Publication Search

Mr. Vidler, thank you for coming to testify before the committee. It is going to help us in our study.

Looking at the last decade, your report points to a poor performance by Canada. What do we have to learn from the last decade that will allow us to reverse the trend?

Still on the same topic, but in the area of research and development, I want to mention the 2012 report from the C. D. Howe Institute. It says that Canada’s performance in productivity in the last decade was one of the worst. In the OECD, that is. It points to insufficient and ineffective support for innovation from the private sector.

At what point do innovation and research and development become necessary for your members? And what must the government do to improve R and D in Canada?

Could you give us your opinion about exchange rates and national currency fluctuations in trade agreements? They have a significant influence and I am sure you have an opinion on the matter. Could you please tell us about that?

Thank you very much.

Thank you for coming to speak to our study on the opportunities for Aboriginal persons in the workforce.

There are provincial programs. My question is quite broad. Have you thought about how to co-operate with the provinces and work with the various existing programs?

Okay.

Some organizations want to help Aboriginal communities. Have you established relationships with those organizations to see what their recommendations are, or do you go directly to the communities to see what their needs are?

Some communities are in more remote areas than others, and it is more difficult for them to have access to services and to benefit from the various programs. We are studying here the opportunities for Aboriginal persons in the workforce. Remote locations are an obstacle. Some communities are doing well and have managed to overcome this challenge, but others are having a harder time. What do you do to ensure that remote communities have access to various programs?

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for coming to answer our questions, Mr. Kenney.

I would like to go back to a visit by a witness to the Standing Committee on Finance. On November 18 of this year, François Masse, Chief of Labour, Market, Employment and Learning at the Department of Finance, stated that decisions on employment insurance were made independently of the $57 billion that had been in the fund.

You are the minister responsible for the Employment Insurance Financing Board. Do you think it is appropriate for premium rates to be established with no consideration of the total amount of the fund?

The minister before you admitted that no impact study had been conducted on employment insurance reform. Since that reform, a number of difficulties have arisen in some regions of the country and some sectors of the economy.

Do you intend to take any steps, such as possible pilot projects, transitional initiatives or other mechanisms, to help with the difficulties that those regions and sectors are experiencing?

Yet some transitional provisions have disappeared, measures that have been implemented pending the resolution of problems in given regions. Those measures have been abolished and have not been replaced.

I understand that the rules of the game have changed since employment insurance was reformed. Claims are denied retroactively, and not just for next year. I am not sure if this is connected to the quota issue, or whatever else it may be. But, in the past, officials used to look for ways of doing things that were allowed, but that no longer are. Claimants can be asked to pay back $20,000, $30,000 or $40,000. It has happened to some people in my riding.

Under which circumstances can money be reclaimed retroactively?

How much time do I have left, Madam Chair?

Okay. I'll try to ask my question quickly.

In 2002, the Auditor General said that the employment insurance fund was consolidated with the government's financial statements. It was then separated, but the decision has now been abolished.

I would like to know whether there is something planned to avoid the problem that arose at the time and that will resurface if we don't separate these budgets. In fact, the Canada Employment Insurance Financing Board was abolished. Is something planned to compensate for that?

The fact that the employment insurance fund and the government financial statements were consolidated, which will still be the case, had a significant impact on the government's overall financial outcomes. The government often ended up with a surplus that seemed to be much larger than it was in reality.

Is there anything planned to compensate for the loss of the Canada Employment Insurance Financing Board?

Thank you.

What are the consequences of withdrawing from the tripartite process, Mr. Yussuff and Mr. Bennie?

Mr. Yussuff and Mr. Bennie, can you tell me what the consequences of ending the tripartite process will be?