Adjournment Proceedings

An adjournment debate on youth unemployment and federal support for job training. Garnett Genuis (Conservative) said Canada faces a recession, rising food bank use and a youth unemployment crisis, and asked when the government would present a plan, arguing payroll taxes should be lowered so small businesses can hire young people. Leslie Church (Liberal) pointed to federal transfers to provinces for job training and a six-billion-dollar investment to train 100,000 trades workers, and asked the Conservatives to support the plan rather than vote against it. Genuis replied that Conservatives created trades grants years earlier which the government later cancelled and is now restoring as if new.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .

Official text (opens in a new tab)

4 statements

Garnett Genuis, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan

Conservative
“Canada has a serious youth unemployment crisis. Conservatives and small business groups want the government to lower payroll taxes so companies can afford to hire young people. Instead, the government is raising them. I want to know when the government will present a real plan to help young people find jobs.”
  • A repeated line

    “One in four Canadians is food-insecure.”

    Said 6 times by 5 members since April 30.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, we face serious economic problems now as a country. We are the only G20 nation in a recession. One in four Canadians is living food-insecure. We have seen a doubling of food bank use since 2020, and we are in the midst of a worsening unemployment crisis, particularly affecting Canada’s young people. We have been repeatedly calling on the government to implement a plan to respond to this youth unemployment crisis. In the fall, Conservatives put forward our plan with a series of constructive suggestions focused on unleashing the economy, fixing immigration, fixing training and building homes where the jobs are. We have not seen a willingness on the part of the government to implement these constructive proposals. In fact, we have seen the government choose to move in the opposite direction. We saw, for instance, with changes the Liberals made, the cutting of grants to students who are studying at vocational institutions. The Liberals ended completion grants for students in the trades. They brought them back eventually, following strong advocacy from unions, as well as from Conservatives, but they have now trumpeted them as if they were something new when they were, in fact, the restoration of grants that had previously been cut by this particular government under the Prime Minister. We are seeing some instances in which our advocacy has made a difference, but generally speaking, there is an unwillingness of the government to meet this moment. I will also draw the attention of members, in the context of this unemployment crisis, to a great report recently done by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business highlighting the challenges small businesses are facing when it comes to hiring young people and some of the disconnect that has existed between small businesses and young people. Its proposal, very much aligning with what we have talked about, focuses on creating the conditions in which small businesses can afford to hire young people. It proposed, for instance, payroll tax relief. Payroll tax relief would be a clear and simple way of making it easier for small businesses to hire young people. Small business owners report that a lot of the programming that exists right now can be difficult and onerous for small businesses to use and take advantage of. The CFIB proposed broad-based changes that would reduce the cost of hiring, taking into consideration the costs of training and making it easier for people to start and grow businesses. The Canadian Federation of Independent Business has also highlighted big gaps in terms of entrepreneurship in this country. It is talking about an entrepreneurial drought and saying that far more businesses are closing than are being started. Obviously, this affects the unemployment situation for young people. As I have led this file over the last year, and as Conservatives have been working on confronting this youth unemployment crisis, we have always sought to be constructive. That is, we have sought to put forward specific, concrete suggestions to the government on how these challenges can be addressed. We have put those forward in the form of the Conservative youth jobs plan. The Canadian Federation of Independent Business has put forward its ideas, which are very similar to ours, but really emphasizes payroll tax relief. We have called on the government to adopt these suggestions. What we saw in the last fiscal update is a plan on the part of the government to increase EI premiums, which is again going in the opposite direction from what the Canadian Federation of Independent Business wants. My question tonight for the parliamentary secretary is this: When will we see a concrete plan to address the youth unemployment crisis that responds to these realities and recommendations by different stakeholders?

Leslie Church, Parliamentary Secretary to the Secretaries of State for Labour, for Seniors, and for Children and Youth, and to the Minister of Jobs and Families (Persons with Disabilities)

Liberal

Linked statement

“Our government gives billions of dollars to the provinces each year for job training. This helps workers find good jobs and helps employers find skilled staff. We are also investing six billion dollars over five years to train 100,000 new trades workers. I want the member across the way to support this plan instead of voting against it.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, allow me to focus on the positive measures the government is continuing to pursue as we work to mitigate the impact of these uncertain times. As the Prime Minister has said, as we cope with economic uncertainty, our most powerful recourse, our most powerful tool is to control what is within our power to control, and that is what we are doing. Let me focus on the government’s uncompromising commitment to build a stronger, more inclusive economy. Nothing represents the power of that commitment more than our labour market development agreements and workforce development agreements. These agreements forged between the federal government and the provincial and territorial governments are engines of opportunity, resilience and growth. They provide $2.9 billion annually in training and employment assistance services delivered through provincial and territorial employment assistance offices. This approach empowers Canadians with the skills they need to succeed in a rapidly changing labour market. They offer targeted training programs. They offer career services. They offer all manner of employment supports. They are boosting the employment opportunities of Canadian workers, whether they are new graduates, mid-career professionals, or individuals facing barriers to employment. Through these programs, Canadian workers can adapt and thrive. The results speak for themselves. Each year, more Canadians are able to access skills training that leads directly to a career in a field where workers are needed. Job seekers are not only finding work faster but also securing more stable and higher-quality jobs. However, there are no jobs without employers, and this is why we are ensuring that employers also benefit. They get a more skilled and job-ready workforce and an ability to hire more quickly. Both of these advantages foster a boost in productivity. This alignment between worker skills and employers is crucial. It has the power to strengthen entire industries. A well-trained workforce drives innovation, attracts investment and enhances Canada’s global competitiveness. This is why our government’s workforce tariff response, for example, is providing a further $570 million until 2027-28 under the labour market development agreements. This is funding that will support tariff-impacted employers and workers in the steel and softwood lumber sectors and in other tariff-impacted industries. Global economies have shifted, and tariff tensions are high, but as Canadians, we do not stand idly by. We build, and our skilled trades workers are the ones who will build our future, but we are facing a serious shortage in the trades. This is why we have made a historic five-year, $6-billion investment to help workers and young people gain the skills, experience and support they need in order to thrive. This is where team Canada strong comes in. It is the basis of our spring economic update, and it is our plan to train, recruit and hire up to 100,000 new Red Seal trades workers to meet the demand. It is a plan that will help apprentices learn and train, and to access meaningful and well-paid careers. I can assure the House that the Government of Canada will always have the back of our workers and their families. With respect to the importance of the skilled trades and apprenticeships, I have to note that I would encourage the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan to support our new plan for the trades, and I ask him why he voted against it in our spring economic update.

Garnett Genuis, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan

Conservative
“Conservatives created grants for trades workers years ago. The Liberals cancelled them and are now bringing them back as if they are new. Most of the programs the government brags about are old ones. The Liberals have no new ideas and no real plan.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, there are many things that are very strange about this response. Let us be clear. In 2006, in the first Conservative budget of Stephen Harper, Conservatives brought in grants for trades workers. We brought in completion grants in 2009. The current government cancelled them under the Prime Minister, and then, with much fanfare, announced they were bringing them back. Of course, we support bringing in these grants. We wish they had not been cancelled before being reinstated. We voted against the government’s fiscal plan in general because, in general, it is going in the wrong direction. The member highlighted labour market development agreements, which are, of course, an important and valuable part of our national architecture. Most of those agreements were signed in the 1990s and early 2000s. The last one was signed with Yukon in 2009. The government also trumpets things like the Canada summer jobs program. Again, these are programs that date back to the nineties and have existed for a long time. The government has nothing new. The best the Liberals can do is rename past Conservative programs. The Liberals clearly do not have a plan. They need to get a plan, and fast.

Leslie Church, Parliamentary Secretary to the Secretaries of State for Labour, for Seniors, and for Children and Youth, and to the Minister of Jobs and Families (Persons with Disabilities)

Liberal
“Government job training programs help workers, employers, and the whole economy. The member across the way voted against our six-billion-dollar plan to train 100,000 new skilled tradespeople.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, Canada’s labour market development agreements and workforce development agreements demonstrate what is possible when governments collaborate with a common goal in mind. The economic impact is equally significant. As more Canadians enter and remain in the workforce, consumer spending rises, communities prosper and public revenues grow. This is why workforce development is more than a social policy. It is a cornerstone of economic strength. These agreements invest in people, respond to real labour market needs and deliver measurable benefits for workers and employers alike. They are not just supporting jobs. They are helping to develop a more prosperous and inclusive future for all Canadians. I thank my colleague opposite for answering my question and confirming the fact that he voted against the spring economic update and the $6-billion program we have to reinvigorate skilled trades in Canada and recruit 100,000 new tradespeople and apprentices.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 129

  1. Government Orders Protecting Victims Act 30 statements
  2. Government Orders Protecting Victims Act 27 statements
  3. Statements by Members Ponoka Stampede 2 statements
  4. Statements by Members Retirement Congratulations 2 statements
  5. Oral Questions The Economy 12 statements
  6. Oral Questions Canadian Identity and Culture 6 statements
  7. Oral Questions The Economy 14 statements
  8. Oral Questions Climate Change 4 statements
  9. Oral Questions The Economy 10 statements
  10. Oral Questions Health 2 statements
  11. Oral Questions The Economy 20 statements
  12. Oral Questions Justice 6 statements
  13. Oral Questions Forestry Industry 3 statements
  14. Oral Questions The Economy 2 statements
  15. Oral Questions Points of Order 5 statements
  16. Oral Questions Business of the House 2 statements
  17. Government Orders Protecting Victims Act 26 statements
  18. Oral Questions Artificial Intelligence 4 statements
  19. Government Orders Government Orders 53 statements
  20. Private Members' Business Fair Representation Act 12 statements
  21. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  22. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  23. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 5 statements