BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS

THE PROBLEMS WITH CANADA'S MATERNITY BENEFITS

In the 2000 budget, the Liberal government extended maternity leave from 6 months to one year. On the surface, this was great news since it appeared to recognize the importance and need for parent/child bonding and nurturing, during the first year after birth.

The problem, however, is that the scheme has the following serious flaws:

• The mother is required to work 600 hours before she becomes eligible for benefits. This is double the previous requirement that she work only 300 hours to attain eligibility.
  
  
• The benefits are not available to self-employed mothers or those working on contract.
  
  
• The maximum benefit to be received is $413 a week, less taxes, which makes it difficult for many mothers and families to survive financially.

The result of these restrictions is that many mothers will not qualify for the benefits. Also, because of high taxes in Canada, many mothers will be unable to take advantage of the full year off because of financial pressures.

Quebec Objects to Federal Maternity Leave Scheme

The province of Quebec, alarmed by its extremely low birth rate (one of the lowest in the world) and the resulting detrimental effect on its culture and language, wants to encourage more births by attempting to reconcile work and family life. It hopes to achieve this balance by increasing the amount of the maternity benefits and allowing coverage to be extended to self-employed workers and those on contract, even if women have not paid into the Employment Insurance Fund, from which the maternity benefits are paid.

During the past year, Bloc Quebecois MPs have repeatedly peppered Prime Minister Chrétien in the House of Commons with requests that he increase the amount of the maternity benefits and adjust the eligibility requirements. In response, Mr. Chrétien has patted himself and his government on the back for having extended the time allowed to receive maternity leave to one year. He has then arrogantly explained to the Quebec MPs that if Quebec wants to increase the amount of the benefits, then it should go ahead and do so, out of its own funds, but not those of the federal government.

Last December, finally fed up with Mr. Chrétien's response on this issue (among others!), Quebec launched a constitutional challenge in the Quebec Court of Appeal, arguing that the delivery of social programs, such as maternity leave, is a matter of provincial jurisdiction, not federal. In so doing, Quebec hopes to gain access to the $400 million in Employment Insurance premiums that Quebec workers pay into the fund. The latter fund, by the way, is currently running a $36 billion surplus.

Quebec is on the right track on this one. By attempting to separate the link between maternity benefits and paid employment benefits, it wants to change the maternity benefits into benefits directly related to the birth or adoption of a child, and not make them dependent on the parent's place or means of employment.

Further, Quebec's desire to be more generous with the amount of the maternity benefits is in line with the recommendations made in 1999 by the federal Finance Sub-committee on Tax Equity for Families, which recommended the combined maternity and parental leave benefits be increased to 70% of the mother's gross earnings. The government, of course, ignored this recommendation. This recommendation, by the way, is not excessive in comparison to maternity benefits paid in Sweden, which pays the woman's entire salary while she's away on maternity leave. Also, France and Germany pay extremely generous maternity benefits. The US, on the other hand, does not provide maternity benefits at all, but permits the mother only 6 weeks medical leave after the birth of a child.

Canada can vastly improve the present tight-fisted policy in regard to mothers and families by separating the link between the birth of a child and salaried employment by extending benefits to self-employed mothers and those on contract and by reducing the eligibility requirements, and, of course, increasing the amount of the benefits paid.

Please write to:

BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS