you don't get into this argument of the small business owner who says, look, I have an apprentice, then I lose him to a large employer, so why should I do it? These kinds of seminal issues are facing us now in the context of the 21st century knowledge-based economy, sector by sector.

    For me, something the committee might find interesting as they review this, if you choose to look at the skills and learning agenda more comprehensively, is to ask some of these councils to come in and talk to you about what they're doing. You'd be energized by the experience, and I think it would be good value for them as well.

    Mr. Alan Tonks: Madam Chair, I was just going to say that in terms of value-added, best practice, and indicators, the committee would really be interested in seeing how the impact is going to be made through sector councils. Having the councils appear before us would be an excellent activity for this committee.

    I just have one small question on the Knowledge Matters side with respect to provincial-territorial cooperation. You've mentioned the former labour ministers' council and you've mentioned the ministers of education, but in terms of post-secondary education and skills development--again, crossing over to my previous question--how do you see the Knowledge Matters paper being implemented? What are the instruments you see through territorial-provincial cooperation?

    Ms. Jane Stewart: First and foremost, when we're talking about post-secondary education, there is and has always been a role for the Government of Canada--through Canada student loans, for example. We have added to that structure the millennium scholarships. We have added to it the Canada education savings grants for families or individuals to start saving for their children's post-secondary education, which has been extraordinarily well received by Canadians.

    A few months ago in Newfoundland we celebrated the billionth dollar of Canadian family investment in their children's education. That's an additional tool that has been added to the structure.

    In the context of our partnership with the provinces and territories, it's interesting that at the Council of Ministers of Education there has never been, until last month, a federal minister invited to come and sit with the council. Because of the skills and knowledge paper, the council asked me to come and sit down and talk about the synergies that really should be further developed. I think that's a positive sign in terms of a recognition that everybody has to think about this in the context of a national agenda--not a federal agenda, not a provincial agenda, but a national agenda.

    The work the department has been undertaking with that particular council, though, did not begin with my arrival there. We have some experiences where we're working with the ministers of education to look at the financial tools that are there for access, to really ask the tough question: is there a better relationship we could build?

    We're starting to see some fruits of that in Saskatchewan, and in Ontario, for example, we have we have a “one student, one loan” approach. We've integrated our relationship quite directly, but there's more that needs to be done.

    On balance I think it's becoming clear. Many provinces have issued their own papers on skills and learning--Quebec has; Alberta has; New Brunswick has a paper that talks about it.

    I've been travelling the country talking with the provinces about the paper. I'm optimistic about the energy being put into this. But the PSE sector is a very important one, and that's why our first broad round table is in this category. Certainly if members of Parliament would like to attend it, we'd be glad to give you the information. If you're available, it would be great to have you there.

  (1230)  

    Mr. Alan Tonks: Good. Thank you.

    Thank you, Madam Chair.

    The Chair: Mr. Crête.

[Translation]

    Mr. Paul Crête: Thank you, Madam Chair.

    April 29 marked the conclusion of consultations in the Canada Gazette on the issue of charging interest to persons who owe money to HRDC. I believe you received hundreds of letters as part of this consultation process.

    Do you have any plans to postpone the implementation of this measure and to take into consideration the views of the sixty odd members who wrote to you calling for the matter to be debated here in committee, since the notion of filing a false statement is far from clear and that people who quite unintentionally defraud the government may be obliged to pay interest? What is your current position on this issue?

[English]

    Ms. Jane Stewart: Indeed, Mr. Crête, you're right. We received about 100 responses to the Gazette. We're in the process now of reviewing them.

    One of the pieces of the proposal that we want to look at very carefully is writing. I mean, writing the undertaking so that we clarify absolutely that if interest will be applied, it will only be in cases where there was, without question, intentional misrepresentation.

    The message that has come through in those representations is I think an appreciation on behalf of really everybody that it is all right to have a penalty for those who deliberately misrepresent themselves. The integrity to the Canadian taxpayer demands that. But we have to be very clear and able to define that category.

    I think the role of members of Parliament in that regard, as well as others, has been very clear. So what we want to do is make sure the system is fair; that when there's a circumstance where an individual has, with no intention of defrauding the government or the Canadian taxpayer, made an honest mistake, there won't be a penalty. That's not the intention at all. But being able to really clarify those circumstances is something we're looking at right now.

[Translation]

    Mr. Paul Crête: Madam Minister, I agree with you that persons who intentionally set out to defraud the government should be fined and I find your comments today most interesting. Does this mean that implementation of your proposal scheduled for July 1, 2002 will be delayed?

[English]

    Ms. Jane Stewart: I'm not at this point expecting there will be a delay. But at the same time, I'm very anxious to ensure we get it right. So I think the implementation of the proposal will come only when we're convinced we've got the language and the structures correctly assigned.

[Translation]

    Mr. Paul Crête: Madam Chair, you know I'm willing to discuss this matter any time in committee.

    My other question concerns parental leave provisions. The Quebec government was forced to go to court to ensure that a provision in the legislation was applied. However, at the same time, the minister responsible, Ms. Goupil, offered to meet with you. According to 1998 figures, only 49 per cent of pregnant women in Quebec took advantage of parental leave provisions. The Quebec program would be much broader in scope.

    Are you willing to meet with Ms. Goupil so that negotiations can resume and an agreement can be reached on amounts and on how the program could be applied by the Quebec government?

  (1235)  

[English]

    Ms. Jane Stewart: In the past I've met with both Madame Goupil and Madame Marois, and have talked about this program. I think it's fairly clear--and my representations publicly don't change too much--the expansion of the program we undertook has been extraordinarily well received by Canadians. We have been able to double parental benefits and to make the system more flexible and more responsive without increasing the cost to premium payers. I think that has been very well received.

    Should a provincial jurisdiction want to add to that program, we would be absolutely happy and encourage them to do so. For my part, I see the doubling of parental benefits as an extraordinarily important addition to the social fabric of Canada. We're starting to and will be interested to see the response of Canadians to the program--maybe in terms of fathers participating in the raising of their children in the first year. It's really a highlight of the work we've done as a government in response to the issues facing Canadian families, including this workplace-family balance question.

    As I say, I've met with both ministers in the past. They've taken a path you've identified now, which is clear. I'm very satisfied we've been able to act very quickly on a commitment we made to Canadians to improve the parental benefit structures. At the same time, we've been able to do it without increasing premiums, but by decreasing premiums.

[Translation]

    Mr. Paul Crête: In the spirit of cooperation, would you be available to meet with the Quebec government ministers to pursue these negotiations, or would you prefer to wait until the courts have ruled? That could take awhile and in the meantime, many women who could be covered by the Quebec program will not benefit from any federal coverage either.

[English]

    Ms. Jane Stewart: Well again, I would say I have met with them. I've made my position clear, that we have provided an available and much-expanded system for all Canadians.

    If provincial jurisdictions want to add to it, it would be interesting to see how they do it with the supports that would be required for an expanded program. But at this point, Quebec has chosen an approach that is their right to follow.

    But for me, I am very satisfied that we have a program that responded to our commitments to Canadians and will make a difference in their lives.

[Translation]

    Mr. Paul Crête: Yet, we've offered to...

[English]

    The Chair: You've had well over 15 minutes in your two rounds.

    Madame Neville.

    Ms. Anita Neville (Winnipeg South Centre, Lib.): Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and I thank both ministers for being here today.

    Mr. Tonks pre-empted me a bit on the post-secondary education question, but I'll ask mine briefly.

    I have two questions related to post-secondary education and issues related to increasing the access to post-secondary education. What are the plans in development, and how are you moving forward on that issue?

    Another very serious concern for me--and I was pleased to hear Minister Blondin-Andrew address the issue--is both K to 12 and post-secondary education/skills training of aboriginal young people. My concern about the education of aboriginal young people relates to cooperation with the provinces and the jurisdictional issues that sometimes come into play. Are you working with provinces specifically on the initiatives related to aboriginal young people? I'm pleased to hear about the upcoming round tables to determine what the needs and concerns are, but how are you responding with the provinces in connection with the education of aboriginals?

  (1240)  

    Ms. Ethel Blondin-Andrew: I'll start by saying that we have an ongoing process with the federal-provincial-territorial ministers of aboriginal affairs. We have developed, in concert with them, an aboriginal youth strategy, a national one. We commenced with a conference that was basically prepared and undertaken by young people and delivered by young people in Edmonton, Alberta. The results of the strategy that have come together are ongoing. There will be further discussion with those ministers when we commence again.

    Manitoba plays a fairly active role, with Minister Eric Robinson. We have aboriginal ministers--Pearl Calahasen from Alberta, who figures very prominently on this, is also an aboriginal. We have Minister Jim Antoine from the territories, though I think that may have changed now. These are all leaders in and of their own communities, but they are involved in this.

    Not only that, but we've had youths present to the federal-provincial-territorial ministers their priorities and their issues that they want included as part of the strategy. I think it's a work in progress, and there's a lot more to do.

    On the issue specifically of collaboration on the ground, I think you'll find that Quebec and the Northwest Territories are the only two provinces that have full jurisdiction over post-secondary education. In the territories, I know that all people, including aboriginal people, are eligible for a grant. They've adjusted it and made it very generous, and they continue to work on that.

    The problem with post-secondary education for aboriginal people lies basically with the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs. They have a huge waiting list. That's a challenge for them. But all of the other issues we deal with in a fairly comprehensive and universal manner.

    Ms. Jane Stewart: Specifically in response to your question about access, I outlined to Mr. Tonks some of the things we've undertaken, but there are a couple of other things I might mention.

    In the last budget, despite the fact that it really was a budget that was responding to the question of security for Canadians post September 11, we did identify and set aside money for some very important investments. One was additional investments for the sector councils, but another one was expanding the Canada study grants for Canadians with permanent disabilities. So the study grant that's there will move from $5,000 to $8,000, in recognition of the cost of services for someone with a permanent disability to get to university, to have access to their programming, to participate in as full a manner as possible.

    Our message there was, we know there is more we need to do and we should start with those who are most vulnerable to participation and for whom the sticker shock of post-secondary education can be the most difficult.

    The other piece of the puzzle that I think is going to be important is finding those tools that will allow Canadians, particularly Canadians who are working, to continuously learn. We've looked at a number of different options, but the idea of being able to determine the place and the pace of learning, to earn as you learn, and those kinds of sentiments, has led us to the direction of looking at a more expansive and responsive part-time loan structure.

    Right now, through Canada student loans, we issue hundreds of thousands of full-time student loans and only 3,000 part-time loans. I think there is some potential there for us to look at mechanisms that are far more responsive to the reality facing Canadians who are so busy working, raising their families, and trying to continuously keep themselves current, and that will give them those tools that will allow them that flexibility in an immediate fashion.

    So we're looking at different strategies. We are partnering, as I say, with the provinces to actually look at the structures that are in place and to see if we can bring a more reasoned infrastructure to that. But without question, the issue of access and capacity is recognized in the paper as being an area where we have to turn our attention.

  (1245)  

    Ms. Anita Neville: Thank you.

    The Chair: Thank you, Ministers. I think we've had some rather interesting questions and answers, and we certainly appreciate that you've taken the time to come and visit with us today.

    We thank your officials. We've seen a number of them as we've been studying other things, and I know that over the course of the next several months we'll see many of you back again.

    Again, I thank members of the committee. You were all very cooperative and I'm very pleased with the results.

    With no further ado, the meeting is adjourned.