Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 121 - 135 of 3210
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
We've heard the explanation on the amendment and I will have to give a chair's ruling.
The amendment attempts to remove proposed subsections 8(1) and 8(1.1) in clause 291 of the bill. The effect would be to revert back to the existing text of the Canada Recovery Benefits Act, which provides for a payment of $500.
Since the bill provides for a decrease of these payments, this amendment, if adopted, would result in increasing payments from the consolidated revenue fund. The amendment as proposed is therefore inadmissible, as it requires a royal recommendation since it imposes a new charge on the public treasury. As I think Mr. Julian and Mr. Ste-Marie mentioned, this ruling applies to both BQ-7 and NDP-18. The amendments are inadmissible under the rules.
Are there any challenges to that? Everyone seems quiet. There's no challenge?
View Peter Julian Profile
NDP (BC)
He's a very polite member of Parliament. I'm less polite.
The government should be doing this. The government could provide a royal recommendation on this. It's outrageous that it is choosing to slash benefits at such a critical time, particularly when it has been so amazingly generous with Canada's big banks and Canada's billionaires.
It's an outrage, quite frankly, so yes, I will challenge your ruling on that basis. A government that actually cared about the people affected by COVID would not be doing this.
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
Polite or not, Mr. Julian, you speak from the heart.
Ms. Dzerowicz, there's a challenge to the chair, so I'll take that up first and then go to you.
Mr. Clerk, could you poll the committee on the chair's decision?
(Ruling of the chair sustained: yes 9; nays 2)
View Julie Dzerowicz Profile
Lib. (ON)
No, it's okay, Mr. Chair. I'll pass for now. Thank you.
(Clause 291 agreed to on division)
(Clause 292 agreed to on division)
(On clause 293)
Catherine Demers
View Catherine Demers Profile
Catherine Demers
2021-06-03 16:47
Clause 293 would add proposed new section 9.1 to the CRB Act to specify that, if the week during which an EI claimant exhausts their EI regular benefits or a combination of regular and special benefits is in the middle of the CRB two-week period, then that person may receive a payment of $300 to avoid a one-week period without income, provided the person meets the other eligibility criteria of the CRB.
In other words, it is to ensure that if someone's EI is exhausted and they apply for the CRB, they will not face a one-week income gap if their EI ends in the middle of a two-week CRB period. That relates to clause 289, as I was describing at the beginning, in the event there should be an extension of the CRB in the fall.
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
Are there any questions on that? No questions.
(Clause 293 agreed to on division)
(On clause 294)
Catherine Demers
View Catherine Demers Profile
Catherine Demers
2021-06-03 16:48
This clause would increase the maximum number of weeks for the Canada recovery caregiving benefit from 38 to 42, with four extra weeks available, June 19 to July 18. These four additional weeks would be at the same current rate of $500 per week. This is accompanied by a corresponding amendment to the Canada Labour Code, which we will talk about in a moment.
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
Are there any questions on clause 294?
(Clause 294 agreed to on division)
The Chair: We're on clause 295.
View Ed Fast Profile
CPC (BC)
View Ed Fast Profile
2021-06-03 16:49
Mr. Chair, would you be prepared to consider grouping clauses 295 all the way through to 302?
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
Absolutely.
(On clauses 295 to 302)
The Chair: We'll get an explanation from Ms. Demers on them all. Then we'll see if there are any questions, and then we'll go to a vote collectively.
Ms. Demers, go ahead on clause 295 through to clause 302.
Catherine Demers
View Catherine Demers Profile
Catherine Demers
2021-06-03 16:49
Absolutely, it's my pleasure.
If you agree, I will do clause 295, and Ms. Moran will proceed with the other clauses, which relate to the Canada Labour Code.
Catherine Demers
View Catherine Demers Profile
Catherine Demers
2021-06-03 16:49
Clause 295, which is also in the context of amendments to the Canada Recovery Benefits Act, proposes to amend the act by adding a new regulatory-making authority to extend the eligibility period for benefits under the CRB Act up to November 20, 2021, should they be needed, as announced in the budget.
Barbara Moran
View Barbara Moran Profile
Barbara Moran
2021-06-03 16:49
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Clause 296 through to clause 302 align with the changes to the CRCB, the Canada recovery caregiving benefit, to extend job-protective leave for the federally regulated private sector from 38 to 42 weeks if someone is unable to work due to caregiving responsibilities due to COVID-19, and also changes the repeal date to match the new date, prescribed by regulation, on which the Canada recovery caregiving benefit and the Canada recovery sickness benefit aren't available. It covers various changes that relate to the federally regulated private sector.
Results: 121 - 135 of 3210 | Page: 9 of 214

|<
<
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data