Discussion · Private Members' Business
Andréanne Larouche Bloc Québécois
“I support this bill and want it to pass. It lets parents keep their parental leave and employment insurance benefits if their baby dies. Right now, grieving parents have to prove their sadness to the government every two weeks to keep getting help. That is cruel. Quebec already protects parents this way, and federal workers deserve the same care. This bill is a good start, but the government still needs to fix the rest of the employment insurance system.”
“Mr. Speaker, this evening I am speaking to Bill C-222, which seeks to amend the Employment Insurance Act and the Canada Labour Code. This bill is sponsored by the member for Burnaby North—Seymour, and I want to commend him for introducing this legislation. It is a bill on a sensitive issue that provides for the following: ...a person to whom employment insurance benefits are payable to care for a newborn child or a child placed with them for the purpose of adoption remains eligible to receive those benefits even if the child dies during the benefit period. The bill further provides that an employee remains entitled to maternity or parental leave in the event that the employee’s newborn child, or a child placed in the employee’s care with a view to adoption, dies during the period of leave. This bill, which is non-partisan and crosses party lines, is compassionate and appropriate, as it seeks to ease the financial and psychological pressure on families who have lost a child. This is a bill that addresses a real problem, and we are confident that Quebeckers and Canadians will benefit from these measures. This is a real game-changer for families dealing with such tragedies. Let us hope that reality will prove the old saying wrong, however, because it is never too late to right the wrongs of the gutting of EI and workers’ rights that occurred under Conservative governments. Let us not forget that, over the past 10 years, minor adjustments have been made without ever addressing the profound injustices against workers and EI recipients. Despite the Liberals’ election pledges and commitments, nothing substantial has been tabled in this decade. Labour organizations in Quebec and Canada and the opposition parties, including the Bloc Québécois—which echoed the main criticisms made by the unions—have made many demands over the past decade. That is why the Bloc Québécois condemns the inaction and obstruction of the Liberals, who voted against Bloc bills and motions to support workers and allow more people to access EI. However, we are persistent and we will once again table a bill for a more comprehensive reform of EI. Let us get back to the bill before us. As we saw during the committee study of the current bill sponsored by the member for Burnaby North—Seymour, the cabinet and the Prime Minister quickly made a commitment to the Liberal member to offer their support and a promise that his private member’s bill would receive the necessary royal recommendations, a crucial step for any private member’s bill requiring new public funds. I will quote a few figures. Infant mortality has remained relatively stable since the early 2000s in Quebec. The Institut de la statistique du Québec has counted approximately 380 child deaths before the age of one. The infant mortality rate for both sexes is 4.9 per 1,000 births. In the rest of Canada, the rate is slightly higher but not statistically significant. Among the countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, or OECD, we have one of the lowest infant mortality rates in the world. Fortunately, this tragic occurrence is pretty rare, as we can see from the figures. Having seen the Liberals’ tendency to cite the state of the public finances whenever they want to justify saying no, whether to a comprehensive reform of the Employment Insurance Act or to old age security benefits for those aged 65 to 74, the low infant mortality rate means that this enhancement to the EI program and the Canada Labour Code should come at very little cost. For those affected by such tragedies, however, a measure such as Bill C-222 would make all the difference and allow claimants to grieve with greater peace of mind, free from financial anxiety. As we see time and again, Quebec is at the forefront when it comes to socially oriented public policies. Thanks to the Quebec Parental Insurance Plan, or QPIP, Quebeckers already have a social safety net with the same criteria as those set out in Bill C-222. It is understood that a claimant may apply for QPIP benefits even if a child dies after a claim has been initiated. By contacting the plan’s customer service department, claimants can receive the information and assistance they need from a representative. As a result, they receive personalized support tailored to their needs. The plan also specifies that the death of a child has no effect on benefit payments, since QPIP provides for a grace period following pregnancy or childbirth. Naturally, this also applies if a parent is grieving the loss of a child. It is worth noting that, in 1972, Quebec passed the Crime Victims Compensation Act, which allows victims to receive compensation and the care they need to recover. This law sets out a financial compensation regime for any income losses the victim experiences. In December 2007, without specifically addressing the death of a child, the Quebec act respecting labour standards with regard to absences and leave included provisions that provided compensation for employees who are victims of crime, employees who have lost a loved one as a result of a criminal act or suicide and employees whose child goes missing. The Bloc Québécois believes that workers who are employed by a federally regulated businesses should have the same protections. Furthermore, there is a clear parallel between Bill C-222 and Quebec’s political action. It is also worth noting that, when the committee tabled its report in the House on May 29, 2026, the bill’s sponsor was particularly proud that his government gave royal recommendation to his bill. That is great. That is the pivotal stage where the executive branch must give its approval when a private member’s bill requires a commitment of public funds. It is important to point out that this is the fourth time in the history of Canada that a private member’s bill has managed to make it past this legislative step. The member also mentioned that there are approximately 1,600 Canadian families a year who experience the death of a child. According to him, it is unconscionable to ask parents to contact Service Canada every 14 days to justify their need for employment insurance sickness benefits. Bill C-222 seeks to address this cold and callous measure under which parents cease to be eligible for parental benefits. The amendments presented at report stage were specifically intended to prevent benefits from ending abruptly. They would allow parental benefits to continue, whether under the standard 40-week benefit period or the extended 69-week benefit period, including in cases where benefits have been extended because of a child’s hospitalization. If a child tragically dies at the end of a parent’s EI benefits period, each parent will be eligible for five additional weeks. In addition, the bill provides for a 17-week extension of bereavement leave with job protection. Lastly, grieving parents will only have to submit an attestation, sparing them the burden of submitting documentation every two weeks. To achieve this result, the Liberals tried to put forward some amendments to their colleague’s bill in committee, but several were ruled out of order by the chair because they required a royal recommendation. Furthermore, the parliamentary secretary had very little understanding of the amendments she was proposing and was of little help. Things were a bit confusing in committee, which significantly slowed down the work. Finally, the Liberals proposed amendments on May 27, 2026. It should be noted that these provisions are very similar to the ones that were rejected by the committee chair because they all involved expenditures and therefore required a royal recommendation from the government. For example, one amendment sought to add a new ground for extending the benefit period under section 10 of the Employment Insurance Act if a claimant’s child dies during the period in which parental benefits may be paid. This amendment would ensure that a claimant can receive up to 26 additional weeks of EI parental benefits after the death of their child. Parents came to testify in committee and their stories were deeply moving. Tears were shed during the committee’s proceedings. It was not easy. The parents simply asked us to allow them to grieve in peace and, above all, without having to battle bureaucracy. Honestly, I do not think anyone ever fully recovers from the tragic death of a child. I am thinking of those bereaved parents. The Bloc Québécois is, of course, in favour of this bill, because our political party has always advocated measures that go even further. We have consistently maintained that a 50-week period is appropriate. We have long advocated for this through the “Émilie Sansfaçon” bill. Although different, our proposal was intended to assist claimants facing a serious illness. Through this motion, the government is proposing to extend this period to 52 weeks. We welcome this measure, having long maintained that a stillbirth, a miscarriage or sudden infant death are profoundly traumatic experiences. We therefore agree that parents should be entitled to a 52-week period of respite to grieve, heal and come to terms with the loss of a child. All that remains is to take action on behalf of seriously ill workers. This is a battle that still needs to be fought, and for which we have already tabled the “Émilie Sansfaçon” bill. We must stop inflicting financial distress on these workers, as it is profoundly unfair. This is a good start tonight. It is an important step, but it is far from the end of the fight.”
Mr. Speaker, this evening I am speaking to Bill C-222, which seeks to amend the Employment Insurance Act and the Canada Labour Code. This bill is sponsored by the member for Burnaby North—Seymour, and I want to commend him for introducing this legislation. It is a bill on a sensitive issue that provides for the following: ...a person to whom employment insurance benefits are payable to care for a newborn child or a child placed with them for the purpose of adoption remains eligible to receive those benefits even if the child dies during the benefit period. The bill further provides that an employee remains entitled to maternity or parental leave in the event that the employee’s newborn child, or a child placed in the employee’s care with a view to adoption, dies during the period of leave. This bill, which is non-partisan and crosses party lines, is compassionate and appropriate, as it seeks to ease the financial and psychological pressure on families who have lost a child. This is a bill that addresses a real problem, and we are confident that Quebeckers and Canadians will benefit from these measures. This is a real game-changer for families dealing with such tragedies. Let us hope that reality will prove the old saying wrong, however, because it is never too late to right the wrongs of the gutting of EI and workers’ rights that occurred under Conservative governments. Let us not forget that, over the past 10 years, minor adjustments have been made without ever addressing the profound injustices against workers and EI recipients. Despite the Liberals’ election pledges and commitments, nothing substantial has been tabled in this decade. Labour organizations in Quebec and Canada and the opposition parties, including the Bloc Québécois—which echoed the main criticisms made by the unions—have made many demands over the past decade. That is why the Bloc Québécois condemns the inaction and obstruction of the Liberals, who voted against Bloc bills and motions to support workers and allow more people to access EI. However, we are persistent and we will once again table a bill for a more comprehensive reform of EI. Let us get back to the bill before us. As we saw during the committee study of the current bill sponsored by the member for Burnaby North—Seymour, the cabinet and the Prime Minister quickly made a commitment to the Liberal member to offer their support and a promise that his private member’s bill would receive the necessary royal recommendations, a crucial step for any private member’s bill requiring new public funds. I will quote a few figures. Infant mortality has remained relatively stable since the early 2000s in Quebec. The Institut de la statistique du Québec has counted approximately 380 child deaths before the age of one. The infant mortality rate for both sexes is 4.9 per 1,000 births. In the rest of Canada, the rate is slightly higher but not statistically significant. Among the countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, or OECD, we have one of the lowest infant mortality rates in the world. Fortunately, this tragic occurrence is pretty rare, as we can see from the figures. Having seen the Liberals’ tendency to cite the state of the public finances whenever they want to justify saying no, whether to a comprehensive reform of the Employment Insurance Act or to old age security benefits for those aged 65 to 74, the low infant mortality rate means that this enhancement to the EI program and the Canada Labour Code should come at very little cost. For those affected by such tragedies, however, a measure such as Bill C-222 would make all the difference and allow claimants to grieve with greater peace of mind, free from financial anxiety. As we see time and again, Quebec is at the forefront when it comes to socially oriented public policies. Thanks to the Quebec Parental Insurance Plan, or QPIP, Quebeckers already have a social safety net with the same criteria as those set out in Bill C-222. It is understood that a claimant may apply for QPIP benefits even if a child dies after a claim has been initiated. By contacting the plan’s customer service department, claimants can receive the information and assistance they need from a representative. As a result, they receive personalized support tailored to their needs. The plan also specifies that the death of a child has no effect on benefit payments, since QPIP provides for a grace period following pregnancy or childbirth. Naturally, this also applies if a parent is grieving the loss of a child. It is worth noting that, in 1972, Quebec passed the Crime Victims Compensation Act, which allows victims to receive compensation and the care they need to recover. This law sets out a financial compensation regime for any income losses the victim experiences. In December 2007, without specifically addressing the death of a child, the Quebec act respecting labour standards with regard to absences and leave included provisions that provided compensation for employees who are victims of crime, employees who have lost a loved one as a result of a criminal act or suicide and employees whose child goes missing. The Bloc Québécois believes that workers who are employed by a federally regulated businesses should have the same protections. Furthermore, there is a clear parallel between Bill C-222 and Quebec’s political action. It is also worth noting that, when the committee tabled its report in the House on May 29, 2026, the bill’s sponsor was particularly proud that his government gave royal recommendation to his bill. That is great. That is the pivotal stage where the executive branch must give its approval when a private member’s bill requires a commitment of public funds. It is important to point out that this is the fourth time in the history of Canada that a private member’s bill has managed to make it past this legislative step. The member also mentioned that there are approximately 1,600 Canadian families a year who experience the death of a child. According to him, it is unconscionable to ask parents to contact Service Canada every 14 days to justify their need for employment insurance sickness benefits. Bill C-222 seeks to address this cold and callous measure under which parents cease to be eligible for parental benefits. The amendments presented at report stage were specifically intended to prevent benefits from ending abruptly. They would allow parental benefits to continue, whether under the standard 40-week benefit period or the extended 69-week benefit period, including in cases where benefits have been extended because of a child’s hospitalization. If a child tragically dies at the end of a parent’s EI benefits period, each parent will be eligible for five additional weeks. In addition, the bill provides for a 17-week extension of bereavement leave with job protection. Lastly, grieving parents will only have to submit an attestation, sparing them the burden of submitting documentation every two weeks. To achieve this result, the Liberals tried to put forward some amendments to their colleague’s bill in committee, but several were ruled out of order by the chair because they required a royal recommendation. Furthermore, the parliamentary secretary had very little understanding of the amendments she was proposing and was of little help. Things were a bit confusing in committee, which significantly slowed down the work. Finally, the Liberals proposed amendments on May 27, 2026. It should be noted that these provisions are very similar to the ones that were rejected by the committee chair because they all involved expenditures and therefore required a royal recommendation from the government. For example, one amendment sought to add a new ground for extending the benefit period under section 10 of the Employment Insurance Act if a claimant’s child dies during the period in which parental benefits may be paid. This amendment would ensure that a claimant can receive up to 26 additional weeks of EI parental benefits after the death of their child. Parents came to testify in committee and their stories were deeply moving. Tears were shed during the committee’s proceedings. It was not easy. The parents simply asked us to allow them to grieve in peace and, above all, without having to battle bureaucracy. Honestly, I do not think anyone ever fully recovers from the tragic death of a child. I am thinking of those bereaved parents. The Bloc Québécois is, of course, in favour of this bill, because our political party has always advocated measures that go even further. We have consistently maintained that a 50-week period is appropriate. We have long advocated for this through the “Émilie Sansfaçon” bill. Although different, our proposal was intended to assist claimants facing a serious illness. Through this motion, the government is proposing to extend this period to 52 weeks. We welcome this measure, having long maintained that a stillbirth, a miscarriage or sudden infant death are profoundly traumatic experiences. We therefore agree that parents should be entitled to a 52-week period of respite to grieve, heal and come to terms with the loss of a child. All that remains is to take action on behalf of seriously ill workers. This is a battle that still needs to be fought, and for which we have already tabled the “Émilie Sansfaçon” bill. We must stop inflicting financial distress on these workers, as it is profoundly unfair. This is a good start tonight. It is an important step, but it is far from the end of the fight.