Evidence of meeting #61 for Finance in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was information.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Kevin Page  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
Chris Matier  Senior Advisor, Economic and Fiscal Analysis, Office of the 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

9:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

I call this meeting to order. This is the 61st meeting of the Standing Committee on Finance. Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we're studying the progress report on monitoring and oversight of the 2009 budget.

We're very pleased to have with us this morning, from the Library of Parliament, the Parliamentary Budget Officer, Mr. Kevin Page. We have an hour and a half with Mr. Page this morning.

Mr. Page, I will ask you to introduce your colleagues and to give an opening statement. Then we'll have questions from all members. Welcome back to the committee. We look forward to your remarks.

9:05 a.m.

Kevin Page Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament

Thank you, Chair.

I have with me today three important members of my group. They're all important, but they are three very important ones since we're small. With me are--

9:05 a.m.

Liberal

Massimo Pacetti Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC

Point of order, Mr. Chair.

9:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

Mr. Pacetti on a point of order.

9:05 a.m.

Liberal

Massimo Pacetti Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC

Yes. Normally this committee sits in one of the rooms where the committees are televised. I'd like to know why we haven't taken the time to reserve one of those rooms when we have a witness of the stature of Kevin Page.

9:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

We did ask for a room in Centre Block. You are right, Mr. Pacetti, that typically we do sit in Centre Block, but the Auditor General is releasing a report today, so we were bumped by the Auditor General.

As you will recall, this date was agreed to by me and the vice-chairs, including you, and in fact, it is being recorded. We did have some requests from news organizations, so the House of Commons is recording this meeting.

I'm sorry, Mr. Page. Please continue.

9:05 a.m.

Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament

Kevin Page

With me, I have Mr. Sahir Khan, our assistant parliamentary budget officer for revenue and expenditure analysis, and Mostafa Askari, the assistant parliamentary budget officer for the economic and fiscal situation and fiscal outlook. As well, our senior economist is Chris Matier, for economic and fiscal outlook as well.

Thank you.

9:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

You may continue with your opening statement.

9:05 a.m.

Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament

Kevin Page

Very well.

Good morning, Mr. Chair, vice-chairs, and members of the committee. Thank you for inviting me and my colleagues to speak to you today regarding Canada's economic and fiscal situation and our monitoring of the government's third-quarter report on the implementation of the 2009 budget.

I have three key messages.

The first is that the Canadian economy appears to be emerging from a difficult recession. The average private sector outlook is stabilizing, although uncertainty remains high as the fallout from the global financial crisis persists. Based on the latest information, the PBO is indicating that the emerging recovery is fragile and the short-term economic risks continue to be on the downside.

The second point is that the world recession has thrown Canada further off its fiscal track. While Canadian fiscal numbers are significantly better than those of many other countries, even under the most optimistic private sector forecasts the federal fiscal situation is unlikely to return to balance over the medium term. A fiscal plan with targets and/or rules could help guide an exit strategy once the economic recovery has been put on a sustainable path.

The third point is that with the high levels of uncertainty and the loss of fiscal room, the policy challenges and trade-offs associated with both cyclical and structural issues become more difficult. This environment puts a premium on the need for transparent quarterly reporting on economic monitoring and budget implementation.

In this regard, the government may wish to consider the merits of including information on activities, outlays, and/or expenses to date, in addition to commitments, in the next quarterly budget implementation report. The government may also wish to consider providing analysis to parliamentarians on the effectiveness of stimulus spending to date on supporting Canadian output and jobs.

Let me now turn to the economic and fiscal situation and outlook. In July, at the request of the House finance committee, I released a comprehensive assessment of the economic and fiscal situation and outlook. At the time, I reported that private sector forecasters, on average, expected to see a technical recovery in the second half of this year, followed by modest economic growth in 2010 and more robust growth over the medium term.

I also reported that, on the basis of this economic projection, the government would experience a cumulative budget deficit of about $156 billion over the current and the next four fiscal years. In September and early October, my office, the PBO, updated its July projections, and I would like to highlight the key conclusions of our update.

The preponderance of indicators suggests that the Canadian economy has begun to stabilize in the third quarter following three quarters of negative growth. These indicators include consumer and business confidence, employment, hours worked, housing activity, and retail sales. While the Canadian economy has weathered the global recession better than most economies, Canadians have been hit hard by the recent downturn.

PBO estimates of the output gap, the level of real output compared to its potential, indicate that the depth of the weakness in the Canadian economy is more severe than it was during the recession in the 1990s and is similar to the recession experience in the early 1980s.

The unemployment rate stands at 8.4% in September, compared to 6.2% a year earlier. Including involuntary part-timers and discouraged workers, the unemployment rate would be about three percentage points higher. The average duration of unemployment is increasing at a significant rate. Canada has lost 395,000 full-time jobs since October 2008.

Although a general consensus has emerged that a recovery in the global economy is under way, considerable uncertainty continues to surround the outlook.

While the Canadian private sector forecasts indicate a modest recovery in the second half of the year, international forecasters like the IMF and the OECD are less sanguine about the pace of economic recovery and continue to emphasize the downside risk to the economic outlook. Despite this uncertainty, the September 2009 PBO survey of private sector forecasters suggests little change in the Canadian economic outlook since July.

According to the PBO survey, based on the average private-sector outlook, real GDP is projected to fall 2.3% in 2009 and rise 2.3% in 2010. Nominal GDP, the broadest measure of the government's tax base, is projected to fall 4.6% in 2009 and rise 4% in 2010. The unemployment rate is projected to average 8.4% in 2009 and then rise to 8.9% in 2010.

The updated survey implies that the Canadian economy will not return to its potential until the end of 2013. This translates into a cumulative loss of over $200 billion or about $17,000 per Canadian household in unrealized output.

According to the PBO view, there are downside risks to both the short-term growth and labour market forecasts in the September private sector survey. These risks include the potential for a weaker U.S. recovery as well as the potential for negative impacts stemming from the recent strength of the Canadian dollar.

The PBO projects a cumulative budgetary deficit of $167.4 billion over the next five years. The budget deficit is projected to rise from $5.8 billion in 2008-09 to a peak of $54.2 billion this year, falling to $19 billion in 2013-14. Consequently, the federal debt is projected to rise to $631.2 billion in 2013-14, which corresponds to 33.8% of GDP.

The PBO has improved some of the tools that it uses in doing fiscal projections, including the construction of our own measure of potential output and the government's structural balance. Based on the new estimates of potential output, PBO calculations continue to suggest that the budget is not structurally balanced over the medium term.

The PBO estimates that the structural balance would deteriorate from an essentially balanced position in 2007-08 to an $18.9 billion structural deficit in 2013-14. That said, the structural deficits projected over the medium term are significantly smaller than those of the early 1980s and early 1990s. They are also small relative to the size of the economy.

However, a more thorough assessment of the sustainability of the current fiscal structure requires a longer-term perspective, in particular taking into account the fiscal challenges posed by population aging. The PBO has undertaken such analysis and will release a comprehensive assessment of the sustainability of the government's finances in the coming months.

As noted, the PBO continues to judge that there are significant risks to the economic outlook, and there's of course a wide range of possible outcomes. To help illustrate this point, we have simulated the fiscal implications of a range of private sector economic forecasts in our September survey.

In 2013-14, the projected budgetary balance ranges from a deficit of $7 billion to a deficit of about $34 billion. This suggests that even under the most optimistic private sector forecast the budgetary deficit is unlikely to be eliminated without policy actions.

Further, considerable uncertainty remains with regard to future effective tax rates and revenue basis. In effect, there is a risk that effective personal income tax rates will recover at a slower pace than the PBO assumption.

In addition, corporate income tax revenues are subject to a high degree of uncertainty as a result of corporations' ability to carry losses backward or forward. An upside risk to the fiscal outlook in the near term arises from the possibility of large amounts of lapsed infrastructure funds. For example, one in every three planned infrastructure dollars went unspent in the past two fiscal years for which data is available.

Based on these considerations, we continue to judge that the balance of risks to the fiscal outlook over the medium term is tilted to the downside.

The high levels of uncertainty and risk also underscore the importance of a fiscal plan with clear targets for budget balances and debt. In the same vein, quarterly reports that highlight activities, outlays or expenses related to budget implementation, in addition to commitments, will help us understand the nature and impact of budget stimulus measures on economic recovery.

In closing, I thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today. I will be happy to answer your questions.

9:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

Thank you, Mr. Page, for your opening statement.

We will go to questions from members.

Mr. McCallum.

9:15 a.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome, Mr. Page and associates.

My apologies. I was a few minutes late. I went to the normal place in the Centre Block, not realizing that the government was shunting us over here where there are no bright TV lights.

9:15 a.m.

Conservative

Ted Menzies Conservative Macleod, AB

We were worried about the bags under your eyes.

9:15 a.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

9:15 a.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

I would like to ask you, first of all, about the information provided by the government. In this report, you note that you requested information on the government expenditure plan and they said no. There was the recent incident of, in this computer age, 5,000 pages being dumped into your office. Then, in your recent report, you referred to “uneven information regarding the implementation progress, relevant benchmark outputs and expected outcomes of measures in the stimulus package”.

If you put those things together, it's hard for me to avoid the conclusion that the government is deliberately depriving you of information so that you cannot, as well as otherwise, provide us with information regarding these impacts. Is that a fair conclusion?

9:15 a.m.

Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament

Kevin Page

Well, sir, as you've noted we've asked for information from the Department of Finance on a number of fronts. One front was really to look at some of the income shares behind their forecast so that we'd get a better sense of what was behind their revenue forecast, particularly their effective tax rates and elasticities.

As you've noted, we've also asked for information with regard to the spending profiles of different departments over the five years, which we think is very important for our examination of structural spending going forward. We have not received any information on either front.

With regard to infrastructure spending, specifically the implementation of the stimulus package, almost one-third of that is stimulus-related discretionary fiscal policies. I point out that when you estimate the amount of debt we're expected to accumulate over the next five years, even on an average private-sector forecast, we're looking at about $167 billion.

We asked the Department of Transport and Infrastructure for information on infrastructure, and we recently received some information. It's true that it's in paper form. I've had a few conversations with the deputy minister. We're trying to get it in electronic form. We've not received it in electronic form yet, but we are hopeful. We've also requested a technical briefing with their officials, so that we could better understand the nature of the data we've received. It's still a work in progress.

9:15 a.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

Thank you.

Well, I would think that in 2009 for the Government of Canada the notion that an electronic version does not exist is totally lacking in credibility. Would you agree?

9:15 a.m.

Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament

Kevin Page

Well, we're quite convinced--you're correct, sir--that there is an electronic version and we're hoping to get an electronic version. I haven't given up hope. We've also looked at different ways in which we can machine-read the information in a paper-based format onto an electronic format, but we know that it will cost thousands of dollars to do so.

9:15 a.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

Thank you.

I'll turn now to your table 2-2 on direct program spending, where you've subtracted their unidentified savings. Those savings were $2 billion this year, going down to $1.5 billion, $1.1 billion, and $0.6 billion. I have two questions on that.

I remember from my time in government that when we did savings we'd usually go in the other direction. We'd start with $0.6 billion and move up gradually to $2 billion, because you can't find huge savings in year one.

Given that we're approximately halfway through the fiscal year, is it possible to find $2 billion of savings at this juncture?

9:15 a.m.

Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament

Kevin Page

We've highlighted the unidentified savings, as you've noted, because we haven't seen the details on those savings. It is the same situation we found ourselves in on asset sales, when we saw, almost a year ago, that government was adjusting the fiscal projections for things that we felt didn't have sufficient information behind them.

Is it possible to generate $2 billion worth of savings? If the government has identified measures and we haven't been made aware of them, that's the reason we've not adjusted the books yet. Is it possible to generate $2 billion? It is possible, but we haven't seen the details.

9:20 a.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

My last question is related to that. You say that the record of the last two years is such that only approximately two out of three infrastructure programs have been done and the other has lapsed. Can you tell us how many billion dollars of lapse that might be? In an accounting sense, if it's more than $2 billion, might that be the source of their savings?

If they simply didn't do all of the infrastructure they said they were going to do, they'd conceivably have savings substantially greater than $2 billion. So that's how they'd find the savings. It's not a happy way to find the savings, because we want the shovels in the ground and the jobs created, but from an accounting point of view, could that be how they found those savings?

9:20 a.m.

Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament

Kevin Page

As we noted in our speech today, if spending is lower than projected for these stimulus measures, particularly infrastructure, we could see a deficit this year that is smaller than what the government is projecting.

We're assuming, on the infrastructure spending, that if the money does not go out the door this year, it will roll forward into the future year. We're not arguing whether that's a good thing or a bad thing, but if you look at our output gap measures, the economy is very weak right now and will continue to be weak even until next year.

We have raised the risk that money would be lapsed this year, based on lapse history. We have raised additional risks in recent days. In speaking with some municipalities, we've heard that it's difficult to get the money out in the two-year timeframe. Some of those municipalities suggested that we should look at the two-year timeframes we allowed for the infrastructure fiscal stimulus program.

So there are some of those risks. Certainly a lapse would mean a smaller deficit. It would mean potentially, if you roll it over, more spending next year. But even the timeframes are pretty short.

9:20 a.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

Thank you very much.

9:20 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

Mr. McCallum, you have a few more seconds.

9:20 a.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

Do you have any idea of the dollars that could be lapsed, the order of magnitude, on infrastructure in this current year?

9:20 a.m.

Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament

Kevin Page

I'm not really in a position today, sir, to give you a sense of the potential lapse we might see on some of the stimulus spending, particularly infrastructure. We are looking at the data. Again, we got a significant amount of data, over 4,000 pages, on Thursday. Once we go through that data it will give us a sense...at least it gives us a sense now of how much, relative to the project, the overall federal spending amount is, and for much of that data, the project start and end dates.

We'll start to get a sense of whether or not this money can flow this year or next year. But prior to our analysis of that data, I'm not in a position to give you a lapse estimate at this time.