This is a single speech (house debate) resource from the openparliament.ca API. If you’re new here, you might want to look at the documentation. If API and JSON are gibberish to you, you’re better off at our main site.

Content

Get this resource as raw JSON.

See the corresponding webpage.

{
    "time": "2006-05-10 16:10:00",
    "attribution": {
        "en": "Ms. Paule Brunelle",
        "fr": ""
    },
    "content": {
        "en": "<p data-HoCid=\"3376\" data-originallang=\"fr\">Mr. Speaker, my comments are being somewhat misconstrued. When we say that $48 billion was taken out of the EI fund, that means that indeed this money was allocated to the consolidated surplus and to paying down the debt. That is why we are calling for an independent fund, to keep this money in the hands of workers.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"3377\" data-originallang=\"fr\">If $10 billion is needed in reserve to maintain the integrity of the fund, then a $38 billion surplus still remains. That is how this should be settled.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"3378\" data-originallang=\"fr\">My colleague addressed another aspect of this issue and that is the employment insurance benefits that workers receive. Hon. members know that the rules have changed over the years. The percentages of benefits and the number of weeks they are paid have continued to decrease, with the intention of giving less to workers. Therein lies the problem. It is the employers and workers who contribute to employment insurance. The government contributes nothing. The fact remains that when workers fall on hard times they cannot even count on a good income replacement. That is what we find unfair.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"3379\" data-originallang=\"fr\">For this reason, when we talk about improving the employment insurance scheme, it is a matter of increasing the benefits workers receive and the number of eligible weeks. The debate is about how to ensure fairness and a decent income for people who truly need it.</p>",
        "fr": "<p data-HoCid=\"3376\" data-originallang=\"fr\">Monsieur le Pr\u00e9sident, on trafique un peu mes propos. Lorsque nous disons que 48 milliards de dollars ont \u00e9t\u00e9 pill\u00e9s dans la caisse de l'assurance-emploi, cela signifie qu'effectivement cet argent a \u00e9t\u00e9 affect\u00e9 au surplus consolid\u00e9 et au remboursement de la dette. C'est pour cette raison que nous r\u00e9clamons une caisse autonome: pour que cet argent demeure entre les mains des travailleurs.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"3377\" data-originallang=\"fr\">En effet, si 10 milliards de dollars sont n\u00e9cessaires pour assurer les r\u00e9serves et conserver l'int\u00e9grit\u00e9 de cette caisse, il y aura donc un surplus de 38 milliards de dollars. Il serait n\u00e9cessaire de le r\u00e9gler de cette fa\u00e7on.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"3378\" data-originallang=\"fr\">Mon coll\u00e8gue a abord\u00e9 un autre aspect de la question, \u00e0 savoir les prestations d'assurance-emploi que re\u00e7oivent les travailleurs. On a pu s'apercevoir que les r\u00e8gles du jeu ont \u00e9t\u00e9 modifi\u00e9es au fil des ans. Les pourcentages des prestations et le nombre de semaines pendant lesquelles elles sont vers\u00e9es n'ont cess\u00e9 de diminuer, toujours dans l'intention d'en donner moins aux travailleurs. C'est de l\u00e0 que vient la difficult\u00e9. Ce sont les employeurs et les travailleurs qui cotisent \u00e0 l'assurance-emploi. Le gouvernement n'y contribue pas du tout. Il n'en reste pas moins que lorsque survient un coup dur, les travailleurs ne peuvent m\u00eame pas compter sur un bon revenu de remplacement. C'est ce qui nous appara\u00eet in\u00e9quitable.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"3379\" data-originallang=\"fr\">Pour cette raison, lorsque nous parlons de bonification du r\u00e9gime d'assurance-emploi, il est question de hausser le montant des prestations que recevront les travailleurs et le nombre de semaines admissibles. C'est ce sur quoi porte le d\u00e9bat, \u00e0 savoir comment on peut assurer l'\u00e9quit\u00e9 ainsi qu'un revenu d\u00e9cent \u00e0 une population qui en a v\u00e9ritablement besoin.</p>"
    },
    "url": "/debates/2006/5/10/paule-brunelle-3/",
    "politician_url": "/politicians/paule-brunelle/",
    "politician_membership_url": "/politicians/memberships/1524/",
    "procedural": false,
    "source_id": "1528256",
    "h1": {
        "en": "Government Orders",
        "fr": ""
    },
    "h2": {
        "en": "The Budget",
        "fr": ""
    },
    "h3": {
        "en": "Financial Statement of Minister of Finance",
        "fr": ""
    },
    "document_url": "/debates/2006/5/10/",
    "related": {
        "document_speeches_url": "/speeches/?document=%2Fdebates%2F2006%2F5%2F10%2F"
    }
}