REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE |
Tuesday, December 15, 2009 |
The Standing Senate Committee on National Finance
has the honour to present its
FOURTEENTH REPORT
Your committee, to which was referred Bill C-56, An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, has, in obedience to its order of reference of December 15, 2009, examined the said bill and now reports the same without amendment.
Your committee has also made certain observations, which are appended to this report.
Respectfully submitted,
JOSEPH A. DAY
Chair
OBSERVATIONS
to the Fourteenth Report of the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance
(Bill C-56)
During the committee’s examination of this legislation, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada shared its projections regarding the net financial impact on the Employment Insurance (EI) Fund. By 2014, the cost of these special benefits for the self-employed will exceed the revenue derived from its premiums by approximately $78 million. Since any shortfall will be paid by the EI Fund, regular contributors to the EI Fund will in effect be subsidizing special benefits for the self-employed, and premium increases will be required unless there is a transfer of funds from the government to the Employment Insurance Financing Board to cover any short fall.
With the proposed Bill C-56, Quebec self-employed workers will be entitled to sickness and compassionate care benefits only, given that they already have access to parental and maternity benefits under a provincial regime. The committee has heard from an expert witness that the premium rate proposed (1.36/$100 as compared to 1.73/$10 for the rest of Canada) in Bill C-56 for Quebec self-employed workers might be too high relative to the expected cost of the benefits to which they are entitled.
The committee therefore believes that the government should consider setting up, at the earliest possible time, an independent working group that would further examine the issue of the premium rate for Quebec self-employed workers to determine whether it is set at a fair level.
The committee heard witnesses who eloquently expressed concerns with respect to the Compassionate Leave Provision under the Employment Insurance Act which provisions are incorporated into C-56.
We learned that there is a significant difficulty with the definition which requires a physician to indicate that there is a significant possibility of death within 26 weeks. We learned that not only such a determination is extremely difficult for physicians to make but that in the case of children whose parents are perhaps in greatest need of compassionate leave in order for them to care for their children, there is great reluctance for both the physician and the parents to admit to the possibility of death. A change to the definition in the legislation to words such as gravely ill, or a life-threatening illness, and removing the reference to death within 26 weeks would make for a more appropriate balance. In addition, we learned that an eight week benefit, including a two week waiting period, is inadequate. We heard recommendations for a 52 week benefit. The present sickness benefit under EI allows for a 20 week benefit including a two week waiting period. Your committee believes that this would be a good first step.