HUMA Committee Meeting

37th PARLIAMENT, 2nd SESSION

Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Tuesday, November 26, 2002

Á

1110

The Chair (Mrs. Judi Longfield (Whitby—Ajax, Lib.))

Á

1145

Ms. Diane St-Jacques (Shefford, Lib.)

The Chair

Mr. Alan Tonks (York South—Weston, Lib.)

The Chair

The Chair

The Chair

Hon. Jane Stewart (Minister of Human Resources Development)

Â

1210

Â

1215

Â

1220

The Chair

Mr. Larry Spencer (Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, Canadian Alliance)

Mrs. Jane Stewart

Mr. Larry Spencer

Mrs. Jane Stewart

Mr. Larry Spencer

Â

1225

Mrs. Jane Stewart

The Chair

Ms. Diane St-Jacques

Ms. Jane Stewart

Â

1230

Ms. Diane St-Jacques

Mrs. Jane Stewart

The Chair

Ms. Suzanne Tremblay (Rimouski-Neigette-et-la Mitis, BQ)

Ms. Jane Stewart

Â

1235

Ms. Suzanne Tremblay

The Chair

Mrs. Jane Stewart

The Chair

Mr. Eugène Bellemare (Ottawa—Orléans, Lib.)

Mrs. Jane Stewart

Â

1240

The Chair

Mr. Yvon Godin (Acadie—Bathurst, NDP)

Â

1245

Mrs. Jane Stewart

Mr. Yvon Godin

Mrs. Jane Stewart

Mr. Yvon Godin

Mrs. Jane Stewart

The Chair

Ms. Raymonde Folco (Laval West, Lib.)

Mrs. Jane Stewart

Â

1250

Ms. Raymonde Folco

The Chair

Ms. Raymonde Folco

The Chair

Mr. Norman Doyle (St. John's East, PC)

Mrs. Jane Stewart

Mr. Norman Doyle

Mrs. Jane Stewart

Mr. Norman Doyle

Mrs. Jane Stewart

The Chair

Â

1255

Mr. Alan Tonks

Mrs. Jane Stewart

Mr. Alan Tonks

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Eugène Bellemare)

Mr. Peter Goldring (Edmonton Centre-East , Canadian Alliance)

·

1300

Mrs. Jane Stewart

Mr. Peter Goldring

Mrs. Jane Stewart

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Eugène Bellemare)

Mr. Raymond Simard (Saint Boniface, Lib.)

·

1305

Mrs. Jane Stewart

Mr. Raymond Simard

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Eugène Bellemare)

---

CANADA

Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities

---

NUMBER 003

l

2nd SESSION

l

37th PARLIAMENT

---

EVIDENCE

Tuesday, November 26, 2002

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Á  (1110)  

[English]

    The Chair (Mrs. Judi Longfield (Whitby—Ajax, Lib.)): Welcome, ladies and gentlemen.

    [Editor's Note: Public Proceedings resume]

    We are here to consider the operational budget for the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. You will see before you three separate budgets. They are done in this way just to make it easier for us to present when we go to the liaison committee.

    The first one you have before you is the projected budget for the main committee, and it would go through until the end of the fiscal year, March 31. The second budget deals with the Subcommittee on the Status of Persons with Disabilities. The final one is an estimated budget on behalf of the Subcommittee on Children and Youth at Risk.

    I would take comments on the first of the budgets.

    Madame St-Jacques.

Á  (1145)  

[Translation]

    Ms. Diane St-Jacques (Shefford, Lib.): I have a question about the budget for the pilot project of the Sub-Committee on the Status of Persons with Disabilities. There is no start date. Could we obtain a specific date? Will it be starting in the winter, the spring or the summer?

[English]

    The Chair: I need help in responding to this as well. Apparently it reflects ongoing work, with a projected start date of December 3. A great deal of work has already been done on behalf of the subcommittee. We are looking for approval of a budget where things have already begun.

    Are there any other questions, concerns, or reflections?

    Mr. Alan Tonks (York South—Weston, Lib.): I move the budget, Madam Chair.

    The Chair: I have a motion from Mr. Tonks that we approve the budget.

    (Motion agreed to)

    The Chair: I'm going to suggest a recess. We will reconvene at 12 p.m. sharp, with the Minister of Human Resources Development. Thank you.

Á  (1148)  

---

  (1209)  

    The Chair: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I want to welcome the Minister of Human Resources Development.

    The committee has been awaiting your arrival, Madam Minister, and we're pleased to see that you have brought Margaret Biggs with you.

    Margaret is the Assistant Deputy Minister of Human Resources Development.

    Members of the committee, the minister has agreed to come on very short notice. I tracked her down early last week to have her come in to talk about the skills and learning agenda.

    Without further ado, because our time is short, Minister, I'm going to turn the floor directly over to you.

[Translation]

    Hon. Jane Stewart (Minister of Human Resources Development): Thank you, Madam Chair.

[English]

    I'm sorry I'm a little bit late coming out of cabinet, colleagues, but it is a wonderful opportunity to be with you here today to share with you some of the developments that have occurred over the course of the last year, most directly at the National Summit on Innovation and Learning that we held in Toronto on Monday and Tuesday of last week.

    The challenge I have today is to condense two days of intense deliberations into a brief presentation. I do want to be brief, so I'll just highlight the major areas in which we achieved consensus and commitment to action by all partners. I'll touch on one specific area in which I would hope the committee might consider providing us with information in playing, in fact, a vital role.

    I can say to the committee that there is no doubt that we've reached a turning point in our work on innovation and learning. We have moved beyond the what-ifs to some serious commitments to producing concrete results.

  (1210)  

[Translation]

    The importance of skills and learning clearly resonates with Canadians. And there is a genuine desire, all across the country, to take joint action to address the challenges of innovation and learning.

[English]

    From a policy perspective, what is most rewarding is that all recommendations resulting from the summit largely mirror the government's priority areas. While there is still room for improvement, the recommendations reinforce that we are on the right track.

    I think the other important message coming out of the summit is that Canadians don't see enhanced innovation and learning as simply a matter of more government funding. In fact, it was pleasantly surprising and reassuring that representatives from all sectors recognized that everyone has a part to play. Even more promising is the fact that everyone demonstrated their willingness to play a part.

    To support and advance this progress, I'll quickly review some of the major developments that took place at the summit.

    The Government of Canada committed to creating the Canadian Learning Institute, in consultation with provincial and territorial governments and stakeholders, in order to support the testing and analysis of innovative approaches to learning, as well as to research best practices. The institute will report regularly on Canada's progress in improving learning outcomes and will publish key findings on what works and what does not.

    We also announced the provision of $12 million to the Canadian Apprenticeship Forum and to Skills Canada, to spearhead a national campaign to alert young Canadians and their parents to the range of career options available in the skilled trades and to overcome any blue-collar stigma associated with the trades.

[Translation]

    We are going to realign our Youth Employment Strategy to enable youth to develop the skills of the future so they can fully participate in all areas of the labour market in the 21st century. We will reenergize Youth Employment Strategy programs to ensure they respond to the changing economic environment and can meet the needs of young Canadians.

[English]

    Finally, we committed to working with provincial and territorial governments and other partners to establish transparent and efficient processes to recognize foreign credentials. Indeed, if we truly want to attract the best and the brightest, we have to make sure immigrants' skills are recognized, utilized, and put to work for Canada. These respond directly to some of the key recommendations that came out of the summit.

    Of course, there were other priority areas identified. For example, we were advised by participants that to increase inclusion, we need to improve access to skills development, apprenticeship, and internship programs, and better target them to aboriginal people, people with disabilities, and new Canadians. There was a real determination to tap the talents of these underemployed groups and to strengthen their participation in the labour force by using innovative approaches such as prior learning assessment and recognition.

    Of all the recommendations at the summit, the overarching learning priority related to workplace learning, an area flagged consistently during our consultations and reaffirmed at the summit. Related to this priority, according to the International Adult Literacy Survey, we have 8 million workers with inadequate literacy and essential skills. Nearly a quarter of the youths graduating from high school don't have the literacy skills needed to fully participate in the knowledge economy. To become the innovative society that we want to be, we have to enhance literacy skills so that all Canadians can fully contribute their talents.

  (1215)  

[Translation]

    There are three fundamental challenges facing our country. First is the fact that so many of our citizens have low literacy skills. Equally disturbing is the apparent lack of awareness among many of these individuals that they even have a problem.

[English]

Without understanding the need for improvement, these Canadians are unlikely to seek opportunities to enhance their skills. Third, even if they do, many simply don't know where to turn so that they can solve the problem. This holds true for both individuals and employers.

Madam Chair and colleagues, while there was consensus for action in this area, participants concluded that we don't yet know enough about how best to address this national priority.

[Translation]

    This brings me to the work of this committee. We need to find new and better ways to target and support individuals with low literacy and essential skills so we continue to prosper as a nation and I'm hoping your committee will help us identify what they are.

[English]

    I'd like to ask the committee to examine the challenges of adult literacy and essential skills development, the idea being to increase public awareness and understanding in three key areas.

    First, we know 8 million Canadians lack essential and literacy skills. The challenge will be to reach them and to determine how to stimulate further learning.

    We also know workplace literacy and essential skills programs and opportunities now exist across the country, either provided by governments, business, labour, or non-governmental organizations. However, we need to examine the gaps and bring best practices forward. I'd like us to discuss the federal government's role in making that happen.

    Thirdly, how can we, as Canadians, collectively support the literacy and essential skills development of workers, especially on the job? We're looking to gain greater buy-in from employers, but what about small businesses, which may not have the resources to support training?

    We know from our consultations, as well as from the summit, that there are a lot of possibilities, but we now need to focus on getting the message across to Canadians in need or to Canadians who can help. The Government of Canada has acknowledged that strong foundational skills are critical for the competitive economy and society, and the literacy community is looking for federal leadership. The standing committee could build on the momentum that has been generated through the skills and innovation consultation process and the recent national summit.

[Translation]

    Without presupposing how you might approach it, if you were to choose to take on this assignment, I would encourage you to examine the international data to see if there are models that Canada should adopt or test. I would also strongly suggest you consult closely with this country's national literacy groups, and business and labour, who have presented us with a range of interesting options for consideration.

[English]

    We can support these sectors' efforts by demonstrating federal leadership in developing and disseminating the necessary information on which to make sound decisions and effective strategies. I can reassure you, Madam Chair, that there's a real sense of excitement and determination to take on these challenges. I'm confident that the energy and enthusiasm I witnessed at the national summit would be enriched if you were to take on this important work.

    For us, it's important that all the initiatives that were represented and contemplated at the national summit be considered. However, I'd just like to share with the committee that, from my point of view, there is a belief and a sense of urgency around the questions of innovation and, more particularly, the role that Canadians as individuals play in our ability to be an innovative nation. Clearly, people appreciate that it is Canadians who will create the ideas, Canadians who will implement these ideas, and Canadians who will suggest to other countries around the world the opportunities that exist for those other countries in using Canadian technologies and talent.

    For us, the real priority is ensuring that, in our work on innovation, we place a significant priority on the value of our citizens and the role that Canadians ultimately play in our success as a nation, whether we are talking about our social cohesiveness or our economic capabilities. In fact, it is the difference in approach that has been appreciated in the context of this work, which really has been evolving over the last twenty years.

    Some people say we've been talking about this for a long period of time, and they wonder what's different now. Honestly, I think it's the recognition of the role that individuals, our citizens, play in making sure Canada is an innovative nation. There's no doubt in my mind that the committee could provide extraordinarily valuable work and advice not only to the government, but also by engaging all the partners who truly have to be part of this national strategy.

    One of the great strengths of the national summit was the opportunity to bring together partners who heretofore really hadn't cemented their relationship. The committee, too, can build on that relationship-building, because it is a national priority for us. It's essential to our future, whether we're talking about, as I said, social cohesiveness or economic prowess.

    With that, I would leave the floor open to you and to the committee members, Madam Chair.

  (1220)  

    The Chair: Good.

    I have seen almost everyone raise their hand, looking to ask questions. I note that we have ten people in the room. We have little more than forty minutes left. If I'm going to hear from as many as possible, we're going to have to confine each member's question and answer to no more than five minutes. I'm going to be very firm on that with both members and the minister. We have to go very quickly.

    Mr. Spencer, your time is beginning now.

    Mr. Larry Spencer (Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, Canadian Alliance): Thank you, and thank you for watching the minister's time on long answers.

    Thank you for this presentation. I'm sure all of us are proud to know our country puts value and emphasis on innovation and education. We know this is where we have to go.

    My first question is probably fairly brief. In light of the fact that the government is obviously ramming Kyoto through this year, is this in any way the government's response to the report from the Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters and others who say probably 450,000 jobs will evaporate? Does this in any way address that, or is it not related at all?

    Mrs. Jane Stewart: Actually, that's a very good question, Mr. Spencer.

    First of all, I would reject your introductory statement. I don't believe we're ramming it through at all. In fact, we're enjoying listening to your colleague Mr. Mills in the House as we speak.

    Building on that, I'd like to tell you that, at the summit itself, there was the opportunity for us to link other large government priorities with this large government priority. There were people there from our sector councils in the area of environmental economic development. We were linking our focus on climate change, on health care, and on other large priority items, particularly with the innovation and learning priorities.

    From our point of view, there's tremendous opportunity for us to develop new employment opportunities in the environmental field, directly related to our focus on climate change, but for other environmental developments as well. For us to presume at this point that there are going to be significant job losses without recognizing that there is a huge potential for new jobs to be created would be inappropriate.

    So your question is a good one. Very clearly, we are linking these agendas together. We believe that if Canada commits to Kyoto and to dealing with the question of greenhouse gases, then in our very innovative way, we will find new employment opportunities and will in fact create new economic engines for the country, and ones that we can indeed export around the world.

    Mr. Larry Spencer: Unfortunately, Madam Chair, the government doesn't do anything without being open to accusations of ramming it through, because they outnumber us by so much. So take that in a light way.

    Mrs. Jane Stewart: That, too, Mr. Spencer.

    Mr. Larry Spencer: You asked for input from the committee as the days go on. Perhaps we can start today, because there are some systemic problems with some of our ongoing programs already that would have some impact on learning and on the involvement especially of business on the outside. For instance, you mention the apprenticeship forum and those kinds of things that will help learning.

    Just to make this very personal, my daughter-in-law lives in Vancouver and is a pre-med student. She applied for a student loan at the beginning of the semester this year, was promised that, and it was approved. She is still waiting. There is now one week left in the semester, and the word this week was that she should have her cheque in three more weeks. Well, it has been three more weeks for three months. This drastically hinders students being able to go out and get their education. How are we coming along in addressing that problem in order to get the students to a point at which they can survive once they go to class?

  (1225)  

    Mrs. Jane Stewart: The question of access to post-secondary education is a very good one. Indeed, it was very much a topic of discussion at the summit. In fact, as you point out, recommendations came forward that could help us to strengthen and solidify the Canada student loans program. On some of these recommendations, I believe many of you may have been lobbied by CASA, one of the predominate student association organizations. So we're looking at the Canada student loans program and how we can modernize it.

    I would suggest as well that we have a table and a working relationship with the Council of MInisters of Education, looking specifically at the question of access and our student loan provision tools. As you know, the provinces have grants and loans, as does the Government of Canada. We are making progress at understanding the relationship. In some provinces, like Saskatchewan and Ontario, we have moved to a “one student, one loan” approach to make it easier.

    I would remind you, too, that the Government of Canada has taken back the responsibility for managing student loans, whereas the banks were doing the job in the past. I think what we will find from that, Mr. Spencer, is the opportunity for us to work more directly with students both as individual loan recipients and in helping them to understand the circumstances around their loans and how to benefit more broadly from the loan structure.

    There are a combination of things that we can do to continuously improve a very important program, the Canada student loans program that services 350,000 Canadians a year, while also recognizing that there have been a number of additional investments through the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation and a number of other things that perhaps we'll be able to talk about in the context of other questions.

    The Chair: Thank you, Minister.

    Madame St-Jacques.

[Translation]

    Ms. Diane St-Jacques: Welcome. We are very happy to see you here this morning.

    Allow me to say that I'm very pleased to see that the government is interested in skills and learning and especially, as you pointed out in your brief, that stakeholders from all areas are intent on becoming involved. I think this is important so that we can find out what the real needs are.

    The Canadian Learning Institute was mentioned in your report. I would like you tell us more about this.

    Ms. Jane Stewart: I hope that this institute will become very important for Canadian men and women.

[English]

    Over the course of our year-long series of round tables, it was interesting to note that it very often came up that Canadians recognize that we spend billions of dollars on education and training every year, but we don't have a good way of understanding the success of those investments: What works best for Canadians? What doesn't work? How do we learn best, given individual circumstances?

    From a number of different points of view, the recommendation came forward that we could benefit from an arm's-length, third-party adjudicator of our investments. And it's not only the Government of Canada's investments. The provinces, too, have been asking for some support in terms of following their investments and their results.

    What we'd like to be able to do, Madame St-Jacques, is respond to parents who are asking what the outcomes will be if they support their children in where they go. The OECD has suggested that we don't do a good enough job in Canada in providing employers with information as to why and how their investment in their employee pool could be beneficial to their bottom line. Information and data can be developed to provide those answers. And the educational institutions, too, would like to have a third-party indicator on some of the work that they're doing so that they can improve and develop existing and new curricula.

    We can look at the different partners in the learning cycle and ask what their issues are and what information they need, and the institute can prepare and collect data from sources like StatsCan. Of course, StatsCan doesn't have the mandate to analyze this data in a way that is responsive to the outcomes. This is the idea behind the Canadian Learning Institute.

    Without question, the Canadian Learning Institute was very positively received by the participants at the summit. I can also say that, over the course of the year of discussions with Canadians, it was a thread that we have been hearing could be an important addition to our infrastructure of learning.

  (1230)  

[Translation]

    Ms. Diane St-Jacques: Will it be reporting on a regular basis to the manufacturing and education sectors, or to the government, or will we need to wait a long time before knowing what the outcomes are?

[English]

    Mrs. Jane Stewart: We'll be working with the provinces and territories to outline some of the expected strategies. At this point, my suggestion would be that there would be annual reports probably in areas identified by the institute at the first of the year. They would collect the data and would then be able to respond to different interested parties.

    I would anticipate that we would have a board of directors or a comprehensive board that would develop work plans for reporting to Canadians on an annual basis on topics of interest. We want to know if we're going to be able to make an impact on the number of youths who choose the skilled trades for their future, and what the right tools are that allow us to get better results there. Building a plan of action in that area would be the responsibility of the institute, and annual reports would then be one part of their responsibilities.

    The Chair: Thank you.

    Madame Tremblay.

[Translation]

    Ms. Suzanne Tremblay (Rimouski-Neigette-et-la Mitis, BQ): Thank you, Madam Chair.

    Good afternoon, Madam Minister. I'm very pleased to meet you but I think it is unfortunate that we have so little time to discuss such an important topic. Many questions remain unanswered in your presentation this morning, and I imagine the committee could learn more with more time.

    First, I would like to say that I think it is unfortunate that the committee was not involved with the consulting that you did throughout Canada, and that we were not given sufficient notice about the summit in Toronto in order to be able to organize our schedules around it. We learned about it at the very last minute, and it turned out that this meeting was extremely relevant to how things would unfold in this area.

    I spent 35 years of my life in education trying to teach our future teachers about learning methods and trying to teach them that if they have 30 students before them, then they have 30 different ways of learning before them because there are no two people who learn in the same way. Because our schools cannot adapt to the way young people learn, they have ended up giving 30 per cent of their diplomas to students who are illiterate, which is an enormous problem.

    I recently met a manufacturer from my riding who told me that his biggest problem was that he needed to change his machines but his workers could not read and understand the instructions. In many workplaces, there are real learning problems. All young people will not always work in the same field; they will be constantly retraining as the situation evolves. The possibility of the committee's input has been raised, but I wonder what the government's true concerns about the information highway are, especially given the fact that the meeting you held in Toronto was called the Summit on Innovation.

    I come from the Lower St. Lawrence area. There is high speed Internet access in Rimouski, and that is all. In the nearby village that I come from, Bic, there is no high speed Internet access, and because there is no access an insurance company had to move its head office to Rimouski because it could no longer do business without access to the high speed Internet. I think the matter is urgent. We need to stop talking about this high speed information highway and build it. What are the government's intentions in that regard?

    Ms. Jane Stewart: You have raised some important points, Ms. Tremblay.

    First, your question on the high speed Internet is a very good one.

[English]

At the summit, it was raised and identified as a priority area for the country to consider and hopefully to make investments in, because it is a question of recognizing the needs and opportunities in the rural and more remote parts of our great country, as well as in terms of the different requirements in urban centres. So you will see from the report that there is agreement particularly in this area.

    You also made reference to literacy or illiteracy. For me, this really is a foundational question when we talk about the importance of Canadians to our innovation capabilities. Indeed, that's why I suggested in my opening comments that the committee could assist us, the country, by doing some real work on this question, in the context of your developed plan.

    How can it be possible that a country like Canada has 8 million Canadians who are not at the level required to fully participate in the new economy? As you point out, small employers know they need to upgrade their workforce, but they aren't sure how. What relationship should the Government of Canada have with them, or what role should it be playing in assisting them? We have some suggestions, and we can go across the country to see the areas in which we have individual relationships in this regard, but it would be extraordinarily helpful for the committee to hear from the broad groups of stakeholders, as well as from individual Canadians, in regard to how we should be assisting them and how other partners should be assisting them, too.

    I thank you for raising that, and I would agree with you that it is an area of immediate concern for us.

  (1235)  

[Translation]

    Ms. Suzanne Tremblay: I would like to ask one more brief question. You talked about establishing an institute in consultation with provincial and territorial governments. Have you already started discussing this idea with the Council of Education Ministers or does this still remain to be done?

[English]

    The Chair: You have thirty seconds, Minister.

    Mrs. Jane Stewart: With official parts of the CME not with ministers, we anticipate doing that very soon. I can tell you that we have had indications from ministers that this would be a useful body for them.

    The Chair: Thank you.

    Monsieur Bellemare, and then Monsieur Godin.

[Translation]

    Mr. Eugène Bellemare (Ottawa—Orléans, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair.

    I'm going to refer to a comment made by Ms. Tremblay. Ms. Tremblay and I have something in common. We both worked in the educational field. I was an administrator in continuing education for several years.

    She referred to the information highway. She should probably address this question to the Minister of Industry, given that he was the one who told us, four or five years ago, that the undertaking to connect all libraries, schools, employment centres and a whole range of other facilities in Canada, including the far north, had just about been completed. So Ms. Tremblay's question is interesting. Did they miss her riding? I am aware that we are fully connected in Canada, but if there are any areas that have been overlooked, the Minister of Industry should look into it.

    We also know, Madam Chair, that people increasingly want to get into high technology. They all want to become doctors, professionals, lawyers and so on and so forth. The country's newspapers tell us that we are starting to have a tremendous need for tradespeople. Can the federal government add anything to what the provincial government is already doing to improve the situation that we have in Canada? Fewer and fewer people are going into the trades, which I'm sure is having a negative impact on our manufacturing sector, our industries.

[English]

    Mrs. Jane Stewart: Monsieur Bellemare, we are quite concerned that, despite the fact that we know the average age of membership in the trades is increasing—in some trades, it is well into the early part of the fifties—we are seeing fewer apprentices and apprenticeship opportunities created in Canada. Despite the fact that we know the opportunities are there and that these jobs do provide great income and have the potential for individuals to participate as tradespeople and become entrepreneurs, we have not been able to instill in Canadian parents or youths the recognition that the blue-collar trades should be a career of choice.

    From the point of view of the Government of Canada, one immediate thing that we feel comfortable engaging in is working with two very well-known partners. One is the Canadian Apprenticeship Forum, which is a forum of provincial participation, as well as unions and others who are experts in the trades. The other is Skills Canada, which many of you may know as the organization that encourages young people to come forward and compete in a number of different trades at the local, regional, and national levels. The winners then go on to an international competition. Madame Folco went to the international skilled trades competition in Seoul.

    We have allocated $12 million to the Canadian Apprenticeship Forum and to Skills Canada to design and implement a strategy to encourage young people to consider the trades. They have prepared a report that I think will be useful to us in that regard.

    Similarly, I think the Government of Canada can play a role in providing more information. We know there are places in Canada where communities have come together and have created websites and networks of information that help those who are interested in the trades. Those individuals can get information on those with whom they might find an apprenticeship in the private sector and what the requirements are for a particular trade. These sites really articulate the process in that area in terms of to how to become a tradesperson or get an apprenticeship.

    Similarly, you'll know that, in the context of the employment insurance regime, we made changes that are directly responsive to the requests of those who are in apprenticeships, relieving them of a two-week waiting period to receive employment insurance benefits every time they go into the classroom. They now only serve that once, recognizing that we're talking about an individual instead of their individual aspects of training.

    So there are different things that the Government of Canada can do to support Canadians who are interested in the trades and to hopefully increase the interest of Canadians in considering the trades, because we're dependent on our craftsmen and craftswomen to help build the country. This is therefore something in which we believe we have a role to play.

  (1240)  

    The Chair: You were only eighteen seconds over.

    Monsieur Godin.

[Translation]

    Mr. Yvon Godin (Acadie—Bathurst, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I hope that I will have as much time to ask my questions as the minister had had to answer the other questions. Five minutes is not very much time because this is a really important issue.

    Generally speaking, I am not the one to congratulate the minister, but I can tell you, Madam Minister, that the Youth Employment Strategy is a program that I support because it provides our young people with an opportunity to gain experience. I'm strongly in favour of this strategy, which we can always improve.

    Furthermore, I would like to know whether the department is prepared to provide more assistance to individuals who want to enter the nursing profession, for example. We are experiencing problems in the health sector, but those individuals who want to study nursing are not eligible for employment insurance.

    Earlier, you said that you had eliminated the two-week waiting period for tradespersons with one exception. Why not eliminate that exception as well? Going to school does not constitute abuse. I feel that the current situation is terrible. Let's take the example of an individual who works in the forestry sector and who wants to take a mechanic's course. When the time comes for this person to take his course at community college, he will lose two weeks of pay and the entire family will suffer.

    I would like to see this two-week waiting period eliminated in these cases, even when they are the first two weeks, because we are not dealing with somebody who has quit his or her job, but rather with somebody who wants to improve his lot. Madam Chair, I think that this is going against what we want to achieve.

    My third question pertains to literacy. According to the agreement entered into between the federal government and the Province of New Brunswick as part of phase 2 of the employment insurance program, the people who were taking literacy courses or who had gone back to school to get their seventh or ninth grade could take these courses and receive employment insurance at the same time. However, the province decided otherwise and now you have to take courses from the ninth to the twelve grade. This is not going to encourage our adults to take courses. I think this is terrible. This goes against what you said earlier, Madam Minister.

    Also, as part of phase 2 of the employment insurance program, it is the province who decides who can take these courses and be entitled to benefits, and there is no appeal mechanism for those people who do not agree with the decision.

    I have asked you a lot of questions and I know that we only have five minutes, which is unfortunate, but these are the points that I would like you, Madam Minister, and our government to clarify.

  (1245)  

[English]

    Mrs. Jane Stewart: First and foremost, it is a very important initiative. If the committee chooses to really dig into it, I'd be happy to come back at any time, at your request, because it really is a priority for us.

    With regard to nurses, Mr. Godin, you'll be interested to know that we have a sectorial relationship with nurses, who are now looking at their overarching human resource requirements in the context of existing and anticipated medical service models. Right now, over $1 million dollars is in the hands of nursing organizations, and I anticipate that we are going to get some very positive working results out of their deliberations. And we're also asking them to work with doctors, with whom we also have a sectorial relationship. So this is a role the Government of Canada can play in helping to determine the human resource requirements for the country in very important professions.

    With regard to employment insurance, the two-week waiting period will remain, because it's a reflection of the insurance principle of employment insurance. We all give something. When we looked at the opportunities and the options for the apprenticeship question on the two-week waiting period, I can tell you that the unions and all the stakeholders were really quite happy with the results that we came up with in the last budget.

    Finally, with regard to literacy and the question of the relationship between the provinces and the Government of Canada, this is an area particularly in the.... You gave the example of New Brunswick having literacy upgrading for grades 9 to 12 instead of grades 7 to 9. These are some things that the committee might want to look at in terms of the different approaches that the provinces are taking. You could then make some recommendations about best practices. Doing that would be particularly useful.

    Mr. Yvon Godin: And the appeal process?

    Mrs. Jane Stewart: For employment insurance?

    Mr. Yvon Godin: No. The provinces receive human resources money from the federal government and they make decisions about who can go to college, but there's no appeal process if they refuse people. It depends how the person making the decisions wakes up in the morning, and there's no appeal process. There are no critères.

    Mrs. Jane Stewart: These might be some things you'd like to look at. Of course, if they're in the provincial domain, you must recognize that in terms of the relationship.

    The Chair: Thank you.

    Madame Folco.

[Translation]

    Ms. Raymonde Folco (Laval West, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair.

    I too would like to welcome you, Madam Minister.

    Several questions have been asked about the trades. I would like to talk about the professions. I am particularly interested in the health care professions, medicine especially. Having read the newspapers and spoken to several members of Parliament and to you, I know that we are currently working on something to help doctors who studied abroad, whether they be Canadians who received their degrees abroad or foreigners who immigrated here. Traditionally, physicians with foreign degress have not been allowed to practice here because they did not have a Canadian degree, and also because the professional associations did not allow them to practice.They are very soon going to have an opportunity — or perhaps this has already begun — to upgrade their skills and practice here. It seems to me that this is a very important thing to do given the crisis that we are experiencing here in Canada in the health sector. I'm thinking, in particular, about the scarcity of doctors. I'm therefore wondering what is being developed in your department. I know that other departments are involved, especially the departments of Industry and Immigration. I would also like you to talk about your relationship with the provinces and the professional associations.

[English]

    Mrs. Jane Stewart: The question of foreign credential recognition is one that came up over and over again at the summit. We all have anecdotal evidence about Canadians who have skills and training but can't use those skills and that training here in Canada, for the reasons you have made reference to, Madame Folco. It's a “brain waste”, as one of our colleagues referred to the challenge.

    For us, we're starting to see a recognition amongst many professions in regard to the importance of dealing with the question of foreign credential recognition. Some 60% of new immigrants to Canada come with post-secondary education, and 43% of them want to work in the regulated trades—health professions, engineering, and those sorts of professions; 17% are in engineering, for example.

    While you are speaking about the health professions, I can tell you we're making progress with engineers. We are working with the CCPE, the Canadian Council of Professional Engineers, who have identified this as their number one challenge. With some support from the Government of Canada, they are bringing together their provincial entities to deal with the specific question of foreign credential recognition for engineers. We anticipate that this model may well be transferrable to other professions, and as part of our sectorial relationships with doctors, with nurses, and probably five other health professions, we are encouraging them to look at the foreign credential requirements.

    So we are dealing with two things. On labour mobility across the country, we've made some significant progress with the provinces and territories in that regard at the Forum of Labour Market Ministers. That table will also be focusing on foreign credential recognition. And working with the regulating professions and their organizations is also a priority for us and, I believe, for the provinces and territories more and more.

  (1250)  

[Translation]

    Ms. Raymonde Folco: Do I have any time left, Madam Chair?

[English]

    The Chair: You have thirty seconds for your question and thirty seconds for the response.

    Ms. Raymonde Folco: It's not a question, it's actually a comment. I wanted to say that, in my riding of Laval West a week and a half ago, we had a very interesting exhibition

[Translation]

    on the trades, which was organized by one of the island school boards. We saw the type of advertising that a school board could do in order to motivate the young and the not-so-young to sign up for continuing education trade courses. This was undertaken in cooperation with the local Laval Human Resources Development Canada Office. This turned out to be wonderfully successful. This has been done not only internationally, but also locally.

[English]

    The Chair: Thank you.

    Mr. Doyle, and then Mr. Tonks.

    Mr. Norman Doyle (St. John's East, PC): Thank you, Madam Chair.

    Welcome, Minister. I have a question on the availability of training money and the problems associated with moving training money from one area of the province into another. I'm sure you're aware of that problem.

    In my own province, the large urban areas receive all of the applications from individuals for training. There is often the problem that they run out of money at the satellite offices very quickly because of the large influx of applications. However, in the rural areas, where there are fewer applications and fewer demands for money, HRDC officials continually tell me that they find it difficult to move money from an area with less demand to an area with high demand. I want to get your comments and your opinion on that.

    Are you aware of the problem? It is a real problem in my province, and it has been for a number of years. How could you go about getting the information from Ottawa and into these various offices?

    Mrs. Jane Stewart: Actually, because the details aren't as specific as what I would need to know if I'm talking about the co-managed LMDA—the labour market development agreement—or other programs, it's hard for me to actually make a comment. But if you want to sit down and talk about it, Mr. Doyle, I would be glad to do that with you.

    Mr. Norman Doyle: I really would, because it has been a problem now for a number of years. It involves applications from individuals who want to go to trade school and who want to access HRD money. Individuals from HRDC will often tell me they're out of money in the St. John's area, for instance, but that they do have plenty money left in the Gander–Grand Falls area. They're not using it out there, but they can't transfer it from one area of the province into another.

    Mrs. Jane Stewart: This sounds like it might be skills development money, which could be part of the LMDA. If there is some fine tuning that we could do there to be more responsive, I would be glad to look at it.

    Mr. Norman Doyle: Yes, because it's a real problem. Maybe if I sat down with you on an individual basis, we could come to a resolution on the matter.

    Mrs. Jane Stewart: I'd be happy to do that.

    The Chair: Thank you.

    Mr. Tonks, and then Mr. Goldring.

  (1255)  

    Mr. Alan Tonks: Thank you.

    Minister, I had the opportunity to attend one of the prep coms for the skills and learning agenda. A consensus emerged from the various groups that we had to search out an integrated model similar to the sectorial councils, for those involved in apprenticeship training, those involved in literacy, and those involved in the provision of child support services in a comprehensive way, so that people can avail themselves of the skills and education required.

    There was a recognition that it should be an integrated model because a one-size-fits-all model does not fit all across the country in terms of the nature of seasonal workers' challenges and the challenges of economic and employment dislocation occurring, for example, in the various industries.

    The third thing that emerged was a consensus that we should—How did they put it?—have a sense of urgency, that there is a necessity to have an integrated, community-based model up and running so that budgetary allocations, program development, and so on, can take place.

    Can you tell me what the nature of the Canadian Learning Institute's makeup will be? Will it in fact mirror the sense that we have that the models are going to be community-based and are going to be integrated? Is there going to be a feeding up of information so that this information can be analyzed? This information comes from people who are working in the field, on the street, or in the communities of the country, and who really know what the problems are. They can then get program allocations back in terms of supporting the community-based efforts.

    Mrs. Jane Stewart: Actually, this is a wonderful question.

    In the context of the databases that exist in the area of learning, I made reference to StatsCan, but there are some others. But one of the areas in which we have difficulty bringing together experiences is that of community-based interventions that really do make a difference at the community level. We have no way of pulling that information to a higher level so that we can compare it, provide best practices, and say how something worked in a certain kind of community.

    One of the stakeholders in this whole undertaking would indeed be our communities, because one of the challenges—and this came up at the summit as well, Mr. Tonks—is the importance of developing learning communities, communities that know what their human assets are, as well as what their technical assets are, like their schools, their structures, their networks. This is becoming very much an issue of focus in terms of how we encourage lifelong learning, whether we're talking about literacy programs at the library, post-secondary education programs, or the role a community college can play at helping to diversify the economy and get the questions of commercialization onto the table. These are all the kinds of things we don't have good data on. We don't have a way of monitoring and assessing and determining what works.

    So your point about community approaches to lifelong learning and the provision of the tools and services individuals need to continuously learn and reach their potential is a very good one, and I suspect it would also be part of the context of data collection and analysis, and then of recommendations.

    Mr. Alan Tonks: Thank you.

[Translation]

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Eugène Bellemare): Mr. Goldring will be the next intervener.

[English]

    Mr. Peter Goldring (Edmonton Centre-East , Canadian Alliance): Madam Minister, I think it's fair to say that the affordable housing problem across this country and the lack of construction are in large part due to the lack of specific tradespeople. As a matter of fact, that could be one of the biggest inhibiting factors in competition in the construction trades in and of themselves.

    If we go back to the 1950s and 1960s, I think it's well understood that in the city of Toronto, for example, where they were building literally hundreds of high-rise apartment buildings, the construction industry there spoke Italian. Would part of this plan be, then, to encourage more immigration of tradespeople to help fill that avenue?

    The $12 million to be spent basically to advertise for more people to enter the trade skills is a step in the right direction, but how sustainable is this? Obviously, this has been a kind of systemic problem over a multiple number of years when there has been a discouragement for the trades. Could you respond to that in terms of the sustainable intent of this and what will be done to promote it more?

·  (1300)  

    Mrs. Jane Stewart: That's an interesting analysis, Mr. Goldring.

    First and foremost, there was and continues to be a focus on making sure Canadians have access to the tools they need and the information they need to participate in a significant way in Canadian society and the economy. We are looking at who is going to be there to do the work of the country. We have to absolutely look at our youth and make sure our programs and labour market information are targeted to young people so that they get the information about where the best opportunities are. We know that includes the skilled trades today.

    Beyond that, Canada has always been a country of immigration. We have a strong heritage in terms of welcoming those who want to leave their home countries to come to Canada. As part of this overarching innovation and learning strategy, then, the Minister of Immigration is very closely aligned with our work. We want to make sure that, through our temporary foreign worker program, for example, we have the technologies and administrative capacity to bring people in quickly when we need them, and then to move on as our cycles change.

    For those who are thinking of coming to Canada, we also want to be able to do a better job overseas in terms of providing them with the information they need on how their skills can be used, what the labour market information is, and what kind of training they can begin now, even before they come to Canada, to fast-track their integration into the Canadian economy. This is very much the immigration piece of this strategy, and it's very much present in our thinking and in our developments.

    Mr. Peter Goldring: But in the points system for immigration, there really seems to be an overall weighting for more scholastic abilities and linguistic abilities. We seem to have forgotten our history, that history being that, as I said, the construction industry in the 1960s and 1970s spoke Italian. What chance would those tradespeople have to immigrate under today's standards?

    It's not that we want to fixate on immigration as a way of solving our problems in our construction industry. It's not that at all, because I certainly do believe we should, first and foremost, go to the Canadian public to encourage them to come forward. But we must approach this with a combined effort, and I believe immigration is a very important element. What's your feeling?

    Mrs. Jane Stewart: You'll be interested to know, Mr. Goldring, that as we were developing the new Immigration Act, there were voices from this side of the table that were very aggressive in our caucus in terms of pointing out to the minister that we had to make sure our tradition of welcoming those who are trained in the trades would not have a problem and would continue to be a part of the flow of new immigrants to Canada. If you look at the act, there were changes made to reflect that in terms of the new systems associated with immigration.

    Another point on this is the fact that we have, of late, created a sectorial council in the construction trades. It took us a while to get there, but the stakeholders—both the employers and the unions—ultimately came together. They're preparing their human resource planning documents and strategies, and I think that is also a particularly positive piece of the puzzle. It will assist us with the challenge of skilled trades in Canada.

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Eugène Bellemare): Thank you very much, Mr. Goldring.

[Translation]

    I will now give the floor to Mr. Simard.

[English]

    Mr. Raymond Simard (Saint Boniface, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I know we're running out of time, so I'll keep this very brief.

    Madam Minister, I have a particular interest in literacy. In my area, I have an organization called Pluri-elles, which used to deal with women's issues. That group got sidetracked, and now they're dealing with literacy issues for both women and men. I'd like to tell you that the response has been overwhelming, to the point at which they've had to set up contact people in twenty or thirty small towns in Manitoba.

    With all the partners that we have to negotiate with and speak to—we're talking about labour, educational institutions, and business—I'm a little bit concerned that we won't be able to respond fast enough to the demand. Is Canada ready to respond fairly quickly to what I think will be a fairly substantial demand for improvements to literacy?

·  (1305)  

    Mrs. Jane Stewart: One of the challenges that we have, Mr. Simard, is to really have the information that will point us in the effective and right direction. There's no question about that.

    I would applaud the National Literacy Secretariat for the work it has been doing in terms of providing seed money for pilot projects across the country, and for supporting large literacy organizations like ABC Canada and others. But my sense is that we need a broader understanding of what works. We need to better understand the impact of family literacy, of workplace literacy.

    Particularly in the area of workplace literacy, I'll come back to the point made by Madame Tremblay about the difference between small and large employers. As she suggested, small employers are very apt to have an employee base that could benefit from essential basic skills opportunities and could be connected to this.

    Again, Mr. Chair, that's why I suggested that this would be an area in which I would absolutely welcome the work and advice of the committee. As I said, it's foundational and we are in a different world. Those who have been able to mainstream in Canadian society and in the workplace with low levels of literacy do not have that opportunity in a knowledge-based economy. We risk creating the digital divide—that's one way of talking about it—thereby undermining our social integrity, as well as our economic abilities.

    So again, colleagues, if that were something the committee turned its attention to, I can tell you that I certainly would appreciate your work and your advice.

    Mr. Raymond Simard: Thank you.

[Translation]

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Eugène Bellemare): Mr. Simard, thank you very much. I would also like to thank Ms. Biggs, the assistant deputy minister, for coming to assist the minister. The subject is extremely important and interesting.

[English]

    You were very forthright, very informative, and very interesting, to the point that I know more members would like to keep on asking questions on the topic.

    You have made an offer to come back when we discuss adult literacy and essential skills development, Madam Minister. We certainly would like to see you back. I am sure every member here will have very good questions and that you will have very interesting and involved answers to our questions.

[Translation]

    Madam Minister, thank you very much.

    The meeting is adjourned.