Concurrence in Committee Reports

The debate focused on the state of youth employment and the scope of federal involvement in training and labour markets. Members of the governing party asserted that youth unemployment has decreased since 2012 through government initiatives, such as trades grants and summer job programs, while cautioning against unfairly blaming immigrants. Opponents argued that the federal government should not interfere in areas of provincial jurisdiction, specifically concerning job training standards and labour authority. Furthermore, some members stressed that federal policies must account for regional economic differences and incorporate feedback from local businesses and communities.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .

Official text (opens in a new tab)

19 statements

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“Our government takes youth unemployment seriously and is taking real action. The youth unemployment rate was worse in 2012 under the Conservatives than it is today. We are creating jobs for young people by recruiting about 7,000 new soldiers, offering $5,000 grants for skilled trades, and funding summer jobs. I also want us to change our rules so debates like this cannot be used to block government bills.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I would like to express appreciation for the effective role that the standing committees can play at times. The House of Commons is made up of a number of standing committees. Through those standing committees, there is an opportunity to do a wide spectrum of different studies. One thing the Government of Canada has consistently been concerned about, coming out of the last federal election, is the economy and its impact on jobs, opportunities and so forth. We have seen a number of different initiatives that have been supported by the government. We have a standing committee of the House that has spent some time trying to deal with the youth unemployment issue. I have a number of things I would like to share with the House on that, at the very least to acknowledge the efforts made by the standing committee to bring forward this particular report. I have argued in the past, when we have had a continuation as opposed to an adjournment, as to why these reports come before the House. Typically, it is a way we can provide concurrence if it is deemed necessary. Before I provide my comments directly on youth and youth employment, I want to highlight the legislative agenda. Just moments ago, we had the opportunity to pass a private member’s bill that will have a profound, positive impact on Canadians. In every region, there will be Canadians who will directly benefit from the legislation we just passed. It is encouraging to see members on all sides of the House come together to see what I anticipate will be that bill passing tomorrow unanimously. I give credit to the member for taking the time to do the canvassing, to share the experiences and to work very closely with the Prime Minister’s Office and others to make sure we could do that, because of the expenditure component of the legislation. It was a significant challenge. I say that first and foremost to acknowledge exactly what my friend from B.C. has been able to accomplish but also to highlight that, as programmed private member’s business, whether it is a motion or a bill, the Standing Orders facilitate its ultimate passage. If we look at government business, much like opposition business, there is a limited time frame. I have had opportunities to talk about this issue with other concurrence motions that have been brought to the House. When a concurrence motion is brought forward during government business at the beginning of the day, what I have witnessed over the years is that it is often used as a tool to prevent government bills from being debated or to minimize the amount of time that a government bill is up for debate. I say this as more of a cautionary note. Government legislation does not have programming per se. It is an issue with the Standing Orders, to protect both government and opposition. I believe we can come up with ways that would facilitate programming of motions or government legislation in much the same way that opposition or private members’ bills are allowed to be programmed. In Manitoba, we made some rule changes that facilitated that sort of programming for the first time. That is important to recognize at this stage because, I would like to think, there should be a high level of interest in ensuring that government legislation is debated in the House, while at the same time respecting what concurrence motions are there for. Where there is an opportunity to talk about an important issue, we would find, if we were to check with the Clerk’s table, that we could be debating concurrence motions, or issues raised at committees such as the one we are debating tonight, indefinitely. We could virtually take it all the way up to the next election. It is very important, when we get reports that come out of our standing committees, that we be very careful about which ones we determine we want to debate and then ultimately have concurrence or a vote on here in the House. I am glad we are having this debate this evening because it is not taking away from debate on government legislation, which is critically important because it is a part of election platforms. Those debates need to occur. Then the legislation needs to advance to a committee and come back for the third and final reading in order to advance to the Senate and then to royal assent if the Senate does not send it back. Time is very important. This is not to take away from the principles of the report itself. The report we are debating today is about youth unemployment, which has been a major concern of this government since the last federal election. I myself was very concerned about it and had the opportunity to talk about it in the last federal election. I can assure members opposite that whether they look at the Prime Minister or other members of the Liberal caucus, they will find a great deal of effort put into public policy to drive the issue of youth employment and determine what we can do to alleviate concerns. Listening to the Conservative opposition’s remarks, one would think that youth unemployment at this level is something new. Sadly, that is not the case. Youth unemployment at times can be a very difficult challenge. If we were to go back to 2012, two administrations ago under Stephen Harper, we would find that youth unemployment back then was just over 14%. The economy was doing relatively well, and we did not have the wars in the Middle East and Europe or the trade issue between Canada and United States. We can contrast that to 2025, which was the first year we could actually report that, on average, youth unemployment was less than 14%. In 2012, it was over 14%; in 2025, it was less than 14%, on average. We are still concerned about it, which means we are trying to address the issue. I would argue that one needs to look at the different announcements we have made as a government to support our young people in Canada. As for employment opportunities, a number of things come to mind, and I would like to emphasize a few of those things in particular. One would be general policy as a whole with the government promoting, encouraging and investing in our Canadian Armed Forces. We have seen dramatic results. Within six months of the last election, the Prime Minister and the government achieved that spending of 2% of the GDP. As a benefit of that, not only did we see a bump in salaries for our military personnel, but we also saw record numbers of young people get in line to become members of the Canadian Forces. That directly helps young people. There is a sense of pride because it had been 30 years since we saw so many put in their applications. Yesterday, when I brought it up, the Conservatives said they are just applications. Well, those applications turn into real recruits. I believe the number is 7,000. Can members tell me when it was that high in the last 30 years? It has not been the case, which goes to show that government policy has clearly demonstrated a higher level of interest in providing more job opportunities in the Canadian Forces. I was young when I joined the forces. I would have been 20 or 21, I am not 100% sure, but as a young Canadian going into boot camp situations, I found the vast majority were young. This is one action since the last federal election. Another action has been the Red Seal program. The Red Seal in trades is an incredible commitment from young people to play a major role in building a stronger and healthier Canada. Something I am often afforded the opportunity to talk about is how the government is advancing the importance of building that stronger, healthier Canada. As I cited just an hour or so ago, everything from major projects to small businesses is going to drive and build that stronger economy, and an important aspect of that is our skilled trades. These are important jobs of the future, and we have made a commitment to young people that we are going to invest in that program to the degree that we anticipate 80,000 to 100,000 people are going to directly benefit. We are talking about a $5,000 donation to individuals who are able to acquire that certificate, which helps pay for the education and the training that was involved. It provides incentive, whether for those in post-secondary institutions or secondary institutions. I think of high schools like Tec-Voc High School in Winnipeg, our Red River College Polytechnic and other post-secondary facilities. Cooks, autobody workers, bricklayers, hairstylists, machinists, plumbers, roofers, tower crane operators, welders and so many more are going to benefit, and they are going to be the youth. The minister just made an announcement that we are going to extend the employer applications for the Canada summer jobs program until December 3. These summer jobs provide opportunities for young people. Thousands of young people are going to benefit from the summer jobs program, and providing those non-profits and others the opportunity to hire youth will benefit Canada as a whole. I think of the many daycares in Winnipeg North and how many of them will be hiring summer youth. These are all programs designed to help young people land their first job. It is making a tangible difference. The government talks about youth unemployment and takes tangible examples of it. I just finished demonstrating that.

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“My party brought in the Charter of Rights, and I stand by it. In 2012, youth unemployment was over 14 percent, and the Conservatives cut funding for youth summer jobs. Today, our government has lower youth unemployment and helps young people find work through more programs.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 10 of 100

    None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, we are the party of the charter. Ours is the party that brought in the Charter of Rights, and I stand by the Charter of Rights. It is interesting that the member would refer to that because, back in 2012, when there was over 14% unemployment with young people, what did the Conservative Party do to the summer youth program? It cut it. It put in a budget that cut the amount of jobs being created with that particular program. We can contrast that to now having a government that has lower youth unemployment. We continue to not only support the summer youth program but also bring in other programs that support our youth, unlike the Conservative Party. Talk is cheap—

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“I disagree with the member. The federal government has a real role in helping skilled trades workers. National certificates let workers use their skills anywhere in Canada. That helps all Canadians, including the people in her riding. It is irresponsible to say the federal government has no role here.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I disagree with the member. I was a provincial MLA for just under 20 years, and the province plays a critical role. There is no doubt about that. When saying that the federal government should not support the Red Seal program, the member needs to reflect on the constituents she represents. I believe that our constituents having mobility rights under the Red Seal program is to the advantage of her constituents, my constituents and all the people of Canada, because if they achieve the Red Seal certification, the skills they learn through time and money will be recognized from coast to coast to coast. To say that the federal government has no role is highly irresponsible.

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“The member is partly wrong. Under Stephen Harper in 2012, youth unemployment was over 14 percent. Today it is under 14 percent. That is still not good enough, which is why we need programs to get young people working. Also, Canada has added over 150,000 net jobs since the Prime Minister was elected.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

    Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, in part, the member is factually incorrect. I said in my comments, if he was listening, that back in 2012, which is when he was working for Stephen Harper, the Stephen Harper government had over 14% youth unemployment at a time when the economy was doing relatively well. In 2025, the youth unemployment rate was under 14%. That is not something we should be proud of, and that is the reason I spent the time I did on the types of programs that we believe are important to get more young people working. That is what it is. The member talks about unemployment stats, and I have a stat for him. There have been over 150,000 net jobs created since the Prime Minister was elected just under a year and a half ago.

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“Electricians in Quebec want to be able to work outside their province. Skilled workers are proud to get certifications that let them work anywhere in Canada.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, my answer to the member would be that he should check with constituents to find out if there is an electrician with a Red Seal who feels that they should have the opportunity to do electrical work outside of the province of Quebec. I can tell the member that individuals with a Red Seal are very proud of the fact that they did the training and spent the money that was necessary to get that Red Seal because it enables them to practise their skill set beyond the province—

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“This government is new, with a new Prime Minister and more than 70 new MPs. We have changed policy and done many things to help young people. Those actions are making a positive difference, but we know we still need to do more about youth unemployment.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the member needs a refresh on when the last election was, when Canadians actually chose a new Prime Minister and 70-plus new members of the House of Commons to form the government. If she were to consult with many people, she would find that there has been a shift in public policy. She will find that there has been a litany of things to support our young people, all of which I think are making a positive difference, but we do need to do more, and we will continue to work on youth unemployment.

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“People want different levels of government to work together to get results. They do not want the division the Bloc promotes.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, much like many other issues that face an economy and beyond, we find that our constituents want the different levels of government to work together collaboratively with different stakeholders to get the type of results that our constituents expect of government. They want governments to work together as opposed to the constant divide and conquer that the Bloc tries to promote inside the House.

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“The previous Liberal government was not a failure. It did many things well, like improving pensions and cutting taxes. Even Stephen Harper did some good things.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I definitely do not. There are many things we could talk about, such as CPP or some tax breaks. There is a litany of things that the previous government did well. I would even go further to say that even Stephen Harper did some things well too.

Natilien Joseph, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert

Liberal
“The federal government does not interfere with Quebec. The Bloc Québécois votes against everything in Ottawa, even things that help Quebec. They should stop playing political games.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I am also from Quebec, and I also serve on the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities with my colleague, who, I have to admit, does an outstanding job. I have never witnessed the federal government attempting to interfere in matters that fall under Quebec’s jurisdiction. I would like to ask my colleague whether she thinks she is protecting Quebec’s jurisdictions by voting against everything here in Ottawa. I think that Quebeckers deserve better than political games. Every time there is a vote on something that benefits Quebec, they vote against it.

Carlos Leitão, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry

Liberal
“Youth unemployment is a big issue, and American tariffs make it harder. The Americans started the tariffs and are not really ready to talk. The federal government already has job training programs and can work well with Quebec. For example, we fund training programs at aerospace companies there.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the issue of youth unemployment and how difficult it is for many young people to get that first job and join the workforce is very important. We find ourselves in a very unfortunate situation with the tariffs, but I would point out that this was initiated by our neighbours. We would love to discuss it, but someone needs to be on the other side of the table. They do not seem to be ready, despite what they say in public. As for the federal government’s role in workforce training, the federal government has a number of programs. In Quebec, we are aware of Quebec’s unique circumstances, but I think we can work together to get there, especially since we provide funding to companies in the aerospace industry, for example, which offers training programs. We believe that is an example of how we can work together.

Carlos Leitão, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry

Liberal
“Youth unemployment is a serious problem around the world and here in Canada. Young people struggle to find jobs, and their skills do not always match what employers need. We need to keep talking about this and fix that problem.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, my colleague had a lot of very interesting ideas. I am not a member of that committee, so I did not follow its work, but clearly some good ideas have come from that work. Youth unemployment is indeed a very serious problem, and not just in Canada. We just have to listen to the news on TVs or on our computers these days to see that it is worldwide. Canada has special circumstances in that we live in a very large and very diverse country, and young people are having great difficulty entering the labour force. In that respect, it is upon us to continue talking about that as much and as often as we can and to try to correct the skills mismatch—

Carlos Leitão, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry

Liberal
“Youth unemployment is very high, and getting that first job is critical. What role should the federal government play to help train young people faster?”
  • Speech in the House

    Signal 38 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. Indeed, there is unemployment in general, but youth unemployment is quite high. Of course, this is also a major concern for us. It is really a matter of that first job. How does a person go about landing their first job? I remember my first job. It was in 1975 and I worked the night shift. It was not necessarily pleasant, but by the weekend, the paycheque was nice. That is very important. That first job is a stepping stone. My question for my colleague is very simple. In this context, in his view, what role should the federal government play in getting young people trained faster?

Natilien Joseph, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert

Liberal
“Moving to other provinces can help young people find good work experience. Does my colleague agree that letting workers move easily helps youth employment?”
  • Speech in the House

    Signal 31 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I am going to share a brief story, even though my time is limited. This summer, while visiting organizations participating in the Canada summer jobs program, I met a young man from New Brunswick who was working in Longueuil. I asked him whether he had come to Quebec because job opportunities were scarce in New Brunswick. He replied that this was not the case, that he was simply there to discover Quebec and that he loved gaining experience in other parts of the country. Mr. Speaker, the question I would like to put to my colleague, for whom I have great respect and whose work I sincerely appreciate—I will not deny that—is the following: Does my colleague believe that mobility can contribute to youth employment?

Carlos Leitão, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry

Liberal
“Many young people need jobs, and many businesses need workers. They do not match up. What should the government do first to fix this problem?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, indeed, youth unemployment is a major issue not just in Canada but around the world as well. However, we are talking about Canada, where it is a major issue. We find ourselves in a situation that is rather unique in that there are a lot of young people looking for jobs and a lot of businesses and companies looking for workers. There is a mismatch between people looking for jobs and businesses offering jobs. In that context, what would my colleague recommend the government do first in order to make sure that the mismatch disappears and that the people looking for jobs can find one that businesses are looking for workers to fulfill?

Carlos Leitão, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry

Liberal
“Our economy is under serious stress because of the trade war with the United States. The Americans want our manufacturing jobs. If we want more jobs for young people, we must deal with this threat from the United States.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, if there is one thing we can agree on, it is that the Canadian economy is indeed under severe stress. That stress is coming from the trade war. That stress is coming from the pressure of our trusted neighbour, which now wants to make sure that our manufacturing sector goes back to the United States. Of course, that is not going to happen. If we want to increase the creation of jobs for young people, we have to address the elephant in the room, and that is the attack that Canada is under from our trusted neighbour. This is just a comment, not really a question.

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“Our government gives young people $5,000 to finish their trades training, which could help create up to 100,000 jobs. I want the member to explain his party's position on this program.”
  • A repeated line

    “I will give a specific example.”

    Said 5 times by 3 members since April 23.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, one of the things that I have been trying to amplify is the fact that there are a number of initiatives the government has taken. It is hard to tell exactly why the Conservatives are in opposition to them. I will give a specific example. With the Red Seal program, youth could benefit from 80,000 to 100,000 potential careers, and that is through a $5,000 incentive to get them to finish the Red Seal program. I wonder if the member could provide his thoughts on the Conservative Party’s position on that program.

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“Conservatives are unfairly blaming immigrants for high youth unemployment. Youth unemployment was higher in 2012 under Stephen Harper, and Conservatives did not blame immigrants then. Blaming immigrants causes racial tension. We need to be honest with young people and treat immigrants fairly.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I will say at the outset, I am somewhat concerned about the manner in which the Conservative right today is trying to blame immigrants for problems. Back in 2012, unemployment amongst youth was over 14%. In 2025, it was under 14%. I do not recall, back in 2012, the opposition criticizing Stephen Harper, saying that immigrants were to blame. I am wondering if the member was in opposition back then. There were immigrants doing jobs and there were ample examples of youth trying to find jobs. Would the member have been so enthusiastic in trying to paint a negative image of immigrants? Let us think of the harm that is being caused, in terms of racial tension in our communities. It seems to me that we need to be fair in our explanation to the young people of Canada and also be fair to immigrants in terms of explaining the situation.

Ryan Turnbull, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance and National Revenue and to the Secretary of State (Canada Revenue Agency and Financial Institutions)

Liberal
“Young people do not have to wait for opportunities. Our government just opened 75,000 summer jobs, and we are supporting up to 100,000 skilled trades jobs with money for apprentices. We are also cutting red tape to speed up project approvals and grow the economy for youth. What does the member have to say about that?”
  • A repeated line

    “I have good news for the member opposite.”

    Said 4 times by 3 members since May 26.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I have good news for the member opposite: Youth do not have to wait, because Canada’s summer jobs portal just opened 75,000 jobs every summer, with 340 jobs in my riding of Whitby. I am sure the member opposite can acknowledge that this helps create opportunities for our young people. We also have 80,000 to 100,000 new skilled trades positions, with training incentives, wage incentives and completion incentives with about $31,000 per Red Seal apprentice. It is significant support for youth that provides opportunities. We have also cut red tape. We set up a Major Projects Office, and we have Bill C-39 before the House, all of which would remove red tape and get approvals and permitting to speed up, stimulating the economy to make sure we have opportunities for youth. What does the member have to say about that?

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal
“The previous Conservative government cut summer jobs for young people when youth unemployment was over 14 percent. Today it is under 14 percent. Does the member agree that those cuts were wrong?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the member across the way from Saskatchewan was talking about— Garnett Genuis: Alberta. Hon. Kevin Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, I am sorry, it is Alberta. That Saskatchewan name in his riding kind of throws everyone off. I can say that the member was reflecting on the past. There is one thing I know for sure, because I was in the third-party position when Stephen Harper was here. I know the member opposite actually used to work very closely with Stephen Harper. The member will recall that they actually cut back on summer programs or summer work for young people, and it was somewhat sad. By the way, that was the same time when unemployment for youth was over 14%. I contrast that to today, or 2025, when it is under 14%. Does the member not agree that it was wrong for the government back—

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 156

  1. Government Orders Business of Supply 105 statements
  2. Oral Questions The Economy 8 statements
  3. Oral Questions Housing 6 statements
  4. Oral Questions Oil and Gas Industry 4 statements
  5. Oral Questions Finance 10 statements
  6. Oral Questions Labour 4 statements
  7. Oral Questions Steel and Aluminum Industry 5 statements
  8. Oral Questions Veterans Affairs 2 statements
  9. Oral Questions Housing 8 statements
  10. Oral Questions Intergovernmental Relations 6 statements
  11. Oral Questions Government Appointments 4 statements
  12. Oral Questions Fisheries and Oceans 8 statements
  13. Oral Questions Youth 2 statements
  14. Oral Questions Small Business 2 statements
  15. Oral Questions Natural Resources 6 statements
  16. Oral Questions International Trade 2 statements
  17. Oral Questions Rail Transportation 2 statements
  18. Oral Questions Marine Transportation 2 statements
  19. Government Orders Business of Supply 41 statements
  20. Oral Questions Natural Resources 2 statements
  21. Government Orders Business of Supply 17 statements
  22. Private Members' Business Relieving Grieving Parents of an Administrative Burden Act (Evan's Law) 2 statements
  23. Government Orders Committees of the House 2 statements
  24. Private Members' Business Relieving Grieving Parents of an Administrative Burden Act (Evan's Law) 4 statements
  25. Orders of the Day Concurrence in Committee Reports 71 statements
  26. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  27. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  28. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements