Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Canada Government To Hire People To Make House Calls To Check Up On Employment Insurance Recipients.

The federal government has begun visiting employment insurance recipients at home as part of an "examination" being conducted while the program undergoes an overhaul.

The majority of individuals selected for a random audit are receiving invitations, in person, to appear at their customary EI interviews as part of the project, which wraps up next month.

"An examination to ensure the integrity of the employment insurance program is currently underway," Human Resources Development Canada told The Canadian Press in an email.

Federal employees have been making the unannounced visits since January, and have been hand-delivering requests for people to appear at the regular EI interview.

The sample of 1,200 EI recipients has been randomly selected from across the country, according to the government.

"Every year, unfortunately, in our employment insurance system, hundreds of millions of dollars are identified or are lost through false or fraudulent or inappropriate claims," Prime Minister Stephen Harper said at an event Thursday in Saskatoon.

"One of the jobs of Human Resources and Skills Development Canada is to ensure that the funds in the employment insurance system are there for people who have lost their jobs who qualify and who need that help," Harper said.

Anyone getting EI benefits risks losing those payments if they don't keep track of their job search and provide those records to bureaucrats who check up on them.

The new system also puts the screws to those who've used EI at least three times for a total of 60 weeks in five years.

Such "frequent users" will get six weeks to look for work in their field.

After that, they'll have to take a job even if it pays at least 70% of their last salary.

Claimants will no longer qualify for EI if they refuse a job within a one-hour radius of their home, even if the job pays 30 per cent less than their previous employment.

Federal officials estimate the new system will save taxpayers $33 million over the next year.

by Anonymousreply 1202/22/2013

O CanaDuh!

by Anonymousreply 102/21/2013

$33 million

is that all? How much will it cost to collect it?

by Anonymousreply 202/21/2013

$33 million in one year, r2, not $33 million in total.

by Anonymousreply 302/21/2013

One would assume the costs are already factored in to the savings, R2.

by Anonymousreply 402/21/2013

Good! I wish the US government would hire some unemployed people to check up on government benefit fraud here.

People who cheat and defraud the public dole enrage taxpayers.

This goes double when it's the politicians themselves!

by Anonymousreply 502/21/2013

Yes, r5, yes!

by Anonymousreply 602/21/2013

Hells to the yes! Would love to see the US doing this.

by Anonymousreply 702/21/2013

If the Government wants to battle public assistance fraud, dibs on the Yeshivas and the Mormons!

by Anonymousreply 802/22/2013

Think of the cost savings if they just abolished the unelected Senate!

by Anonymousreply 902/22/2013

I'm sure it will be the rousing success of drug-testing welfare recipients. It's emotionally satisfying to "hard-working citizens" (who will likely themselves be laid-off and dependent on unemployment insurance at some point) but it's basically pointless and a waste of money. Kind of sad to see Canadians fall prey to this kind of silliness, but it's what happens when times are hard, people are angry, and they need to believe their problems are a result of someone out there "getting over" while they suffer with their noses to the grindstone.

by Anonymousreply 1002/22/2013

It is a clever way to implement a government employment program without drawing the villagers into the streets with torches aflame.

by Anonymousreply 1102/22/2013

There are probably not many people that would say we should deny assistance to those that really need it. I have to say, I get extremely pissed off when I am in line behind someone in the grocery store who splits their order quite neatly between store brand food items and a pile of beer/wine/cigarettes/grape flavored cigars. The latter usually costing more than the former. If you need public assistance, you should deny yourself the accessories.

by Anonymousreply 1202/22/2013
Need more help? Click Here.

Follow theDL catch up on what you missed

recent threads by topic delivered to your email

follow popular threads on twitter

follow us on facebook

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!