Evidence of meeting #16 for Finance in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was stimulus.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Kevin Page  Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament
Mostafa Askari  Assistant Parliamentary Budget Officer, Economic and Fiscal Analysis, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament
Chris Matier  Senior Advisor, Economic and Fiscal Analysis, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament
Sahir Khan  Assistant Parliamentary Budget Officer, Expenditure and Revenue Analysis, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament

3:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

I call to order the 16th meeting of the Standing Committee on Finance. Today, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we are studying the progress report on monitoring and oversight for the 2009 federal budget.

We have with us here today again Mr. Kevin Page, the Parliamentary Budget Officer.

Mr. Page, welcome back to the committee. I would ask that in your opening presentation you would introduce your colleagues at the table. You have up to ten minutes or so to make an opening statement, and then we'll go to questions from members.

Welcome back to the committee. It's good to have you back. Please begin at any time.

3:30 p.m.

Kevin Page Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

If I may, I will introduce our panel. Mr. Sahir Khan is our assistant parliamentary budget officer for expenditure and revenue analysis. Mostafa Askari is our assistant parliamentary budget officer for economic and fiscal analysis, and Mr. Chris Matier is our senior director for economic and fiscal analysis.

Members, if I may, today I'd like to spend some time again talking about the quarterly report but also focus my remarks on the economy and give you an update on the economic situation as well, relative to the budget.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, vice-chairs, and members of the Standing Committee on Finance. Thank you for the invitation to speak to you today regarding the government's budget 2009 progress reports to Parliament.

As you may recall, in late February my office released a discussion paper that suggested information to be included in these reports. In that note, we stated that, in the PBO's view, the central goal of these reports should be to provide Parliament with accurate, timely and easily understood information on three key issues: first, the implementation and progress of budget measures; second, recent economic and fiscal developments and prospects; and, third, assessing budget results relative to its guiding principles, that is of being timely, targeted and temporary.

On March 10, 2009, the government presented its first progress report. My remarks today update our previous work by highlighting what my office views as some successes from this report, some areas for potentially improved reporting to Parliament in future reports, and a brief update on the economic and fiscal context.

The key messages I want to convey to you today are the following.

The government's first report represents an important first step towards improving interim reporting to Parliament and will ultimately strengthen Parliament's budgetary oversight role. As a result, Parliament may wish to consider making permanent some type of progress reporting requirement to ensure this increased transparency for future budgets.

Second, the government's second report, in June, should address key information gaps that are highlighted in our updated monitoring and oversight framework. This includes identifying the uses of the $3 billion Treasury Board vote 35, including output and outcome indicators for all budget measures as well as key implementation risks, and finally updating the government's view on changes to the economic and fiscal outlook.

This leads me to my third key message. Recent economic data and the PBO's updated survey of private sector forecasters suggest a further significant deterioration in the outlook for the Canadian economy relative to budget 2009 fiscal planning assumptions.

As noted in our previous report, Parliament’s ability to provide effective oversight of the government’s economic action plan rests on timely, accurate and relevant information and analysis. To this end, my staff drafted an oversight and monitoring framework for the government’s budgetary measures, based on practices identified from other jurisdictions, such as, the Government of New Zealand’s regular, in-year public updates on key risks.

We are aware of the need to minimize any additional reporting burden on departments, so we suggested that the government use indicators primarily drawn from its own internal processes and external publications. This includes key indicators such as the objective risk assessment performed by the government as part of every Treasury Board submission, which is outlined on the Treasury Board Secretariat’s website.

The initial monitoring and oversight template has now been updated with the additional data released by the government in its first quarterly report. A separate briefing note has been posted to our website that provides a more detailed assessment of results to date. I want to emphasize to you today the benefits of this type of in-year reporting and commend the government in its efforts to build a new leading practice in public reporting.

We anticipate that the government will have more time over the next quarter to compile the additional indicators for June’s progress report. Depending on which information gaps remain after the second report, my staff may begin a more detailed assessment of potential higher risk initiatives, based on comparables derived from other jurisdictions and international best practices.

Given the continuously evolving economic situation, it is important that Parliament have access to up-to-date information on the economic and fiscal outlooks. The government’s first progress report provided little information on how the Canadian economic outlook has changed since the budget was presented in January or on what these economic changes might mean for the fiscal balance. Therefore, my office has done the following three things. First, for the first time, we are reporting the PBO’s near-term outlook for key economic output and labour market variables. Second, we have also updated our PBO survey of forecasters. And finally, we have used the Department of Finance fiscal sensitivities to give a rough sense of the current risk to budget 2009’s fiscal projections.

The government’s progress report states that recent economic developments are broadly in line with budget projections. In the PBO’s view, however, since budget 2009 was tabled high-frequency indicators for both the Canadian and global economies have revealed further weakness.

The IMF now expects the global economy to contract this year, representing the first decline in the post-war period. Members, if you're looking at the slide presentation, slide 4 basically shows the outlook for the International Monetary Fund.

This global weakness has had two main impacts on Canada. First, it has reduced demand for Canada’s exports. Second, it has sharply reduced commodity prices, and in turn the purchasing power of Canadian households and businesses.

Recent Canadian data show a decline in real output that accelerated in December, with the Canadian economy recording a 3.4% drop on an annualized basis in the fourth quarter of 2008 due largely to weak household consumption, business investment, and exports. It also revealed a continued slowdown in housing. And more than 200,000 jobs were lost in January and February 2009.

On slide 7, members, in the presentation, we have additional information on recent indicators.

The PBO currently expects real, inflation-adjusted gross domestic product to drop by about 8.5% in the first quarter of 2009 and by 3.5% in the second quarter. Again, we have some slides. Slide 8 actually provides the figures for our real GDP and the nominal GDP.

Because of the weakness in overall prices, the situation for nominal GDP is actually worse, with declines of roughly 15% and 4% respectively in the first and second quarters. Associated with this drop in output, the PBO expects that roughly 380,000 jobs will be lost over the first half of this year.

Turning to the economic outlook for 2009 and 2010, regrettably, I am once again reporting that private sector economic forecasts have been revised downward. These results, which now fully incorporate the forecasters’ expected impacts of the government's economic action plan, suggest that the current Canadian recession will be sharper than assumed in budget 2009, with real output expected to fall further below its trend potential than in either the 1980s or the 1990s recessions. Slide 13 provides a historical perspective.

Nominal GDP, the broadest measure of the government’s tax base, is expected to fall by about 4.5% this year, with roughly equivalent contributions expected from falling prices and from falling volumes. For the next two years, nominal GDP is now expected to be significantly lower than forecast in budget 2009, this despite the government's prudent decision to lower its growth assumption below its January survey average. Again, I refer you to slide 14.

With a weaker economy comes a weaker labour market. The PBO survey suggests a drop in employment of 2% in 2009, or roughly 350,000 jobs on an annual basis, with only a slight turnaround of 0.3% in 2010. Similarly, the unemployment rate is expected to rise further in the next two years. The survey average is for a peak of just over 9% in 2010, which is below that experienced during the past recession.

We have not had time to fully model the implied fiscal impacts of our new economic survey. Instead, we have applied the Department of Finance’s fiscal sensitivities to the new outlook.

This analysis suggests additional downside risks to the government's budget balance forecasts in the budget of 2009, mainly because of lower tax revenues. The implied budget deficits are $38 billion for 2009-10 and $35 billion for 2010-11, compared with the budget projections of $34 billion in 2009-10 and $30 billion for 2010-11.

You may recall that the stimulus goals in the 2009 budget are to increase GDP by 1.9% and to create and maintain 190,000 jobs by the end of 2010. With that in mind, please let me now discuss three outstanding issues.

The first issue is whether the current stimulus will be effective. Thus far, the government and Parliament have moved in a timely fashion to approve budget measures. The government's first progress report states that approvals for 90% of the measures are expected to be in place for April 1, 2009. It will take additional time to get money out the door and fully implement these programs, many of which require cooperation from key partners, including other levels of government. Therefore, at this point, it is simply not possible to disentangle the incremental stimulus effects of the government’s economic action plan. Indeed, no reasonable assessment can be made until these measures have been implemented and more time has passed.

The second issue is the potential need for additional stimulus in light of the fact that the average downward forecast revision in our survey during the past two months exceeds the estimated positive impacts of the government’s stimulus package. This certainly suggests that even if the current stimulus measures have their full impact, Canada faces a larger economic challenge than was envisioned when the budget was prepared, but let me be clear: this statement on its own does not necessarily imply that more stimulus is required. As a small, open economy, Canada’s recovery depends not only on the actions that policy-makers are taking to provide accommodative fiscal and monetary policies, but also, and crucially, on global economic and fiscal developments. I refer you to slides 21 and 22, which provide a historical perspective on the projected downturn relative to previous recessions in the 1990s and 1980s.

The final issue is whether the current stimulus measures are sustainable over the long term. In this regard the government’s stated goal in the 2009 budget is to enact mainly temporary measures that will avoid long-term structural deficits. In our own previous work, the PBO has provided its rough estimates of the government’s structural budget balance, which is what the government’s budget balance would be if the economy were functioning at its potential. The government’s own estimate of its structural budget balance is needed to meaningfully assess progress towards this goal.

Let me conclude by saying that these progress reports represent a historic opportunity to strengthen budget transparency regarding the implementation, oversight, and effectiveness of government budgets. Therefore, my office encourages Parliament to consider making permanent some type of progress reporting requirement to ensure this increased level of transparency remains in future budgets.

As always, we hope that parliamentarians find this work relevant and timely, and we look forward to any suggestions you may have to help us serve you better.

Thank you once again for the opportunity to speak to you today. I would be pleased to take your questions.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

Thank you very much, Mr. Page, for your presentation. Thank you for the information you have provided to all committee members.

Mr. McCallum, you have seven minutes for the opening round.

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Page and colleagues.

I'd first like to comment very briefly that we in the Liberal Party support your work very strongly, and we will do what we can to ensure that your budget is restored to the $2.7 million a year that had been committed. It's not clear that the combined opposition can force that to happen, but our position is that we will seek to get a motion through the library committee requesting the government to increase the estimates in such a way that your budget promise is adhered to.

My first question is in terms of parliamentary scrutiny. As you may know, we in the Liberal Party have our own website now, onProbation.ca, but one thing we cannot do is monitor the extent to which the government gets the money out the door in the way it has promised to do on infrastructure and on Business Development Bank lending, for example, among other things. I don't see how outside groups, such as an opposition party or outside economists, can do that.

Would it be your intention to obtain that kind of information from government departments, such as Treasury Board, infrastructure, and so on? Have you spoken to government departments as to whether they would cooperate with you in providing such information? If so, what has been the nature of their response?

3:45 p.m.

Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament

Kevin Page

Thank you, Mr. McCallum, for the Liberal Party's support for the PBO budget issue. We too would like to get it rectified as soon as possible to help us move and provide quality services to you in the future.

In terms of what we can do on the reporting side, what we released today and will be made available on our website, we've updated our detailed monitoring tables, both on the economic side and on the fiscal side. On the fiscal side, it includes all the measures that were in the budget on a program-by-program basis. We've broken down those tables and we've updated them for the authorities that have been passed already and further authorities that may be required. There are information gaps with respect to these tables, so we've highlighted those information gaps. They're available on our website.

These information gaps will deal with how the money will flow on a program-by-program basis. They will deal with the output indicators that are required on a program-by-program basis and the outcome indicators that are required as well so we can measure the impact assessment.

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

Okay, but one thing you don't refer to directly, unless I missed it. All those things you just described are very good, but first I'd like to know how many dollars, let's say in the month of April, in the month of May, in the month of June, the government gets out the door for infrastructure, for business credit, and for other things. Will you be able to get those numbers from the government?

3:45 p.m.

Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament

Kevin Page

In terms of how the money will flow, I should say in answer to your earlier question what officials we have met with recently. I have met with Minister Flaherty and Minister Toews. We talked about a role the PBO could potentially play in terms of the implementation framework and even potentially looking at risk assessments on some of these programs in terms of getting the money out the door.

We made the offer that we would be willing to do that, but we would need to have access to appropriate information. I think it's fair to say that both Minister Toews and Minister Flaherty took that under advisement, and we haven't heard back. I made the same point more recently with Mr. Wright, the Deputy Minister of Finance. I met with him yesterday, indicating that we can play with the role. So we've made the offer.

We think if the support is there from Parliament for us to play this role.... With our recent quarterly report we laid out a framework. We can make sure that framework meets your standards, the needs of all parliamentarians, and that it has a month-by-month flow of information. But I think if there is support around this table and from the government side, we're certainly willing to play that role.

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

All right, because we may well come back with such a resolution, but given recent events, we're not inclined to either trust the government's numbers or believe they will deliver, even following resolutions. What I'm hearing you say, and Mr. Menzies can clarify when his turn comes as to whether the government will support you.... It seems to me Parliament is dependent in a significant way on your good offices if we are to have any chance of finding out in a neutral way which dollars have gone out the door. From what you're saying, it sounds as if there's still more work to do on that file.

If I can now shift to the economy, I think what you're saying for the first quarter of 2009 is quite dramatic, and that's the quarter that ends six days from now, so we're talking about it right now. You're saying that real gross domestic product in Canada this quarter will have fallen by 8.4%, I think you said. Is that a record, at least since the First World War?

3:50 p.m.

Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament

Kevin Page

It's a record, sir.

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

I think that's a bigger drop than we've seen in the United States, at least so far in a quarter, and you're saying nominal GDP will fall by more than 15% in this quarter.

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

One minute, Mr. McCallum.

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

Certainly those are shocking numbers. Are those your estimates? You can see from the table that the drop in GDP in the first quarter of 2009 you're projecting is at least three times bigger than what the budget projected, so three times worse than the budget not very long ago. Are those enormous drops in GDP your estimates, or are they the private sector consensus, or some blend of the two?

3:50 p.m.

Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament

Kevin Page

It's a combination effort. We have surveyed eight private sector forecasters for 2009 and 2010 and the numbers we're presenting for the first two quarters reflect the monitoring we've done. We will be releasing a document early next week that will detail exactly what we expect for the first and second quarters. So we've basically overlaid with this an additional level of detail, because these, as you say, are historic numbers, so we will provide a very detailed tracking of what's going on.

What it does reflect, though, are a lot of negative forces that we're seeing coming through the fourth quarter, a very sharp decline, sir, in December of 2008. We have a number of high-frequency indicators for the first part of 2009, export indicators, manufacturing shipment indicators, data on retail sales, and we've seen the labour market numbers as well, so we have quite a bit of information now for the first quarter. But when you see the level of transparency it will provide in the first half of the year with the reports we'll release early next week, I think you'll be quite comforted in the level of detail.

So to back up, it reflects the private sector monitoring, plus our own detailed assessment. We've taken it a step further.

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

Thank you, Mr. Page.

Thank you, Mr. McCallum.

Monsieur Laforest.

3:50 p.m.

Bloc

Jean-Yves Laforest Bloc Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Good afternoon, Mr. Page, to you and your entire team. I congratulate you all on the excellent work you are doing, particularly as regards your budget. We can come back to that.

We will also definitely be in favour of complying with the original estimates so that you can get the $2.7 million necessary for your proper operation and so that you can adequately carry out your mandate. It is very important for democracy that you be able to continue to do so.

On page 4 of your presentation, you say that, even if the stimulus measures contained in the budget have their full impact, Canada will nevertheless face a situation even worse than expected. You say that it isn't clear to you that more stimulus is required.

Can that mean that the proposed stimulus should be better targeted and be provided with an adequate budget to be effective?

3:55 p.m.

Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament

Kevin Page

Thank you for your question, Mr. Laforest.

I'll start by talking about the problem concerning my budget. As a result of budget restrictions, the PBO will have to—

We have to let go, effectively, some of the staff that we have right now.

It is absolutely necessary to obtain a permanent resolution for our budget.

You asked a very important policy question on the subject of the output gap in our present economy. In our minds, there is no doubt that the situation and economic forecasts are much clearer than the last budget estimates for 2009. Consequently, the output gap, that is the difference between potential economic growth and forecast economic growth, is greater now.

We can consider the need to add more stimulus to eliminate that gap, but the budget also has to be implemented now. So you have to consider those two elements.

3:55 p.m.

Bloc

Jean-Yves Laforest Bloc Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

I'll give you an example. In the budget, the government introduced a measure designed to add five weeks to employment insurance. However, based on the statistics from recent years, approximately 25% of employment insurance claimants will be able to receive those additional five weeks. An effective measure would have been to completely eliminate the two-week waiting period.

You say that more stimulus isn't necessarily required. Right away, that isn't what we mean. However, in your future report, will you mention that the measures proposed by the government could have been better targeted? I'm thinking, among other things, of the two-week waiting period for employment insurance. If people could receive benefits in the first two weeks, that would also be a significant economic stimulus.

3:55 p.m.

Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament

Kevin Page

If an agreement was reached to change and enrich the employment insurance program, that would indeed be an example of stimulus. I'm not very comfortable talking about the various options in the current context. I'm much more comfortable talking about economic forecasts. With regard to employment, there is a major difference between the economic forecasts in the budget and our current forecasts.

At this particular juncture, we're looking at an additional 250,000 jobs lost relative to the budget track. Effectively, that's a quarter of a million more people unemployed in 2009 relative to the budget track.

So when you think of the severity of the recession in that kind of context, and potentially the need to do something, I'm just.... I think it's more our job to provide that type of context in terms of the outlook than to suggest potential policy implications.

3:55 p.m.

Bloc

Jean-Yves Laforest Bloc Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

In the first part of your remarks, you said that, in its second report, the government should have a better idea of ways to use Treasury Board Vote 35. I think that's very important. We know that the Auditor General herself expressed major reservations about that situation.

In your opinion, what is the best way to determine that? Is it on a day-to-day basis? I'd like to know your opinion on that subject.

3:55 p.m.

Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament

Kevin Page

Mr. Laforest, when I had an opportunity to meet with the President of the Treasury Board and the Minister of Finance, I did make the point that I thought it was absolutely necessary that a list be provided to parliamentarians on how vote 35 would be used. As I noted earlier, we would be willing to provide a due diligence on Treasury Board Secretariat's risk assessment as they provide it, but we would need access to information.

In terms of Mr. McCallum's point in looking at the flow of that money, I think it should not only be identified in the next quarterly report, but whatever system we use to monitor the flow of money and its impact indicators, both in an output sense and an outcome sense, should be incorporated in the next quarterly report. I think there's an opportunity to integrate the report. I think we do need to identify it, and as we move forward on the next quarterly report the items we spend the money on should be identified.

4 p.m.

Bloc

Jean-Yves Laforest Bloc Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

The Standing Committee on Finance has agreed to a motion to have you come and testify after the government tables every progress report. Would you have liked to be provided with a specific or defined framework with which to report to us on the government's report?

4 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

Just very briefly, Mr. Page.

4 p.m.

Bloc

Jean-Yves Laforest Bloc Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

Would you like to be given broad outlines or a more specific mandate?

4 p.m.

Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament

Kevin Page

For the second quarterly report?

We have a detailed report available on our website now. The tables are so detailed that we didn't photocopy them today because I think it would have been a distraction. But we do have ideas on what the level of detail could be. We were impressed with the level of detail that was provided in chapter 4 of the quarterly report. I think the government should be applauded for that level of detail. We would like to see that detail moved forward so we can capture Mr. McCallum's point. We've seen how money is being tracked. We also look at the impact assessment on the economy. So we do have a good idea, sir.

Thank you for your question.

4 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

Thank you very much.

Mr. Menzies, please.