:
Thank you kindly, Mr. Chair.
I am pleased to appear before this committee to discuss the work of my department. As you know, HRSDC has a very broad mission. We interact with Canadians at every stage of their lives.
[English]
We also play a key role in ensuring Canada's continued economic success, competitiveness, and long-term prosperity.
Since July 2009, over 820,000 net new jobs have been created in Canada. Now, the hard numbers speak for themselves, but in addition to that, we have over 390,000 more Canadians at work now than compared to the best months we had before the recession. This is really tremendous and should not go unnoticed.
[Translation]
However, as I've said many times, we cannot rest on our laurels.
[English]
We're still dealing with high unemployment in some areas, and at the same time we have labour shortages in other areas, sometimes even where there is high unemployment. More acutely, where we're really feeling the pinch is in the mismatch that exists between the needs of employers and the skills and labour that are available to them.
The Canadian Chamber of Commerce recently described the skills gap as, and I quote: “the major socio-economic challenge confronting this country”, and frankly, ladies and gentlemen, I agree with them.
The issue is about how to grow in light of an aging population of workers who are now starting to leave the workforce. We are sitting here competing globally for skills and for talent.
[Translation]
Things are only going to get worse if we don't do something about addressing the gap that exists in terms of skilling up our own people.
[English]
Let's be clear on something, though. Although we agree with the fact that we have a major issue on our hands in this country, I do not agree that it is the sole responsibility of the federal government to fix it; it can't, nor should it be. Our success will be dependent on the collective ability to be innovative, flexible, and willing to change.
So what are we doing at HRSDC to help? First, we're making changes to the employment insurance program to make it easier for unemployed Canadians to search for and find work. At its core, employment insurance is just that: an insurance program to support Canadians when they're out of work through no fault of their own.
[Translation]
With that support, there has always come the responsibility of being available and actively looking for work.
[English]
I've had the opportunity to discuss these changes with Canadians right across the country, and when I or one of my colleagues has that opportunity, it's clear that Canadians do understand that our government wants to make sure that they're better off working than not. They understand that we want to make sure that employers get the workers they need to run their businesses and they understand how important it is that Canadians right here at home always have first crack at job opportunities before a company can ever hire temporary foreign workers.
The changes to the EI program will help us achieve those goals. Think of the measure coming early next year to better connect Canadians with available jobs in their local areas.
[Translation]
The Working While on Claim pilot project also comes to mind. It allows people to keep more of what they earn, when they accept more work while on EI. We believe that these changes will make a difference, while ensuring that the program continues to support Canadians, as it always has, when they need it.
[English]
In addition to these changes comes our focus on training. Governments do play an important role in skills and training, no question. In fact, our government gives the provinces and territories $2.7 billion a year for the exact purpose of labour market and skills development programs, but it goes well beyond government at any level.
Partnership is key. Governments, the private sector, and education and training institutions all have a role to play in getting Canadians back to work, diversifying and strengthening our workforce and addressing the skills shortages.
The world has changed, and now there really is no such thing as an unskilled job. That's why my department supports a comprehensive suite of programs ranging from skills development to workplace literacy, from apprenticeship grants to financial aid programs, which have tremendously improved access to post-secondary education.
That takes me to one of my favourite topics, young Canadians, who are by far our greatest human resource in this country. After all, they are our future.
Youth unemployment, although better in Canada than in most countries around the world, sits at double the regular unemployment rate in this country. Why? Because they don't have the skills that employers need. Too many young people are caught in the vicious cycle of no job, no experience—no experience, no job.
That's why we've increased our investment in the national youth employment strategy.
[Translation]
Through Economic Action Plan 2012, we invested an additional $50 million into this strategy to connect young Canadians with jobs that are in high demand.
[English]
Our approach will match approximately 3,000 young Canadians with jobs in areas where there's a strong need for workers. It's important that we all take responsibility for guiding our young people and our future workforce.
Whether for skilled trades or other jobs in demand in other sectors, it's clear that Canadians of all ages need to have a better understanding of where the jobs are and what skills are required for them.
That's why in August I officially launched the new sectoral initiatives program. Under this program, critical labour market information will be gathered and made available through the Working in Canada website. Giving people better access to better information will enable employers, workers, and job seekers alike to make better decisions.
[Translation]
Ultimately, Mr. Chair, it comes down to doing things differently.
[English]
That leads me to another topic, and it's an exciting one—social finance.
Social finance is a new area for Canada. Earlier this month I launched a call for concepts to solicit ideas on social finance from both individuals and organizations. I wanted ideas on how we can shape future social policy in Canada or identify new partners. I wanted ideas about how we can get better results from our investment of taxpayers' dollars.
Let's be clear: this is not wholesale change. We're exploring at this stage, but this work speaks to exactly what I talked about at the beginning: the need to be creative, innovative, and willing to do things differently if we want or expect to get better results for Canadians.
[Translation]
Mr. Chair, as I conclude, these are just some of the initiatives under way, but they speak to my department's important role in delivering services to Canadians.
[English]
We will continue to be focused on these goals in a fiscally prudent way as we work to ensure that all Canadians have an opportunity to share in real results—job creation, economic growth, and long-term prosperity.
Thank you.
I'll now turn to my colleague.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, members of the committee, it was only a short while ago that Minister Finley and I were here to talk about Bill , the Helping Families in Need Act, and I'm delighted to be back again.
That legislation that we were talking about previously showed our government's commitment to the welfare of Canadian workers and their families. We believe that Canadians are entitled to be treated fairly on the job.
With that in mind, we foster good working conditions, constructive labour-management relations, and healthy, safe workplaces free from discrimination, because by doing all these things, we are making a vital contribution to Canada's prosperity and to our overall quality of life.
That said, we can't ignore that uncertain economic situation in which we are working today.
Some workers in our country are still vulnerable, and they are worried about the ability to provide for their families. We know that when Canadian workers were hit hard by the economic downturn—especially those employees whose employers went bankrupt, closed down, and did not pay their workers the money they were owed—Canadian workers did suffer.
That's why in 2008 our government introduced the wage earner protection program, or WEPP: because we wanted to make sure that the workers who were affected like this received timely compensation for their unpaid wages and their vacation pay.
We expanded the WEPP in 2009, and we included both unpaid severance and termination pay as well.
In 2011 we expanded again, to make sure that workers were covered in situations where a company attempted to restructure but was unsuccessful and ended in bankruptcy.
Overall, since the start of the program in 2008, more than $120 million has been paid to over 53,000 workers. Given the expansion of this program over the time, we are now adding $1.4 million annually in operating funds to ensure that we deliver to WEPP applicants the benefits they are entitled to when they need them most. Therefore, we're requesting additional funding through the supplementary estimates to fulfill this commitment.
We know that in uncertain times, workers suffer, businesses suffer, and indeed the whole country suffers. That's why our government remains focused on creating jobs, on long-term growth and prosperity, but in that, a crucial part is labour peace. We know that good labour relations help create a stable and a reliable environment in which businesses can thrive, but they also give workers the security that they need to be productive and to support their families.
The Federal Mediation Conciliation Service is a part of Labour Canada, and it really does do a remarkable job in supporting the stable, peaceful, and cooperative labour environment.
FMCS has a section for preventive mediation services. That service helps unions and management to build and maintain constructive working relationships that deal with difficult workplace issues as they arise, not necessarily at a point in time when a collective agreement is being bargained. To make this service available to more clients, we are committing half a million dollars in annual ongoing funding.
I want to make a point here on this issue. Despite the impression that may be created by media or by coverage of certain events, cooperative labour relations in Canada really are the norm. Strikes and lockouts are the exception. Indeed, in the past four years 94% of labour negotiations in the federally regulated private sector were settled without work stoppages when FMCS was involved.
Contributing to harmonious working relationships and therefore to labour stability is really only one aspect of the labour program's goals for federal workplaces. As minister, I firmly believe that a healthy and a safe and a fair workplace is a key element to Canada's formula for success. Indeed, I've called the workplace the engine room for the economy.
The workplace is important because where there's more morale, where there's ingenuity, where there's productivity, Canadian businesses are helped to compete with the best in the world, so we promote safe and healthy workplaces through both preventive education and reactive strategies. Most importantly, we encourage workers and employers to take an active role in ensuring the health and safety of their workplaces.
This past fall I visited China, and I'm really proud to say that Canada is recognized internationally for our expertise in workplace health and safety.
Lately, as well, we've been focusing on a different aspect of health and safety in the workplace: mental health.
Mental health in the workplace is a significant concern not only for businesses but also for workers and for families. Half a million people a day miss work because of mental health problems. That can translate into a loss of productivity of about between $33 and $50 billion annually. Quite frankly, this is something that we have to deal with.
That's why the Government of Canada provided $367,000 in funding to the Mental Health Commission of Canada to help develop a voluntary national standard for psychological health and safety in the workplace. My labour program provided the commission with technical expertise. The project is a really great partnership because it received funding from Bell Canada and the Great-West Life Centre for Mental Health in the Workplace.
What's really exciting about this is that it will be the first standard of its kind in the world. It really is an example of how governments and organizations can work together to help modernize workplace health and safety. We're working with businesses and we're working with unions. They were part of the psychological standard creation. With those two parties and with the help of the government, we are creating these dynamic workplaces where cooperation and fairness are the rule, workplaces where health and safety are integral parts of the culture, workplaces where workers and employers can contribute, innovate, and increase productivity for the benefit of all, including the general Canadian public.
Those are some ways that we in the labour program are helping Canadian businesses and families and continuing to strengthen our economy.
Mr. Chair, I hope this overview has been helpful and I'd be very pleased to answer any questions that you or the committee may have.
Thank you very much for your time.
:
We are very pleased to see that the results of some of the new programs that we brought in are enhanced.
As you're probably aware, there is a significant shortage of skilled tradespeople in this country. In fact, a few years ago I was invited to a ribbon-cutting ceremony for a new skilled trades college. The ribbon-cutting was put off because they couldn't finish building the college because they couldn't get enough skilled tradespeople to do the work.
That's when we decided we really had to do something about this problem. We had already introduced the apprenticeship incentive grant for people going into the trades, but also for employers. So far, some 265,000 Canadians have taken advantage of that program. We brought in the completion program for apprentices a few years later, and over 80,000 people have claimed access to it. That's a good start.
Going beyond that, we know there are a number of young people who have challenges. I've mentioned, for example, the no experience, no job—no job, no experience cycle. That's why we have programs like Career Focus and Skills Link. In fact, in Budget 2012 we put an additional $50 million into helping these young people get over the barriers of no experience, particularly helping them get experience in the areas where there is high demand so they're likely to have a much more successful and stable career.
There have been a lot of very positive results, and that's not even starting to address the other things we've done through the Canada youth employment strategy, which includes the Canada summer jobs programs.
The pathways to education program is now helping some 10,000 students who might otherwise be at risk of dropping out of high school to complete high school and go on to post-secondary education. It provides them with the full wraparound supports that they need—not just financial, but the mentoring, the coaching, and all sorts of good stuff. We really believe our future workforce is our young people, and that's the future of our country.
Madam Minister, thank you for joining us today.
Supplementary estimates (B) contains a vote for $3.5 million in additional funding for the Homelessness Partnering Strategy, or HPS. The public accounts, however, show that $31 million in homelessness funding was not spent before it expired, in other words, 2011-12.
Yet, it is a fact that at least 300,000 people are homeless, and the situation is getting worse. That is all too clear in my riding of Hochelaga, where shelters are full, summer and winter. In addition, Montreal has RAPSIM, a support network for people who are homeless and alone. That city has the biggest homelessness support network. Nevertheless, the organization's funding was not renewed for the first time this year, despite all the recommendations of the Public Health Agency of Canada and the federal-provincial committee. It is the only agency in the country whose funding was not renewed, despite recommendations.
In light of such an acute need, why do the supplementary estimates call for just $3.5 million, instead of the full $31 million in the previous budget that lapsed? What's more, even that $31 million would not be enough to meet the need, especially since it was never indexed.
Why did you not sign off on RAPSIM's project?
:
Sure. Thank you very much.
As I outlined in my opening remarks, WEPP is a very important program that we brought into place to deal with issues that were certainly out of the hands of employees. It's stark reality that sometimes businesses close their doors, go bankrupt, and don't pay their employees. That's where the government steps in.
What we do is we fill a gap of time for the employee. The employee has a right to the money should the company go to bankruptcy; however, sometimes it can take a very long time for their claim against the company to make its way through a process. What we do instead is step into the shoes of the employee and make sure they receive as much as they can, to a cap level that we have with respect to unpaid wages, vacation pay, and, as I said, severance pay and termination pay too.
We want to make sure that people who are already dealing with the fact that they've lost their jobs don't have to worry about getting their unpaid wages, that they have something. We go on, hopefully to collect from the company throughout the process and make sure we get the money back for taxpayers.
Since 2008 it has been a used program. We've spent, as I said, about $120 million for 53,000 workers. That's 53,000 workers who didn't have to worry about how they were going to feed their kids the next day because they weren't paid their wages by a company that suddenly went bankrupt. We are the backfill, in a sense, through the WEPP program.
Of course, after those issues are dealt with or they make their applications to us for trustee in bankruptcy, it is for the eligible worker, if they qualify, to apply for EI for their income support going forward. That's how the two departments work well together, and that's why it's a good program.
What we want to make sure of, in a service standard, is that applications are processed within a 42-day service standard. As a result, we've asked for more funding, with the realization that the program itself has expanded with the additions we've made on it since 2008.
You know, I was very fortunate to be named minister in this portfolio in January 2010. I had a meeting with my counterparts across the country within, I think, 11 days. We made this part of our agenda with the provinces and territories, because it's such a growing issue.
When I came from my previous employment, I fully understood the effect mental health can have on the workplace. When you're dealing with a company with fewer than 100 employees, having even one person who is ill, for whatever reason, or mentally ill specifically, can have an effect on the workplace. It affects everybody around the person and it affects productivity at work. What I found as an employer was that I really didn't have the tools to deal with this in the workplace.
As Canadians, we all want to help. We're good people. However, we need to know what to do, especially in certain circumstances when you really don't have any idea what you're supposed to do. That's why it became a very big part of my portfolio.
I'm very pleased with the progress we've made on it. We've had cross-country consultations. We've had national round tables. We've taken part in great campaigns by the private sector to try to eliminate stigma in the workplace, culminating in this psychological standard, but I would also emphasize that this is a work in progress.This continues. Having this voluntary standard will help us have tools for the worker and for the employer, but we still need to be chipping away at it.
In 2009 Don Drummond, the former chief economist at TD Bank, was the one who said that it's 35 million lost workdays each year. Disability costs are about 12% of a company's payroll. These are things we know. With good policies, with good tools in the workplace, we can help ameliorate this situation. We can help make sure that we're as productive as we possibly can be, and more importantly, that we are looking after our workers and our families.
There are two things I'd like you to comment on.
First of all, I want to pick up on what Mr. Cuzner was saying. The old calculation for low income workers was more beneficial, and everyone has told us so. Under the new calculation, people are losing $20, $30 or $40 a week.
One answer touched on the matter of the three days. But in the tourism industry out east, in the winter people don't have three days. They might come in on Saturday to clean a hotel, and that's it. So you can't count on that; it hurts people.
Can you finally admit that is true, that 100,000 Canadians aren't lying when they say they're losing money under the new system? Back home, people who ask to go back to the old calculation are no longer served at the Service Canada office. They are given a form they have to fill out by hand and they have to use the telephone system. They need 20 to 30 hours a week to justify going back to the old system, at 40%.
So how do you explain the fact that these people are being treated like second-class citizens, all because they've opted for the old calculation?
:
Thank you very much for the question.
We've had these services for preventative mediation since about the mid-1990s, and what we've seen from these services is that they're very successful.
I can give you great examples from across the country. In the east, Bell Aliant works with their union, and they went from a really difficult situation with a hard strike and lots of bad feelings to a wonderful working relationship where they deal with issues as they come up. They have no problems bargaining their own collective agreement and having a seamless working relationship.
A lot of it's due to the fact we have officers from FMCS working with them almost on a monthly basis, helping them go through agenda items and keeping the conversation going.
We saw what a great success it was. When you go from the brink of a work stoppage and the potential for violence and lots of acrimony to negotiating a collective agreement at the table prior to it even expiring, it's well worth our taxpayer dollar. It is a great investment.
Building on that, we decided it was a good time and a good place to be able to offer this service more broadly across the country. The department has been a lot more open about advertising the availability of the services. In Burlington a couple of weeks ago we had a workshop that invited lots of federal and not necessarily federally regulated workplace players to the symposium just to describe what preventative mediation is and how it can work.
The key with preventative mediation is that both parties have to agree to submit to it and to work on it. Our pitch is that when you do things, first of all, it's well worth the investment by us, but when the workplace partners do it, it's extremely beneficial to their company and to the lives of the workers.
I'm looking forward to more results. I hope we have great success, because the more time we spend in preventative mediation, the less time we spend in trying to put together collective bargaining agreements in a very acrimonious and sometimes unnecessarily confrontational way.
:
Absolutely. That is the bedrock, at the end of the day, of our workplaces. It's making sure the workplace committees, which are made up of both representatives of employers and employees, know and understand the rights of workers and the rights of employers, and the obligations on both on health and safety in the workplace.
The role we play in government is really an educative side of it, making sure that people understand what the best practices are. What the rules and the regulations are, of course, is important too. It's really just supporting these players in developing their own workplace for health and safety.
We have fantastic labour inspectors who are on call 24/7 in the case of a complaint or a difficulty or a problem. I know they work hard and I know they visit far, remote workplaces, from correctional facilities in Yellowknife all the way to facilities on the east coast, in B.C., and everywhere else. I'm grateful for the work they do in helping to make our workplaces healthy and safer.
It is the obligation of the people in the actual workplace to know they have rights. The most important right a worker has in the workplace is the right to refuse work if they feel it is dangerous. I think that's the one piece of education we can provide to all, because then you can take matters into your own hands. If you work with your committee first within the company, and then if you don't get any kind of result from that, you can come to Labour Canada for it. I think it's important for people to know that especially.
We talk a lot about youth employment strategies. My side of the fence with respect to the youth is that I want my kids to know that when they have their first job, if they're asked to do something they feel is unsafe, they have the right to refuse it. I think we're better off as a nation for having those rules in place.
:
That's another issue. We'll get there when I deal with your motion.
Let's just hold on until we get all our members back, and then we'll deal with your motion.
All right, I think we have all of the members back.
There are a number of things we have to do. We have to vote on the supplementary estimates.
Before we do that, there is a motion that came forward from Ms. Boutin-Sweet. I will indicate that first of all that the motion that she brings can be brought at any time, with appropriate notice. We know that's a two-night, 48-hour, two-sleeps kind of notice. If you wanted to bring it again, you could.
With respect to the notice itself that you've brought, you can bring a motion that relates to the subject matter that's under consideration. We can deal with it on that basis.
First of all, I'd like to thank the clerk and the analyst for doing a lot of scurrying around and getting the information for me. I appreciate that you allowed us some time to deal with your motion in order to make a more reasoned decision on it.
The motion reads,
That the Committee ask the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development Canada to release to the Committee the information requested by the Parliamentary Budget Officer on the cuts in her department.
That's the substance of the motion.
The motion itself does not relate to the supplementary estimates (B). Those are not the main estimates, which cover a whole wide range of areas. It doesn't deal with the mains. It specifically deals with things that are added to them, and in this particular case, the requirements for an increase in funding.
The other place it could fall into would be the departmental performance report. The departmental performance report deals with the period of time that ends on March 31, 2012. The Parliamentary Budget Officer's request for information flows from budget 2012, but it commences on April 1, 2012, so it is not within this area. For that reason, I would rule that the motion as put forward is out of order. That's my ruling.
Go ahead, Monsieur Lapointe.