HUMA Committee Meeting

     I call to order meeting number 18 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities.

    Today is the last meeting we'll be hearing witnesses on this study. Today's meeting is again taking place in a hybrid fashion. We expect all those attending in person to follow health protocols.

    To ensure an orderly meeting, I would like to make a few comments for the benefit of the witnesses and members. Before speaking, please wait until I recognize you by name. For those participating by video conference, please click on the microphone icon to activate your mike. For those in the room, your microphone will be controlled by the proceedings and verifications officer. When you are not speaking, your microphone should be on mute.

    Members and witnesses may speak in the official language of their choice, and interpretation services are available for this meeting. For those participating by video conference, you have the choice at the bottom of your screen of floor, English or French. For those in the room, you can use an earpiece and select the desired channel. If interpretation is lost, please inform me immediately and we'll ensure that interpretation is properly restored.

    For members participating virtually, please use the “raise hand” function. For members in the room, if you wish to speak, please raise your hand. The clerk and I will manage the speaking order as best we can. I would remind you that all questions should be directed through the chair.

    Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Thursday, February 3, 2022, the committee will resume its study of labour shortages, working conditions and the care economy.

    I would like to welcome our witnesses. To begin our discussion, we will have five minutes for opening remarks.

    I will introduce a few changes, because we were not able to connect with some of the witnesses. From Deloitte, we have Georgina Black, managing partner of government and public services, and Craig Alexander, chief economist and executive adviser. From the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, we have Ivana Saula, research director for Canada. From the Ontario Chamber of Commerce, we have Rocco Rossi, president and chief executive officer, who has now joined us; Michelle Eaton, vice-president of public affairs; and Daniel Safayeni, vice-president of policy.

    We're going to begin with five minutes. I would ask witnesses to keep their remarks within five minutes to give our panellists the maximum time to ask questions.

    We'll begin with Deloitte. I believe Craig Alexander is going to speak for Deloitte.

    Am I correct, or is it now Georgina Black?

    Hello. I'm here.

    Ms. Black, you have five minutes.

    Hello. Thank you for the opportunity to join all of you today. My name is Georgina Black, managing partner, government, public services and health care, for Deloitte.

    As you mentioned, I'm also joined by my colleague Craig Alexander, the chief economist and executive adviser at Deloitte.

    For context, Deloitte works with payers and providers across a public, private and not-for-profit ecosystem in Canada and the globe. Our in-house think tank, the Future of Canada Centre, has published research on how to build a thriving nation.

    My remarks will highlight some of the recommendations from our report, “Catalyst: A vision for a thriving Canada in 2030” and subsequent white papers. This includes making fundamental reforms to Canada's care economy to support a growth agenda. From our perspective, the care economy includes those who work in health, education and social services, both paid and unpaid.

    Prior to the pandemic, the demand for the care economy was already growing. Studies have documented the shortage of workers across child care, elder care, health care and social care for years. Here in Canada, the pandemic not only revealed the shortage of workers across the care economy, it also contributed to making the situation worse as workers across the economy left for a range of reasons—unstable access to child care, deteriorating working conditions, health and mental health issues and the pursuit of less risky jobs.

    As we think about the care economy we must make sure we solve problems not only for today but also for the next 30 years. While we clearly need to find and train more humans to solve the problem, we must also think very differently about the problem and innovate in a sector that has largely been operating the same way for decades.

    There are several issues to consider and today we would like to highlight five. The first is this mismatch between demand and supply, not only today but looking into the future. There is no source of truth that we've been able to find provincially or nationally about the state of demand and supply in the care economy. As a result, immigration, skills training, etc., are not aligned to the marketplace's needs.

    The second issue is related to outdated regulations and standards, if in fact they existed at all. There are various barriers to effectively deploying human capital across the care economy, such as suboptimal regulations and outdated standards of care and training.

    The third issue we would highlight is the outdated models of care and lack of digital innovation in the care economy. The health and social care economy in our country has largely remained unchanged for decades. It has been slow and, at times, even reluctant to embrace technology, digital solutions and new models of care.

    The fourth issue we would highlight is with respect to maybe a Canadian value and thinking of this in terms of respect and compensation. Canada's respect for the rights and dignity of children, marginalized populations and elders is somewhat understated, which contributes to a perception of work in the care economy as being “less than”. Compensation across the care economy is less than other specialized professions. For unskilled and low-skilled workers, working conditions, job security and wages are well-documented issues.

    The fifth and last issue I'd highlight here is that of unpaid caregivers. This is a very important part of the care economy. We have an army of unpaid caregivers in our country—estimates of 8.1 million Canadians—juggling work, caregiving and so forth. In addition to the value unpaid caregivers provide to the health and social care economy, we must recognize that there's actually a cost to our economy, which is estimated to be about $1.3 billion in lost productivity.

    Deloitte's research and internal experts have identified several areas where the government and businesses could take action to create a more sustainable and resilient care economy. The first is to develop a national human resource or pan-Canadian human resource strategy for care workers that would join up immigration, training and credentialing to create a more dynamic and coherent care economy.

    The second recommendation is to modernize the care economy. This includes modernizing regulations, standards of care, training, benefits for workers in the gig economy and so forth.

    Related to modernizing the care economy, the third recommendation is to embrace digital solutions in this care economy to free up existing resources, accelerate adoption of virtual care technologies and ensure providers and consumers have skills to engage with these digital programs and services.

    The fourth recommendation is to introduce programs to support this army of unpaid caregivers providing benefits to the health and social care economy.

     Then the last recommendation is to continue to support Canada's early learning and child care systems to allow for greater and more equitable labour force participation. The COVID pandemic has not only had a massive impact on the Canadian economy and society but has also laid bare weaknesses that existed prior to the health and social care crisis. This is particularly true of the care economy. The pressures on these sectors, the experience at long-term care homes and the criticality of access to child care for labour participation have all become strongly evident.

    The opportunity in front of us is to embrace the care economy as a critical part of the Canadian economy and to view the work as important and valued, while at the same time introducing innovations that will build in resiliency and efficiency to benefit workers, employers, Canadians and the economy.

    Craig and I look forward to answering any questions. Thank you.

    Thank you, Ms. Black.

    We go now to Ms. Saula for five minutes.

    Thank you very much.

    Good morning, honoured members of the committee. My name is Ivana Saula. I am a research director for the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. On behalf of the IAM and our members, I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to present our views on this important topic.

    The IAM represents workers in a wide range of industries with a growing footprint in health care. The majority of our members in health care are personal support workers, nurses and ambulance drivers working in various facilities across Ontario and Alberta, where attacks on the public sector and on health care in particular have been especially aggressive.

    On March 3, 2022, this committee touched on the possibility of automation in response to labour shortages, so I will draw on conclusions from our report on automation and artificial intelligence, “Charting Change”, and point to a useful case study. I'll also briefly comment on the government's and employers' roles in inducing these labour shortages, particularly in health care.

    Employers in particular have made precarious employment and non-standard employment—which on the whole erode working conditions—the norm rather than the exception as a feature of the labour market. An employment model that arose out of convenience for employers has eroded working conditions across sectors and has eroded living standards for millions of Canadians.

    Personal support workers often work for multiple employers in order to get enough hours to earn a living. This means that one employer can guarantee four hours per week, another 12 hours and a third 10 hours. Wages of personal support workers vary across Canada, with the starting wage in some provinces being as low as $12 an hour. The work of PSWs and all health care workers is also characterized by physically demanding labour, workplace violence, high turnover and high rates of burnout. Not only is the work undervalued, but the framework for employment promotes instability.

    In some cases, PSWs work for private companies that earned record profits during the pandemic, but they continue to drive wages and other benefits down. Copious numbers of studies yield the same result on this topic: Compared to workers in standard employment, those with non-standard jobs tend to have lower wages, lower job tenure, higher poverty rates, less education and fewer workplace benefits, such as pensions. Similarly, poverty rates of workers in non-standard employment are two to three times higher than the poverty rates of workers in standard employment. Clearly, this framework of precarious and non-standard employment is one of the key issues affecting recruitment into this field.

    Demand for care work in health care is expected to continue increasing, and according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, personal support workers and home care workers are expected to be two of the fastest-growing occupations over the next 10 years. If these jobs are in demand and proven to be critical to our economy, why are workers in this sector not adequately compensated? Our members find this work meaningful and are proud of what they do. It's not the work itself that makes recruitment difficult; rather, recruitment is challenging because of low wages and lack of recognition.

    I point now to a case study in Japan, a country that has severe issues with labour shortages in the health care system. Labour shortages are especially acute in retirement homes and in long-term care, where the elderly are looking after the elderly. Japan's response to this issue has been automation, making Japan's use of robots the fourth-highest in the world. The use of exoskeletons and interactive robots and the piloting of culturally sensitive robots are becoming the norm, as the country anticipates severe labour shortages coupled with growing demand for workers in long-term care.

    Given the immediate need for labour, it seems that an understanding of the impact of automation on quality of care has not been sufficiently studied. In North America, vast amounts of resources are funnelled into studying and developing devices that replace the need for human assistance, such as automated health assessment systems, in-home monitoring systems, smart assistive walking devices and biosensors, just to name a few. These technologies would directly impact personal support workers, health care aides and other ancillary staff. The technological developments in health care go beyond assistive devices, and there are a number of things in the pilot stage right now.

    While it's possible to address the gap in labour, it's necessary to assess technology fully. We have yet to fully understand the impact that technology and digital platforms have on the quality of care and the quality of life of elderly and aging clients. Technology may be convenient, but we should not turn to it as a solution without a full understanding of its impact on the health care system, patients and clients.

     Our broad recommendations are the following. First, both federal and provincial governments should reform labour laws to provide protections for those in non-standard and precarious employment. We're also looking for protection for workers to join a union and for changes to union certification to match today's labour markets. We're looking to curb the proliferation of non-standard employment. We're also hoping that governments will work among different levels to promote living wages, rather than just minimum wage.

    We're also hoping that there can be a thorough study of emerging trends and technologies for use in long-term care. Broadly and ambitiously speaking, we're hoping that long-term care could be included as part of the Canada Health Act.

    We also support a national strategy for health human resources in health care, and last but not least, for national standards for long-term care.

    Thank you very much.

    Thank you, Ms. Saula.

    I believe Mr. Rossi is going to speak for the Ontario Chamber of Commerce.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    We are delighted to be here.

    While we meet in cyberspace, I want to acknowledge off the top that I come to you from the traditional territories of the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishinabe, the Haudenosaunee, the Chippewa and the Wendat peoples. Of course, we're all in different parts of Turtle Island, where the lands and waters have been stewarded by first nations, Inuit and Métis people for generations. The single best way we can thank them for that is to truly redouble our efforts on the path towards truth and reconciliation.

    The Ontario Chamber of Commerce, my colleagues and I represent some 157 chambers and boards of trade across the province of Ontario, which in turn represent some 60,000 businesses and organizations, which include organizations like the Ontario Medical Association, various hospitals and different organizations in the care economy.

    I want to kick off, though, by underscoring that the labour shortage issue permeates the economy as a whole. While certainly accentuated during the COVID crisis, it is something that we've been consistently tracking with our members in our annual surveys. Our latest survey, which was done for this year's “Ontario Economic Report”, underscored that some 62% of members are facing serious labour shortages, and that is across all sectors.

    One area we're focused on in particular is ensuring that traditionally under-represented groups, particularly in the area of disabilities, are approached with very targeted supports and training to ensure that, at a time when we are desperate for labour, no talent and no potential is left behind.

    In focusing on those elements that are specific to the federal government, we have to start with immigration. Clearly these last two years have been an enormous challenge to process. We note that as of December 2021, there were over 1.8 million applications in the queue. Particularly in the area of skilled labour, we're seeing a massive backlog that has to be focused on if we're going to attack this problem.

    There are other issues specific for Ontario within the larger immigration question. Number one, we would very much like to see Ontario's allocation of immigrants, under the Ontario immigrant nominee program, increase from the current 9,000 to a minimum of 18,000, and quite frankly, that number could be much higher. We call upon the federal government to work with the Ontario government to eliminate the current requirement for labour market impact assessments for OINP participants, particularly those hired in communities with populations under 200,000, where it is far more challenging for employers to attract and retain the workers they need to fill labour shortages.

    We recommend expanding Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada's ability to process express entry for federal skilled worker applications domestically and abroad, as well as to process international student study permits and visas at Canadian mission offices, and recommend working with the Ontario government to develop a long-term northern and rural Ontario immigration strategy to ensure communities can attract and retain immigrants.

    We recommend continuing to modernize and address administrative burdens within the temporary foreign worker program. We were encouraged to see the federal government recently announce its foreign worker program workforce solutions road map, but we need to be moving, not just looking at the road map.

    As well, we recommend reviewing the national occupation classification codes to create opportunities for permanent residence for labourers and operators.

    There are still enormous barriers to interprovincial labour mobility that make absolutely no sense in an increasingly competitive world, a world where labour is at such a premium and not necessarily in the right places. This has been exacerbated by inconsistent certification, training standards and acceptance of credentials across the country.

    As we chart our road to recovery, the Government of Canada must develop a strategy to boost long-term economic growth by further accelerating efforts to remove barriers to interprovincial labour mobility. One thing that we could do is create a public repository of information about labour mobility barriers in Canada to help policy-makers prioritize those efforts and strengthen the case for reform.

    The support of health care—

    Excuse me. We've gone over time.

    I'd be happy to take questions.

    For any point that you'd like to further expand on, you can do it in the question round. I understand as well that you have to leave early, but there are two members of the chamber who will stay for questions.

    They're far more talented and bright.

    Thank you, Mr. Rossi and witnesses.

    We'll now begin our first round of questioning with Mrs. Kusie for six minutes.

    Thank you very much.

    Thank you very much to all the witnesses for joining us here today.

    Ms. Black, you recommended that government should complement the social security system with enhanced retraining and re-skilling supports such as a scaled-up and enhanced Canada training benefit and Canada training credit to help the workforce upskill and pivot to their next jobs. In a recent report, you talked quite extensively about the necessity for Canadian workers to have the right skills.

    With the recent budget announcements, we saw some funding allocated but no real specifics. How would you want the Canada training benefit enhanced?

    Thank you.

    In one of the recommendations I shared with you today, we talked about joining up an understanding of the market demand with labour market needs, ensuring that we skill people up to meet the needs with government and with private clients.

    One of the things that we hear across Deloitte all of the time, and Mr. Rossi mentioned it, is the challenge in finding labour with the right skills. The recommendation would be to join up what we know the market needs and for government and business to work together to train Canadians up to be able to contribute to the economy.

    Ms. Saula, you mentioned labour laws extensively. What kind of regulatory framework do you think is needed for the increase in AI and automation as industries grapple with labour shortages? In your answer, you can expand that beyond the framework around labour laws.

    What regulatory framework would you suggest in general for an increase in AI and automation as industries use this as a solution for the severe labour shortage we're facing?

    Thank you for that question.

    I'm not sure that I'm necessarily making an argument that we bridge the gap with technology when it comes to labour shortages right across the economy, but I think what's necessary to understand is that there are possibilities, certainly with artificial intelligence, where we can replace workers in a number of industries and some really surprising ones too.

    What's essential before we move down that road is to really have a firm understanding of where the use of automation is appropriate. It's not just where does it harm workers, but where does it just not make economic sense to deploy at this point? Essentially what we're asking for as an organization is for the federal government to undertake a study of artificial intelligence and the possibilities that exist for various sectors, where it makes sense and where it doesn't make sense.

    In terms of regulatory reforms, we're looking at specific sector reforms rather than just a broad approach in terms of protecting workers or enabling businesses to deploy technology.

    I don't have a direct answer to your question in terms of regulatory reforms but we're looking at specific sectors to develop their own.

    One of the examples that we have been looking to as a progressive template is the Port of Seattle. They've developed a code of ethics for the use of biometrics and the different types of technologies that are being used across airports, not just in Canada and the U.S. but globally. Essentially that code of ethics applies to anybody operating in the aerodrome. It's not just a code of ethics in terms of how employers or how the airport authorities anticipate it to behave, but it really spells out roles and responsibilities in terms of how the technology is handled and how it impacts upon passengers, workers and airline carriers. It asks some of the broader questions.

    When we talk about reforms I think it's important to look at them from the perspective of sectors but also to develop something that works, something that's not just an impediment for employers to implement the technology, because it may be necessary. We want a full understanding, but we also want some assurances that there's no harm that comes out of these technologies.

     Thank you.

    Mr. Rossi, you talked about extensive government failures when it comes to addressing this labour shortage we're facing right now. You talked about a lack of good legislation for provincial labour mobility. Everyone knows about the horrific backlogs we have seen under the current government, as well as this government's lack of ability to finally solve the credentials problem.

    I would like you to take the last minute I have, please, to expand upon these problems and, most importantly, your solutions for how we can resolve these significant, numerous problems you have mentioned.

    With respect to the interprovincial issues, I want to stress that this is not solely the product of the federal government. There is plenty of responsibility to be shared by provincial governments that choose to have different standards for a variety of reasons that, quite frankly, make less and less sense in today's world.

    Very clearly, what happened to the ability to process in person over the course of the last two years has set back a lot of the work on immigration. If you're looking to prioritize where you invest and where you get your resources, getting that backlog cleared by focusing resources now is going to be as powerful as, if not more powerful than, many other steps that the government could take.

    What we would argue is that there are prioritization opportunities. There is co-operation required on the part of provincial governments, together with the federal government, but we would note that, in the early nineties, Quebec was given far greater powers over immigration. This was primarily for cultural reasons. I would argue that all of the provinces, certainly my own province of Ontario, have clear economic reasons for having greater powers in this area.

    Thank you, Mr. Rossi.

    Thank you, all.

    Thank you, Ms. Kusie.

    Ms. Martinez Ferrada, you have the floor for six minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    My question is for Ms. Saula, of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers.

    In your opening remarks, you referred a lot to the care economy. But I'd like to hear you speak about the challenge of labour shortages not only now, but also in the longer term. How do you think we can work on recruitment, training and succession planning, specifically in the aerospace sector? If we're not able to have a pool of students who will take over the field, what will the impact be on the labour shortage?

    Thank you for that question. It's a very good question, because we also put out a report on labour shortages in the aerospace and aviation industry.

    Succession is something that, through the union and the collective agreement in some of the aerospace plants, has been a common practice. The union has negotiated with employers that are anticipating labour shortages in their region for workers who are near retirement to either stay on longer, on a shorter work week—two or three days per week—and come in and mentor younger workers who are coming in, or bring them back post-retirement on a modified work schedule to work with those who are in the plant. We think that this model works quite well, because it passes on that institutional knowledge and it passes on that hands-on experience that sometimes young workers might not get out of their training programs.

    Succession, in the way that it has been informally set up through collective agreements, has been quite successful. It's something that's working, both for our retired members and new workers who are entering the workplace.

    We have gone specifically to the Province of Quebec with this model and tried to get some input and some buy-in into the process. I don't know how far we have gotten with that as we speak, but I know that the Province of Quebec has been an ally for the IAM in Quebec in pushing the aerospace agenda forward.

    Thank you, Ms. Saula. If it's possible, please do send the report on aerospace that you mentioned to the clerk. It will certainly interest the members of the committee.

    My second question is probably more for you, Mr. Rossi, since you raised the issue of immigration. You mentioned the Quebec immigration agreement, and it is, indeed, the only province with an agreement of that kind. However, some Quebec businesspeople will tell you that even with a special agreement in place, there's a labour shortage and an immigration problem in general.

    When it comes to the care economy, how can we use immigration to address the labour shortage?

     It's an excellent question.

     Clearly, as I've said, the focus when the powers were granted in the early nineties was really on the cultural side. I think the key—and it goes back to what Ms. Black was talking about—is really about connecting economic need with potential resources, having that appropriate database and then, really, co-operation between businesses, the government and educational institutions to use it for economic purposes.

     I think that is going to be crucial: to take what has been largely a focus on the cultural side—and important—and, now, to really use those powers for the purposes of economic growth and matching up skills to opportunities.

    Thank you.

    I think one of my colleagues wanted us to split the time.

    How much time is left, Mr. Chair?

    Madame Ferrada, I think there are only a few seconds left.

    We will move to Madame Chabot.

    All right, thank you.

    Ms. Chabot, you have the floor for six minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Good morning to all the witnesses. I'd like to thank them for being here, for participating, and for their testimony.

    My first question is for Ms. Saula, of the IAMAW.

    Even though you discussed the care economy in your testimony, I'd like us to talk about the labour reality in the aerospace industry, since you are the biggest union in the world representing that sector.

    During the last meeting of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, Ms. Martel, the general manager of the CAMAQ, the Comité sectoriel de main-d'œuvre en aérospatiale, told us that the sector suffers from a lack of appeal, among other things because of the pandemic, because of the numerous layoff announcements and the fact that the sector isn't valued, despite it being important to the economy. You know that Montreal is the third largest aerospace hub in the world. Ms. Martel also said that in 2031, or in less than 10 years, 30,000 positions will need to be filled because of retirements and career changes.

    Do you share the same view?

    I found it quite troubling that a sector as critical as the aerospace industry should be coming up against these issues of scarcity and labour retention, as well as appeal.

    What can you tell us about that?

     That's a very good question.

    Yes, the subsector was heavily impacted by the pandemic, given its reliance on air transportation. We know the impact of the pandemic on air travel, both domestically and internationally.

    In our study, we also found that labour shortages are expected to be extreme as soon as 2025. One of the obstacles to recruitment is, again, lack of recognition, particularly for the skilled trades in aerospace. That's one thing. The second thing is the availability of training programs. What we're seeing is that colleges are not able to get sufficient enrolment numbers, so when there are students who are interested in a particular program, the program gets cancelled and they transfer into a different skilled trade. As a result, there are never enough people trained for work in aerospace, even though it's rewarding work, it's enriching, it's stimulating, it's well paid and it's stable. Really, the issue is between people wanting to get into the industry versus having the ability to do so. It is just not there. It's a provincial responsibility, and all of the provinces could be looking more at that. We do have recommendations on what that would look like.

    You're absolutely correct that Montreal is the third-largest ecosystem when it comes to aerospace. Canada is very much globally competitive. This is a subsector that is also of national importance. However, we see that Canada has been falling in terms of global competition and we see that investment on all fronts, from education and training all the way to support to SMEs, really isn't there, so it's a much broader issue. However, skill shortages certainly are plaguing this industry, like many others.

    I would like to ask you a follow-up question to something that was asked earlier.

    Before the pandemic, you produced, “Grounded Potential: An IAMAW Report on a National Aerospace Industry”. You really made the case for having a national aerospace strategy, and you're already predicting serious labour shortages in the sector. You also asked for a multidimensional strategy, including a labour strategy, to be implemented.

    Have you already come up with the main recommendations for the strategy? If so, could you quickly describe them or send them to us in writing?

    I will send the report, but I will say that one of the key obstacles that we identified in terms of a national strategy is that aerospace falls a little bit into the federal jurisdiction and a little bit into the provincial, so the industry tends to fall through the cracks in those roles and jurisdictions. What we have said is that the two levels of government really should be speaking to one another and addressing labour shortages, and then also putting funding into the industry in each of the regions.

    Montreal is the hub for Canada, but there are other ecosystems across Canada that are equally important. Certainly, what I will be doing is passing the report and getting specific recommendations. They are multipronged. We don't just focus on labour shortages, because we understand that some of the recommendations verge on different levels of government, so it is a multipronged strategy.

    Thank you, Ms. Chabot.

    Now we go to Ms. Zarrillo for six minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    I'm going to have a question for Ms. Saula around robotics and lifting. I am going to start with Ms. Black, though, and I'll just thank everyone so much for their testimony today. I really appreciated some of the highlighting of the care economy.

    Ms. Black, your comments were about the care economy as a critical part of the economy, and one of the key aspects of this study is to raise the value and dignity of this sector of the economy. I think those were the words you used.

    My question for you is related to unpaid care. It's a huge piece underpinning our economy. I just wanted to ask if there is any talk about new tax incentives or tax incentives that are available to compensate for unpaid care.

    I'm going to invite my colleague Craig Alexander, our chief economist, to comment on that. Thank you.

    Thanks very much.

    Unpaid work has been a core challenge in the Canadian economy historically. When I worked at Statistics Canada, there was an entire division set up to investigate and quantify the value of unpaid work. Quite frankly, we could do with even more information, because funding was reduced for that activity at Statistics Canada, so the available data is more limited.

    How we can support unpaid workers is a real question. One of the ways we could do it is by providing some sort of tax incentive or subsidy to caregivers in Canadian households. The real challenge from a fiscal point of view is how you design the policy so that it doesn't get gamed. In other words, what you want to do is subsidize caregiving that's going to actually take place and is being done at a high level. The challenge is going to be designing the policy so that you get the desired impact of increasing the contribution of the unpaid workers and at the same time increasing the productivity of workers in the economy, the $1.3 billion of lost productivity that Georgina was referring to.

    We definitely need to think about how we provide more effective and better support to unpaid workers. I certainly wouldn't rule out the idea of some sort of fiscal measure to help support unpaid workers. The challenge is really around designing the program. I also think we need better data in the field in order to get the optimal outcome.

    Thank you, and I think better data has come up over and over again in this study.

    I want to follow up a little bit more with one question in relation to tax credits for mileage or for ancillary products that are bought. I think about all the teachers who buy goods for their own classrooms. I see an increase in the number of people who are managing care for their elderly parents and going back and forth daily to a second location. Is there any talk about that? Have you heard any talk about a tax incentive for mileage or, as I said, ancillary purchases?

    I haven't, but that doesn't mean that there aren't people working on this sort of idea.

    Let me be clear, and this harkens back to what Georgina was saying at the beginning: You can't actually have a vibrant economy without the care economy.

    What we're really talking about here from an economic point of view is the production, development and maintenance of human capabilities or human capital. When we think about the stresses and strains that are created in the unpaid care that's taking place and the fact that unpaid caregivers are actually taking pressure off the health care system and the education system, we see there is an opportunity cost associated with not investing in helping to support those unpaid workers.

    What I haven't seen, though, is the compelling piece of economic research that would put the dollar figures around it that would then help you design effective fiscal strategies, such as providing the sort of tax incentives or subsidies that you're referring to. It certainly merits significant investigation.

    Thank you very much. Let's hope that's something that might come out of this study.

    I want to quickly pivot to Ms. Saula.

    Thank you for those comments about stability and non-standard employment. I think there is a need for more stability in this sector. It's almost going the other way.

    You also mentioned a report on robotics and AI and some of the work out of Japan, and I wanted to ask if you could share that report or that study.

     I wanted to speak about the comment you made on elderly looking after the elderly. We note injuries are very high in home care, in personal support workers and in care aides. I'm just wondering if there is any innovation in robotics around lifting and helping to reduce injuries in this kind of care work.

     Yes, there are. For instance, I mentioned exoskeletons. Exoskeletons aren't just used in health care. From the research that I've done, I know they're also used in construction. They are meant to relieve pressure on the body when something heavy is being lifted, whether it's on a construction site or whether it's in a care home, a resident home or whatever it might be. There are advancements that are being made.

    It's essentially a suit that's put on a specific part of the body. It could be to support the shoulders, the neck, the upper body or the back. Exoskeletons are also used for residents themselves, in order to help them with their mobility, with getting up, getting dressed, moving around and that sort of thing.

    Technology is complex, and it's a very nuanced topic. On the one hand, technology is enabling patients, residents and clients to look after themselves and potentially have a better quality of life, but at the same time it's reducing their need and their reliance on a health care aide or a personal support worker. I think advancements in technology, particularly in health care, are really fascinating in the ways in which they could completely transform long-term care. That's why we're saying we're fascinated by the advancements, but I think there has to be more of an understanding about the impact of those advancements on both patients and workers.

    Thank you, Ms. Zarrillo.

    Thank you. My time is up.

    Yes, it's gone well over.

    We will now go to Mr. Liepert for five minutes, and then we're going to end with Mr. Van Bynen for a further five minutes.

    Mr. Liepert, you have the floor.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Thank you to all the guests today. I want to take a bit of a different approach, primarily with the chamber of commerce and Deloitte as two of our guests.

    We had the head of the Canadian Medical Association as a witness a couple of weeks ago, and she said that Canada's health care system is in crisis and in fact is “on life support”. That is a quote. We heard today from Ms. Black, who said that primarily long-term care has been operating largely the same for decades.

    We hear a lot about the need for innovation and the need for technology and all of these sorts of things, but what we don't hear very much about is whether our entire system is structured properly. If it's not based on a solid structure.... In other words, we will hear a lot from public sector unions and friends of socialized medicine when something goes wrong at a privately run long-term care facility, but my experience with government is that government is not very good at innovation and not very good at making changes.

    Here is my question to the two of you to start with. Have you done much work around—and you mention a couple of studies—whether the structure of our health care economy, which is what we're calling it now, is correct, or do we need to look at ways we can provide better care without simply doing it the same way we've always done it?

    I'll start. That is a big wicked question that you've posed, so I'll try to be succinct.

    I would agree with the head of the CMA that Canada's health and social care system is under significant strain. It was designed for a different era. We also have to remember that we have 13 health and social care systems for a population that I think is at 36 million, so inherently there are inefficiencies. Mr. Rossi talked about some of the challenges in just moving health care labour between provinces during COVID. There was an opportunity to provide virtual care—which the country adopted pretty rapidly, by the way—and there were provinces that didn't have enough nurses and individuals who could provide virtual care. It would have been great if we could have used labour in one province to support virtual care in another, so there are some built-in inefficiencies.

    We also know from the OECD ratings that Canada ranks second to last—the United States is last—on a number of indicators, including cost of our health care system and outcomes. The U.K. and Australia would be jurisdictions we could look to for better performance.

    I want to conclude by saying that we believe there is a really important opportunity for Canada to think about health and social care as an economy. Frankly, it already is a very dynamic ecosystem, with public, private and not-for-profit players in a publicly funded system. When we start to think about it as an economy, with supply and demand, and we bring that lens to it, we'll be quicker to embrace a number of innovations and technologies that are working in other jurisdictions.

     I would ask the chamber of commerce if they would have any comments.

    Thank you for the question.

    I would certainly echo what Ms. Black has said, and I would add to that two things. First, at the beginning of this pandemic, we saw just how important and intrinsically related the caring economy and our health care system are to the vibrancy of our economy writ large. In Ontario, we had to basically shut the economy down very early in the pandemic due to capacity constraints within our health care system, but we also saw the government move very quickly on certain health initiatives, such as the immunization campaign in which we saw various health professionals allying and bringing together public health messaging and campaigns to boost Ontario's vaccination rates to some of the best nationwide, so I think we saw how effectively we can work as well.

    There are two components to this. First, there is the funding component, and I think the pandemic has underscored just how strained some of the funding equations are for the health care system here in Ontario, so we are calling for a jump of the provincial health care spending from 22% to 35% when it comes to the transfer payment.

    The second part of that, which touches on your question as well, I believe, is how that money gets spent. What are the systemic reforms that are going to be needed to deliver a health care system that matches the economy and the needs of society today? I think that is the bigger, trickier question that is probably beyond the scope of today's meeting, but obviously it is one that needs to be explored in earnest when we talk about the types of reforms and changes we need to bolster our health care system's capacity.

    Thank you, and thank you, Mr. Liepert.

    For the final questioning in this round, Mr. Van Bynen will have five minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    I want to direct my question to the chamber of commerce, but before I do so, I wonder if Ms. Black would be prepared to share the report and the analysis that she referred to so that we could have a look at the report in full detail.

    Are you referring to Canada's ranking within the OECD countries?

    You mentioned a report that came out of your research. I think the title was “catalyst for change”.

    Yes, we can share the “Catalyst” report with you.

    We also have one on aged care, which addresses many of the issues. We'll send those along. Thank you.

    Great. Thank you very much.

    My question then will go to the chamber of commerce.

    First and foremost, let me say that our local chambers of commerce have been invaluable resources to many small businesses, particularly during this past pandemic. They've been able to organize subject matter experts to advise their members as support programs were introduced, and even when they were updated. They've been a very important bridge to small and medium-sized enterprises that don't have the resources of larger multinational organizations, but these SMEs do create a large percentage of new jobs with the widest range of skill set requirements.

    My question to the chamber, to whoever wants to respond, is this: Where do you see the biggest gaps in labour shortages from a small business perspective? What kinds of programs should be expanded, introduced or changed to resolve some of these issues?

    Could someone from the chamber respond to that, please?

     I'll take a stab at that first, and Michelle, please feel free to jump in as well.

    We'd be happy to provide the committee with our latest “Ontario Economic Report”, which provides a sector-by-sector breakdown of labour shortages within the province, both by sector and more specifically by region beyond that as well.

    Unfortunately, it's not a very tight answer, because what we're experiencing is that certainly some of the usual suspects are disproportionately being affected by skilled trades, such as construction sectors or anything that has required hand-to-hand contact in the service industry, including restaurants, food and accommodations. These industries are being disproportionately impacted by it. We do have a report that outlines this, and we would be happy to provide that to the committee.

    As a few points on the solution front, number one, I think, is appreciating that there isn't going to be a one-size-fits-all approach, as we're finding out here. Labour strategies that are going to address this need to be sector-specific and also, ideally, regionally targeted.

    Certainly a number of the training and retraining programs that both the provincial and federal governments have rolled out have been enormously helpful. The tax credits for on-the-job training are particularly helpful for those smaller organizations that might not be able to compete with larger multinational firms in terms of talent attraction and retraining.

    Also, we need to be amenable to a constant feedback loop. We're at a time right now in which a number of the federal government's supports are being wound down, so it's important for us to take stock of which programs have been the most helpful in filling some of these talent gaps and perhaps double down on them in a thoughtful way that addresses the unique concerns of sector A versus sector B. Talent attraction might look very different in each, and, therefore, the solution is going to look very different for those sectors.

    I'm Michelle Eaton. I'm the vice-president of public affairs at the Ontario Chamber of Commerce.

    I want to go back to the labour market information gap, because what we really need—as I'm sure you've heard from other witnesses—is labour market information analysis and demand-side workforce planning for key professionals in the care economy. An example is early child care educators, because that can play an enormous role when we look at these efforts.

    Two other reports from the Ontario Chamber of Commerce that I think would be great for this committee to look at would be “The She-Covery Project: Confronting the Gendered Economic Impacts of COVID-19 in Ontario” and “Realizing the Full Potential of Virtual Care in Ontario”. We have various policy councils that do some incredible work looking at some of the issues you are working on. We would be happy to share those with the committee.

    I would appreciate receiving those reports as well.

    Thank you.

    There are only a few seconds left, so we will end the first panel in today's committee meeting.

    Thank you, Mr. Van Bynen.

    Thank you to the witnesses for appearing today on this very important study and providing the detailed information that you did.

    We will now suspend for a few minutes while we set up for the next hour. I want to maintain maximum time for the minister and department staff.

    Thank you, witnesses. We will suspend for a few minutes while we change.

     Committee members, we will now resume the second hour of the committee meeting today, welcoming back committee members on this study on the care economy.

    I've reviewed the procedures you should be following during the committee hearing. If you lose translation, please let me know, and please follow the health protocols in place. I remind members and witnesses to speak slowly for the benefit of the interpreters. That would be great.

    At this time, I would like to welcome back Minister Qualtrough.

    Minister, it's good to have you back before the committee, as well as your department officials. They have all introduced themselves, so I'm not going to repeat that.

    We will move directly to hearing from the minister for five minutes.

    Madam Minister, you have the floor.

    Hi, everyone.

    Mr. Chair and members of the committee, thank you for inviting me to appear here today.

    I'll begin by mentioning that I am joining you from the territory of the Musqueam and Tsawwassen First Nations.

     I also want to recognize our care economy workers, from doctors and nurses to personal support workers and child care workers, to those who take care of our family members at home. They have worked non-stop over the last two years, repeatedly putting themselves at risk to care for others. For the hours they worked, the lives they saved and the people they cared for, we will never be able to adequately thank them.

    I also want to thank our colleague, Bonita Zarrillo, for this motion to study this important topic.

    Our government is steadfast in its support for Canada's caregivers. We are committed to growing this workforce to ensure that workers are skilled, jobs are filled and every Canadian has the very best care.

    I know the committee has heard from an extensive list of witnesses and I commend you on your work. I look forward to your report.

    Today I am going to focus on the care economy and share what we are doing to address labour shortages more generally.

    At this time last year, my focus was on finding jobs for workers, but these days my focus is on finding workers for jobs. Canada has record low unemployment levels, with growth in many sectors outpacing employers' abilities to find workers. Canada's care sector is one of many that are facing labour shortages.

    Our plan to address labour shortages includes investing in the next generation of Canadian workers, helping workers upskill to a changing labour market, maximizing workforce participation, welcoming talent from around the world and addressing the needs of specific sectors, and of course the care sector will benefit from each of these approaches.

    Investing in the next generation of workers means supporting students and apprentices and creating first work experiences. Specific to the care economy, we know that many young doctors and nurses graduate with significant student loans to pay off. We also know that Canada's more rural and remote areas don't attract medical professionals as our urban centres to. Therefore, in budget 2022 we are proposing an investment of $26.2 million over five years to increase the forgivable amount of student loans for doctors and nurses who practise in rural and remote communities.

    In addition, the government will expand the current list of eligible professionals under the program and review the definition of “rural communities”. In 2019-20, nearly 5,500 doctors and nurses benefited from the loan forgiveness program, and with expanded eligibility, this is only expected to grow.

    With respect to skills training, we are working with employers, unions and the provinces and territories to make training accessible for all workers and to help workers stay in the workforce longer.

    Every year, the federal government invests more than $3 billion in funding so that provinces and territories can provide training and employment support through the labour market transfer agreements. These investments help more than one million Canadians each year to prepare for their next job through programs ranging from skills training and wage subsidies to career counselling and job search assistance. We are going to renew this partnership with provinces and territories so that we can be more responsive to the needs of workers, businesses and the economy.

    In budget 2022, we are proposing to amend Part II of the Employment Insurance Act so more workers are eligible for help before they become unemployed, and employers can receive direct support to re-train their existing workers.

    That builds upon work which is already under way. During the pandemic, we partnered with Colleges and Institutes Canada to provide free, accelerated training to 2,600 supportive care assistants. This project offers a career pathway to become fully certified personal care workers, and provides much needed support to long‑term care staff, as they receive training on the job.

    Maximizing workforce participation is accessing untapped labour pools and removing the barriers that restrict workforce participation for many historically marginalized or disadvantaged groups. It is about making our workforce more diverse and inclusive.

    One such example is persons with disabilities. The more than six million Canadians aged 15 and over that identify as having a disability represent a huge untapped labour pool. Despite many being able to work and wanting to work, employment rates for persons with disabilities are much lower than those of Canadians without disabilities, at 59% versus 80%. We aim to change this. Budget 2022 proposes to provide $272.6 million over five years to support the implementation of the employment strategy for persons with disabilities through the opportunities fund.

    As we tap into the talent pools that are within Canada, we also recognize the imperative of attracting workers to Canada and supporting them to efficiently integrate into the labour market. It is also about having a fair and balanced temporary foreign worker program.

    For example, internationally educated health professionals too often face challenges in getting their credentials recognized in Canada, so we're investing in projects that will help them put their education and skills to work sooner in caring for Canadians. Budget 2022 proposes to provide $115 million over five years, with $30 million ongoing, to expand the foreign credential recognition program and help up to 11,000 skilled newcomers per year get their credentials recognized and find work in their field. The program will continue to focus its efforts on supporting internationally educated health professionals to help build a strong, resilient workforce in Canada's health care sector.

    We are also modernizing the temporary foreign workers program. We recently introduced more flexibility into the program to help employers access workers more quickly and in a way that meets their needs. What's more, budget 2022 set aside funding to establish a trusted employer program and to create a new agriculture and food processors stream to the program.

     Finally, we need to develop talent for emerging sectors and industries and find sector-specific workforce and labour shortage solutions.

    Specific to the care sector, we recently launched a call for proposals under the new sectoral workforce solutions program. Investing in the health care sector was a top priority for this call. We look forward to finding projects to help address challenges in the sector, including labour mobility, mental health needs of the workforce and integration of internationally trained health professionals.

    Mr. Chair, colleagues, our focus and investments are about making sure that the care sector has all of the support and human resources it needs to be the best it can be and that we are addressing labour shortages with historic investments in people. We're going to continue these efforts.

    Thank you. I look forward to your questions.

    Thank you, Madam Minister.

    We'll now open the floor to questions, beginning with Mrs. Kusie for six minutes.

    Thank you very much, Minister. It's always a pleasure to see you.

    I wish your family health. I hope that everyone recovers soon. My family went through the same thing over the holidays.

    I have just a couple of things before I get to my questioning.

     I thank Member Zarrillo for presenting this motion, but I would also like to point out that I believe all of the opposition parties were united in the idea of a labour shortage study.

    That includes the Bloc Québécois.

    Certainly Ms. Zarrillo added the nuance of the care economy, but I think everyone was eagerly interested in studying the labour shortage.

    Secondly, to your comment about how last year you were focused on finding jobs, unfortunately, this is part of the reason we find ourselves in the labour shortage situation now. It's my belief, backed up by the economist from your department, that the number of increased jobs we saw—what was previously the one million talked about by the government—was really the natural recovery of the pandemic as people went back to work. Nonetheless it has occurred, and that's a good thing.

    That brings us back to the main issue of the day, which is the labour shortage. Many of the items you talked about in your opening statement are items you put in place both within budget 2022 as well as previously. To outline, some of those were the new foreign labour program specifically for agriculture and fish processing. Of course, one can't mention that without recognizing the Auditor General's report, which indicated that working conditions for temporary foreign workers in both agriculture and fish processing were not upheld. Unfortunately, we didn't really have an opportunity to discuss that here.

    In addition, the LMIA stipulation that you put in, increasing the validity of the LMIAs, I think was very good. I also have that you referred to the temporary foreign worker program workforce solutions road map. You mentioned some of these items, such as making the seasonal cap exemption permanent. I mentioned previously longer validity for labour market impact assessments, as well as the removal of the 6% refusal to process policy.

    What I'm seeing repeatedly, and what was brought up in the last hour by a witness from the Ontario Chamber of Commerce specifically, is that these initiatives by your department, and certainly you and your department are to be commended on these things.... However, the overarching theme is that, despite more budget and program allocations toward these problems, the solutions are not being found, and the overarching problem is with backlogs of immigration processing.

    My first question would be, how are you working with and encouraging the Minister of Immigration to process these backlogs? It just seems to me that almost every single program you mentioned that is implemented or brought forward to solve the labour shortage is not being addressed as a result of these immigration backlogs. What are you doing together, please, in an effort to resolve that? Really, all of your suggestions hinge upon the resolution of the backlogs.

     Of course, when it comes to the temporary foreign worker program, there is a partnership between the LMIA process and the processing of the visa. ESDC and IRCC work in close collaboration to make sure the timing for processing on both sides, the LMIA and the visa, is as quick as possible. There are massive backlogs that are being addressed.

    I apologize. I have the LMIA data, but I don't have the immigration data in front of me. However, I can assure you that it is an all-hands-on-deck effort at IRCC. There were significant investments made in both budget 2021 and 2022 to increase the capacity to address these backlogs quicker, but I hear you.

    What I will say, though, is that some of the measures we put in place in the workforce solutions road map will help to address that, by increasing the validity of an LMIA period, which was originally a six-month stay, to 18 months, for example. That means that an employer doesn't have to apply two or three times during the same period as historically they had to. They only have to go through the process once, so that reduces, theoretically, the number of applications.

    Thank you, Minister.

    I just want to get in one more question. In budget 2022, you announced a union-led advisory table on the changing labour market. I would like for you to address, please, to all of our industry stakeholders, why you are not including them in this advisory table on the labour market.

    Certainly we're still working on the specifics of that advisory table. The purpose of that is to look at issues related to labour. That doesn't in any way preclude conversations and the great partnerships we have with industry. We're working on what the composition of that group should be and are very mindful of the need to have all voices at the table when we talk about labour shortages.

    Specifically, talking with unions about labour needs is important, and I can assure industry—I think we have a pretty good relationship with industry associations—that their voices are also being heard and being reflected as we build processes and structures to address labour shortages.

    Thank you, Ms. Kusie.

    Thank you.

    Ms. Martinez Ferrada, you have the floor.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Ms. Qualtrough, thank you for being here today.

    I know how seriously you take the cause of people with disabilities, including physical disabilities. In my riding, for example, we have the Quebec Foundation for the Blind. The Government does very important work in terms of funding, especially to support growing and flourishing organizations, like the Quebec Foundation for the Blind.

    Can you tell us about funding programs for people with disabilities, and explain how that relates to the care economy?

    Thank you for the question.

    It's a kind of three-pronged approach when we're dealing with supporting persons with disabilities in employment. We provide targeted funding, so that would be the employment strategy that was recently announced in the budget. That's obviously a key pillar of our disability inclusion action plan and our $272-million commitment, through the opportunities fund, to provide targeted employment opportunities and supports for persons with disabilities.

    It's also ensuring that persons with disabilities have access to our broader skills training and employment opportunity program, so we're baking in disability inclusion into these broader programs. One example would be the skills for success program, but I could name 10 others. We really are ensuring that people with disabilities are specifically mentioned under these programs.

    Then there are broader efforts to remove barriers to workforce participation globally, such as the enabling accessibility fund to make sure that people can get into buildings because then they can work there. We're investing in child care that is inclusive so that kids with disabilities have a place to go and parents with disabilities have a place to go, as well as in housing and transit.

    It's really about taking a system-wide approach to programming that is targeted, broad-based and removes barriers to participation.

    Thank you, Minister.

    Mr. Chair, I don't know how much time I have left, but I'd like to share my remaining time with my colleague Mr. Long.

    Minister, could you quickly explain to us how women fit into the current labour shortage context, and how that relates to the care economy? How can we ensure, through existing government programs, that women are better supported in the care economy?

     It's the same approach is what I would say.

    Of course, you've all heard me say that women were both frontlined and sidelined during this pandemic. Women, who are more precariously employed, were the first to lose their jobs. They were on the front lines fighting the pandemic.

    Again, it's specific, targeted programming, such as our women's employment readiness program, which helps women and provides supports specifically focused on the needs of women, to reduce the barriers to employment and get them the skills and opportunities they need. It's also providing wraparound supports within our programs. If you look at our sectoral workforce solutions program, for example, if an organization receives money for training, they have to provide wraparound supports for women. That could include accommodation, transportation and child care.

    Then finally, it's the big bucket of addressing structural, social and more systemic barriers, and the big one there is child care. Women now, with our child care agreements in place with all the provinces and territories, have a real choice about returning to work. That's unlocking the economic potential of half of our population. Again, it's this three-pronged approach: targeted, broad-based and systemic.

    Thank you, Minister.

    Mr. Long, you have a little over two minutes.

    Thank you, Chair.

    Good afternoon to my colleagues.

    Minister, thanks for coming back to HUMA. I want to touch on skills training and apprenticeship. We've clearly heard from several witnesses that skills training and apprenticeships are key in the care economy to help address labour shortages.

    My riding of Saint John—Rothesay is a union-based riding. J.D. Irving alone is looking for 3,500 more workers in the next two or three years just in Saint John—Rothesay. I know in previous testimony you talked about apprenticeship and training. Certainly we've had some wonderful UTIP announcements, with IBEW, ILA and Heat and Frost Insulators. It's key. It's key to training people. I just want to know if you could elaborate on that and some of the programs you're working on pertaining to skills training and apprenticeships.

    I'll keep it quick because I don't know how much more time we have, but ask me this question again and I can talk about it all day. We're really excited about the work we're doing on skills training, particularly around apprenticeships.

    We have our apprenticeship service in place. Through this recent budget, we have doubled UTIP funding. I recently was at a pipefitters' college in my own riding and visited an insulation training centre. It's just extraordinary the high-quality, good green jobs that this program is investing in and that people have access to, and how many people very openly say that this is life-changing for them, that this will enable them to provide for their family and to be able to afford a quality of life they never thought possible.

    I could go on and on, Mr. Chair, but I'll leave it there. Hopefully someone can ask me another question about skills training.

    Thank you, Minister. His time is up by six seconds.

    Ms. Chabot, you have the floor for six minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Hello, Minister.

    You're well aware of the reality: temporary foreign workers contribute to the economy in general. As I'm sure is the case for my colleagues, if there's one issue that I'm frequently asked about in my riding, it's processing times for temporary foreign worker applications.

    The majority of businesses say that the labour shortage is the biggest problem. Next comes the issue of supply. That's why the contribution of temporary foreign workers is important.

    You talked about easing rules, but are you setting up a more comprehensive and thorough reform, to cut down on the irritants that are hurting businesses? Some of them are having to abandon their projects altogether, or are losing workers. This has a negative impact on services.

    Are you looking at that with the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship?

     Absolutely. I would say that one of the silver linings of the pandemic has been the acute attention that it has necessitated that we pay to the temporary foreign worker program, which wasn't perfect—I guess that's an understatement—and it has really forced us, as a government, working with provinces and territories and the stakeholders, to reconceive how we address the power imbalance within the system: how we support workers, how we remove the administrative clunkiness and burden for employers, and how we look at our compliance and integrity measures from a more risk-based approach, so that we can focus our efforts on bad actors and allow good actors in the system, of which there are so many, to get the workforce they need as quickly as possible.

    We have done some really important work on the worker support side. The workforce road map was really focused on removing some of the clunkiness for employers and streamlining some of the processes. What I will note for all of you is that two of the seven sectors with demonstrated labour shortages that received an increase to the number of temporary foreign workers they can hire were hospitals and residential care facilities, so nursing and residential care facilities.

    So yes, absolutely, we're working on that. That's the simple answer I can give you, but this program isn't simple at all.

    Thank you, Minister.

    I did see that the budget provides funding over three years to set up a trusted employer system. That's an interesting measure and we'll be watching it closely.

    I have another question, which isn't related to the labour shortage, but which concerns support for workers. Whenever we talk about standard of living, working conditions or the social safety net, one issue remains a big problem for workers, and that's access to employment insurance. It's been really hard for them throughout the pandemic.

    We were expecting EI reforms to begin in June 2022, but reading the budget, we were greatly disappointed that there was no mention of that.

    Could you tell us where things stand on this issue? Can we expect to see a plan for reforming EI by June 2022?

    Absolutely, and thank you for your ongoing focus on employment insurance. I think it's super important.

    Again, I think what we are steadfastly committed to is modernizing EI. Again, the swing over the past years between record low unemployment, record high unemployment and going back to record low unemployment has shown us that we need an EI system that can work in all these different circumstances within the labour market.

    Absolutely, we're proceeding with the modernization efforts. Obviously the first phase of that closed, and we very soon will be releasing the “what we heard” report. Phase two will move forward again very soon. We're going to announce that very soon. It's going to focus on EI adequacy and sustainability and dig in on issues from phase one that require further consultation.

    All I can say is that we're going to do this. We're going to do this right. It's a very complicated effort—

    Minister, can you tell us when that will be done? Can you clearly state that, by June 2022, you will table a plan for reforming EI? You say that you will, but I'd like to know when it will happen.

    What I can say is that we are moving forward with phase two. I can't tell you what's going to be in place by June of this year or what's going to be announced or not. It's still too early to be able to tell you that with any certainty and I don't want to create expectations I can't meet, but we are moving forward steadfastly with the modernization of EI. That remains my primary focus.

    Thank you, Ms. Chabot.

    We have Ms. Zarrillo for six minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Thank you, Minister, for all the programs you mentioned that are addressing workers' needs.

    Today, I want to focus on income supports for the six million Canadians you mentioned who have a disability. They did not see in the budget the Canada disability benefit.

    I'll share with you, Minister, what you already know, which is that inflation is here. The cost of food and the cost of goods are going up. With REITS—real estate investment trusts—there is a lot of displacement happening in housing, based on this financialization of housing. A lot of co-ops are being lost, which heavily over-index for people with disabilities to live in. There are a number of really pressing, urgent matters around income supports right now for persons with disabilities.

    I know that a number of fiscal bills have come to the floor, but not the Canada disability benefit. We are approaching a year since Bill C-35 was first introduced, and the disability community just can't wait any longer. They need a date. They need to know when this will be coming. We know that the Senate is ready to deal with it and the House is ready to deal with it.

    Please, Minister, the community would like to know: When will we see this bill come to the floor?

     Thank you for the question.

    Of course, as you know, last year in budget 2021 we put in place $12 million over three years to consult and work with the disability community on the creation of this benefit. We just finished year one of that money. We have two more years, which is why you didn't see those kinds of specifics in this year's budget. As I have said before, we are working on reintroducing this legislation as soon as we can.

     Of course, that hasn't stopped at all the work we are doing on an ongoing basis with the community and with provinces and territories to prepare for this benefit. Certainly, as I mentioned before, provincial and territorial negotiations to ensure that there aren't clawbacks and that there are no additional impacts to people's service entitlements or program entitlements are very complicated. We are working on them.

     I can assure you, as was stated in our platform and my mandate letter, that we are going to reintroduce this legislation.

    Thank you, Minister.

    Minister, will it come before the summer begins?

    The disability community is really suffering right now. They have been for a long time but they are really suffering under the inflation, the cost of goods and just the displacement in housing. You mentioned that there's been some additional consultation. Will they see it before the end of summer?

    What are some of the changes we can anticipate in the bill?

    Of course, I don't want to get into trouble for saying anything before something is on the floor of the House of Commons, but I think you can read into our commitment to reintroduce it that it won't be changed. It's going to look the same.

    Again, I can't commit to that, but that's how I would interpret that language. Certainly, again, the intention is to do it as soon as possible. We're working it into the House calendar as we speak. I'm very grateful to all of you who have supported those efforts. It's an ongoing conversation. It remains a priority. I'm pursuing it vigorously.

    Thank you, Minister.

    I'm just going to follow up with a question around employment for persons with disabilities and the conversation we had last time around protections for persons with disabilities, protection of their human rights and just protection in general. That plays somewhat into the care economy.

    Can you just share with us some of the thoughts or the legislation or even the programs that you might be putting in place ahead of the programs you are hoping to implement for persons with disabilities?

    Are you talking specifically around personal care support workers or people who care for people with disabilities?

    Is that where you're...? I just want to clarify.

    I mean just in general, persons with disabilities who may be entering into the workforce for the first time.

    I get it.

    There are a couple of things. First of all, in terms of our employment strategy, historically governments have focused on supporting workers and organizations that support individuals with disabilities to find jobs. What we know is that in fact we need to support employers and increase awareness of the duty to accommodate and the business case for disability inclusion. We need to invest more in entrepreneurs with disabilities.

    The employment strategy, as we are moving forward with it, is a much broader-based approach to ensuring not only that people can get jobs and have opportunities to apply for jobs but also that the conditions they are working within are more dignified and more flexible. There is some really exciting work.

    The $20 million in the budget for Ready, Willing and Able is a really good example of a program that actually looks functionally at what an individual can do and then looks functionally at what an employer needs to have done and matches those two. It might take a little bit from three different job descriptions to create a really robust, meaningful and contributing role for an individual with a disability that plays to their strength. It gives the employer exactly what they need.

    Yes, absolutely, that is top of mind for me, of course.

    You can have one last short question, Ms. Zarrillo.

    You talked about Ready, Willing and Able, Minister, and municipalities are uniquely structured to be able to support such a program. I know that cities such as Edmonton and Surrey have done wonderful work in this area.

    I'm just wondering if there is an opportunity to have a municipal-led program that could partner with Ready, Willing and Able.

    I think that's an excellent opportunity. I'll look into it.

    Thank you, Ms. Zarrillo.

    Next we'll be going to Mrs. Goodridge and then Mr. Coteau. I believe we will have the time, then, to go to Madame Chabot and Ms. Zarrillo, to be fair, to conclude the last hour with the minister.

    Mrs. Goodridge, you have the floor for five minutes.

     Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Thank you to the minister for making a presentation here today and for being part of this study.

    One thing I think we all probably hear fairly regularly in our constituencies is that, when someone finally does make it through the immigration backlog and comes here, they tend to have some pretty serious issues when it comes to their foreign credentials being recognized. This is acutely felt in the care economy.

    I am wondering if you could expand a little bit on what concrete measures you are doing to ensure that the Government of Canada is responding to these concerns as quickly as possible so that these amazing people can contribute to our society and help us through these labour shortages.

    Thanks for the question.

     I spend a lot of time thinking about how we can make sure that we access the experience and expertise of every newcomer to Canada, and of course, from their perspective, how they can put these talents to work meaningfully after all the hard work they've done in other countries.

    The foreign credential recognition program supports what I would call the labour market integration of newcomers. We fund provincial and territorial regulatory authorities. We fund organizations to help improve foreign credential recognition. We provide loan and support services to help skilled newcomers navigate these complicated processes, and we provide employment supports.

    I recently visited an organization that stressed to me how important that first work experience is. It's really getting that first job in Canada in their area of expertise that makes all the difference.

    We recently announced $26.5 million in funding for 11 projects across the country that do those kinds of skill and employment supports, as well as the really important work of working with provinces and territories on the regulatory side to streamline and simplify the recognition process. We're attacking it from a bunch of different fronts to make it easier, from a process point of view, to provide that first work or upskilling opportunity.

    Then, to give newcomers loans, in some cases small loans but meaningful loans, to go through the process and get their credentials upskilled or recognized is really important. If we look at the labour shortage in the care economy, we know that many of these jobs can be filled by newcomers, so this is a really important piece of the puzzle to solve this.

    Thank you, Minister.

    I guess many question specifically why, because of the exceptionally long backlog in our immigration process, they can't do some of this credential recognition before they arrive on Canadian soil so that they can literally hit the ground running. That's one thing I definitely hear in my constituency from people, or frustration—

    To that point, we're doing that. We are actually working on that. Some of the organizations that we fund don't wait until people are in Canada before they give them access to what the process will be and how they can start in advance setting up interviews. That work is being done. Certainly we could do more of it, but that's exactly the kind of innovation we need under the FCR program.

    Fantastic.

    To switch gears a little bit, one witness we heard from today was talking specifically about how we don't have enough data on unpaid work in this country, and specifically as it relates to unpaid caregiving work. We know that this is something that is felt all across our country, but it's also acutely felt in this care economy space.

    I am wondering what your department is specifically doing to try to increase the amount of data we have so that we can respond to some of this....

    That's a really good question.

    We have, of course, the Stats Canada labour force survey. We have the wages survey, but it doesn't capture the kind of information you're talking about.

    I think the vehicle that can crack this nut, for lack of a better of way of putting it, is our Labour Market Information Council, which is an FPT partnership among federal, provincial and territorial governments that looks at labour market info. This topic specifically can be dug into by this group.

    I apologize for not knowing the extent to which this group is looking at it. I'll take that away and make sure it does look at unpaid care work. I think that is one of the most important untold stories of this entire conversation we're having.

    Fantastic, Minister. I was just wondering if you could table that information with the committee so that we have it.

    Absolutely. I'll see what I can get for you.

    Thank you, Mrs. Goodridge.

    Now we'll go to you, Mr. Coteau, for five minutes. I believe you may be sharing.

    Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. I will be sharing my time with my colleague, MP Collins.

    This question is continuing on the data piece. In Canada we have such a large pool of potential workers who, without question, can fill labour shortage gaps. There are many underutilized groups here in this country. We think about young people, people living with disabilities, indigenous people and many other groups. It's a long list.

    I'd like to know what we are doing in regard to putting in place a strategy to identify potential large pools of individuals who can contribute to filling those gaps. What kind of strategy are we building?

    Also, what are we doing to collect and use disaggregated data to better inform policy decisions as a government? That data can be broken into many of those categories I mentioned, but race-based data as well.

    I'm going to start with the data question first.

    The best tool we have right now is the StatsCan labour force survey. Historically, it has collected good data but not disaggregated data, so it has had a limited use or it certainly hasn't maximized the potential for its use. Over the past year—I don't remember exactly when; I'm sorry, Mr. Coteau—we started collecting race-specific data through the labour force survey.

    We've recently also started collecting disaggregated data on disability. It's been very helpful as we build our programs and policies to understand where these pockets of untapped talent are, who they are, where they live in the country. It helps us create targeted programs, like the ones I talked about for women and persons with disabilities. It also helps us ensure that our broad programs are responsive at the local or regional levels to the labour market realities people are facing and the barriers people are facing.

    The other story that data doesn't tell, regardless of unemployment levels or regardless of opportunities that exist, is that, if the systemic discrimination is not addressed, people aren't getting these jobs. We need to up our game, as all governments do and as we are trying to do, on addressing the systemic discrimination that these same groups are facing to enter the workforce.

    I'll pass it over to MP Collins.

    Thank you.

    Thanks, member Coteau.

    Minister, welcome back. It's very evident from your answers you've provided today and from your past attendance at committee that you have a real passion for everything you're doing. Thank you for all the work you're undertaking and the progress you're making in all areas of your mandate letter.

    I want to specifically address the FCR program you referenced earlier. I've had discussions with new immigrants who have arrived in my city of Hamilton, and while many of them have found employment, some have struggled to find employment in their area of expertise.

    You highlighted in your opening statement a $115-million investment over five years that will be invested in the foreign credential recognition program. Can you tell us more about the investment, what we'll see in 2022 and how it pertains to the labour shortages in the care economy?

     The $115 million, with $30 million ongoing, which I think is an important addition to the story, is for up to 11,000 internationally trained health care professionals per year to find work in their field, which is the point I think you're trying to make. What we want is for people to be able to use their talent and the talent they've trained for and the work experience they bring to the table.

    Whether it's supporting organizations that help people navigate the credential recognition process—and I commend and applaud the efforts of a couple of the provinces that are, right now, really digging in on their own requirements; my own province of B.C. is one of them for nurses—to figure out where the noise is, what we actually need, how we simplify, how we make sure it's quality skills that are coming in, but also that we're not overburdening people and making them retrain unnecessarily. Also, it's about providing loans to individuals in health care who come with health care backgrounds, so they can get any kind of upskilling that they ultimately need, providing first care work experience, work-integrated learning.

    Again, it's about working across jurisdictions in conversations around streamlining all these processes. These processes are so clunky and burdensome. I think that's one of the big value items we can add as a government: convening those tables and ensuring that we dig in and make sure we're not asking too much that's unnecessary of people.

    Thank you, Minister.

    Ms. Chabot, you have the floor.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Minister, we can all agree that streamlining these processes is a major endeavour. It's true for Service Canada, and for Citizenship and Immigration Canada. There's a range of issues to resolve.

    As for the issue of temporary foreign workers, here are a few statistics. Before 2021, there was a five‑ to six‑week wait to get authorizations. Currently, you have to add eight to 15 weeks, on top of the time it takes to get work permits, which varies, depending on the country.

    Are you currently working—yes or no—to streamline the process and cut down on processing times for the temporary foreign worker program?

     I can assure you, Madame Chabot, that while there were delays—and we actually get the data once a week in terms of how long the processing time is per region across the country—I question it anytime we aren't seeing it go down.

     I'm sorry I don't have the data in front of me. J-F, do you have the current...?

     I know we've made so much progress, particularly in Quebec, on the delay piece, because of what was happening with our systems in the fall, but I feel like that is all but fixed.

    Minister, I don't have the most recent numbers at the moment and I won't try to guess, but we can send the most recent information.

    We absolutely can. In fact, why don't we provide a couple of months' worth of processing time data so that the committee can see how, across regions in the country, the data processing time has gone down over time.

    Madame Chabot, did you...?

    Yes, I would like to see that data, if it's possible.

    Minister, I will end by saying that EI reform can't wait. You know very well that the flexibility measures you put in place will expire in September 2022, and that the status quo isn't possible. And so we're expecting you to make announcements on this issue, in the near future.

    I understand, and I assure you that the message is received.

    Thank you, Ms. Chabot.

    Ms. Zarrillo, to close this session, do you have a question for the minister?

    I want to ask the minister about getting benefits to persons with disabilities. We know that the Canada disability benefit act will be coming soon for the Canada disability benefit. I want to understand from the minister how we will be able to identify in the tax system how to easily find persons with disabilities to access any benefits. I know it was a challenge during the COVID-19 pandemic. I want to understand what movement has been made there and how we plan to easily identify people who will be eligible for a benefit.

    We're forming our eligibility processes. Taking a modern approach to disability is part of the disability inclusion action plan and will feed into the eligibility process for the disability benefit. I can't stress enough how complicated it was—and you all lived it with me. We don't have an easily accessible list of persons with disabilities in this country, as we would for, say, people over the age of 65, whom we could identify very quickly through our data sources.

    We know that we have a list of DTC recipients. We have a list of CPPD recipients. We have a list of Veterans Affairs disability recipients. For the one-time payment, we put those lists together. We are actively working on a better process, potentially working with provinces on how their lists of disability support recipients could feed into some kind of master list, if you will, of recipients. That is, again, the hard work behind the scenes that is certainly going on right now to be ready and to have the system ready. It's going on in parallel.

    Certainly DTC is not.... It's no secret that I'm not a big fan of having DTC play the gate-keeping function that it does within government, and we are working to change that.

     Thank you, Ms. Zarrillo.

    Thank you, Madam Minister.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair, for inviting me.

    In response to the very first comment that was made, I know all of you wanted to talk about labour shortages. I know you're all committed to making the care economy as strong as we can in this country.

    I look forward to keeping our conversations going.

    Thank you so much, Minister. Your answers, as it was pointed out, show your interest and passion on all aspects of your file. Thank you for sharing with us.

    Before we conclude, I want to remind committee members, as the witnesses are leaving, that on Thursday in the first hour, we will be hearing from the latest Centennial Flame winner. She will be appearing before the committee to give us an overview. I also want to remind members that, on Thursday, we will be invited to provide drafting instructions to the analyst on the care economy. This will be done under committee business. The last half-hour will be in camera.

    We will have the Centennial Flame recipient and drafting instructions for the care economy.

    If nobody has any further questions, we will adjourn the meeting. Thank you, committee members.