Employment Insurance Act—Employment Insurance Regulations
Motion in Amendment--Debate Adjourned
October 20, 2022
Moved, seconded by Senator Petitclerc:
That Bill S-236, an Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act and the Employment Insurance Regulations (Prince Edward Island), as amended, be not read a third time, but that it be referred back to the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry to hear from the Parliamentary Budget Officer concerning his office’s fiscal analysis on the bill; and
That the committee report to the Senate no later than November 15, 2022.
She said: Thank you very much.
Senator Dalphond, do you have a question?
Will you accept a question, Senator Ringuette?
Yes, of course.
Why do you propose sending it back to the Agriculture Committee when what is at stake is a financial issue? Perhaps we should send it to the National Finance Committee.
Thank you for the question. I believe that the good-faith senators on that committee were deprived of critical information from the witnesses, because some witnesses knew. Also, after the fact, on September 7, the PBO made public a report of the financial impact of this bill. In all fairness, I believe that the Senate should give the bill back to the Agriculture and Forestry Committee so they can hear for themselves and question the PBO in regard to the pitfalls of this bill. Thank you.
Senator Tannas, do you have a question?
Yes.
Senator Ringuette, you have 26 seconds left.
I wonder if you could tell us why you think we only need to hear from the PBO. There’s been a number of issues raised and MPs that support this. I received a letter today from two P.E.I. MPs supporting that we pass the bill unchanged. Why wouldn’t we deal with the commissioner that you talked to on the phone and got a whole bunch new information?
Good question.
Thank you, Senator Tannas.
Senator Ringuette, your time is up.
May I have time to at least answer Senator Tannas?
Is permission granted?
Senator Tannas, this bill was sent in June to the Agriculture Committee. They met with the first sponsor of this bill, our former colleague Senator Griffin; a former MP from the Island, a proponent of the bill; and other witnesses. They also met with the Commissioner for Workers, as I stated, and also the director of policy for the department. The questions to these people, as far as I can see, have been put and they have been answered.
The most important question and piece of information that we have now at third reading is the unsolicited report from the PBO, because one of my questions to the PBO was: Did someone ask you to do this report, this analysis? His answer was, “No, this is a part of our regular process that we look at bills in front of the two chambers and we want to know what is the fiscal.” So the crux of this issue is the PBO report because, if not for that report that I questioned two weeks ago, why was it made? Why was it being transparently said in the Senate? It is this report that is the crux of why it should be reviewed again by the Agriculture and Forestry Committee. That is why my motion says that.
If I may add, Senator Tannas, this has been in front of the Senate since the end of May. P.E.I.’s seasonal workers are very much aware that this bill is in front of the Senate. Right now, they are going through a very stressful time because of Hurricane Fiona and because of the winter season coming up with fewer jobs for them. We need to deal with this quickly. I have told you how I am going to vote. In all fairness to the Agriculture Committee, I believe that they should have the opportunity to question the PBO and then report to us sooner rather than later in the interests of P.E.I.’s seasonal workers.
I would ask to adjourn the debate on the amendment. I think that it will go to senator —
Speaker, the amendment is not an adjournment in my name; the main motion is. I believe that you called the question on the amendment. It does not affect my adjournment motion.
Yes, that is what I thought was maybe the case and consulted and did not get quite a clear answer; otherwise I would have asked for the adjournment of the debate when I was standing. I did not know whether or not I was allowed to finish my questions or just the one that was asked when we ran out of the 26 seconds, because I have a number of other questions.
The agreement for the extension was to answer the question you had on the floor.
Okay, thank you.