Finance Committee on Oct. 3rd, 2011

[Jo Mark Zurel]

I disagree with that, from the perspective that when you look at an infrastructure deficit, the deficit is always relative to something. There is no absolute value as to what infrastructure should be. When we put money into infrastructure, whether it's in small communities for schools, hospitals, or whatever.... These things are definitely needed. I absolutely acknowledge that. But when I look at a deficit or when we look at a deficit, I think we need to look at what we can afford, because if we always hold out a gold standard for where we'd like to be, we can always justify spending more. There's no shortage of places to spend money.

What we're saying at the St. John's Board of Trade is that in order to have an economy that will support itself over the very long term and to have stability and the ability to plan long term, we need to move that balance back from the large deficits and adding to our debt to getting that back under control and having a stronger economy.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

You made the statement earlier that we're not bringing enough money in. Well, that's a fact. The government has cut the tax rate. In the year 2000, Paul Martin cut it from 38% to 20% so that...and now they've cut it to 15%. This government has taken $16 billion a year out of the income for the government.

It's exactly the point you just made; it's the money that would have been there to invest.

So I think on some of these points, we're just going to disagree. I don't think that's a great surprise.

Ms. Ralph, you raised a point that's really troubling. I was the seniors critic for a time. We talked about the fact that seniors on GIS and OAS got $15,000 a year, and the poverty line is $22,000 a year.

You're talking to us about half being below the poverty line. That's....

Well, I'll bite my tongue. I was going to say something in Hamiltonese, and we're not supposed to use that language in Parliament.

But that is just horrible. It's a horrible thought. Thank you for bringing that to us.

In my riding, I hold disability tax credit seminars. A lot of the time, the people who come in are veterans. As you know, it's a limited type of ability; for instance, if you can't walk the length of a football field without the use of a cane, you would qualify for this. Then you have folks who have a more substantial disabilities who don't qualify because of the income problem.

What would you think of two-tiering it--leaving it as is for people with income, and then having a second tier for those who don't have the qualifying income?

[Susan Ralph]

That's what we're asking for.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

So you wanted to keep both.

[Susan Ralph]

We want to make it refundable in that they're able to use the amount of the disability tax credit so that individuals with an income of $10,000 or less are able to have it as a credit.

Certainly I can get you the figures on it, but basically it would put--

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

You said you had other documentation. We'd be glad to receive that.

[Susan Ralph]

I have that with me, yes.

Essentially, if they were able to use that credit with non-taxable income, it would put about $1,400 in each individual's pocket.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

That's huge.

I have about 30 more seconds here.

Mr. Blakely, we have to make sure that the red seal trades across this country are portable along with that tax credit. Do you see any place for the federal government to be involved in that?

[Robert Blakely]

The federal government runs the red seal program. I would like to see it expanded to more trades. I believe we have 54 trades now. Probably another 15 trades would significantly benefit. That would benefit not just our industry but a number of stationary industries that use the same trades.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Mr. Chair, just so that people understand what I'm referring to, red seal is simply a guaranteed level of qualification of people who are in the trades.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you.

Before I go to Mr. Adler, I want to clarify, Ms. Ralph, that it's $1,400 per person and that the estimated number of people would be about 20,000.

Am I correct in that?

[Susan Ralph]

I'm sorry, I don't have the statistics in front of me, but I certainly can provide that information to you.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Okay. Thank you.

We'll go to Mr. Adler, please.

[Mark Adler, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

I want to thank you all for coming this morning.

To Mr. Meulien, we're all aware of the great work that Genome is doing. You mentioned that by the year 2030, 3% of global GDP will be in the biotech and genome sectors, and Canada has the benefit of the lion's share of all of that.

Could you speak a bit about some of the great success stories we've had in this country in terms of investment, in terms of commercialization, and job creation, and creating the jobs of tomorrow? I just wondered if you could speak a bit about that.

[Pierre Meulien]

Sure. I'll start with a great example in Newfoundland, since we're here. In the health area, a genomic study funded by Genome Canada about four years ago was able to identify a defective gene in Newfoundland families. Males between the ages of 40 and 45 were just dropping dead of heart failure. Now, because of this work's real impact, there is a defibrillator in the chest of over 100 males who are walking around in Newfoundland and whose life is being saved. In fact, all of these defibrillators have been activated over the last year or so.

These are the types of things we will see more and more of, in the cancer area and in the area of adverse drug reactions. There is real, tangible benefit coming out of these studies.

In terms of economics and real job creation you were talking about, those are nascent. As I said, we have now created 24 companies. A lot of them are based on the technology area, for things like new diagnostic tools, new machines for doing high-end mass spectometry, or machines for isolating DNA from different sources, including, for example, the oil sands. You wouldn't naturally link genomics with oil sands, but in fact the microbial communities that live in the oil sands, if manipulated correctly—and this is not genetic manipulation but just understanding how those communities work from a genomic standpoint—can facilitate the extraction of oil from the oil sands.

Also on the remediation side, there are a lot of projects on the bioremediation of mining sites. This is big environmental stuff, and I believe a lot more companies will be created on these interfaces between the environmental studies and the genomics area. It's at these interfaces that new companies are going to be created. We've started. We've created 24 companies. We've done over 25 licensing agreements with larger companies. Companies are coming forward, and I'm very interested in this public-private sector divide we have in Canada. I'm very interested, because I believe we can play the role of that interface.

Our job is designing programs. We can design programs that bring the public and private sectors together and get this innovation pipeline to correct the deficiencies that exist. Everybody in Canada today knows that we have great science but there is a lack of the innovative pipeline, which is something we need to change.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

You have one minute.

[Mark Adler, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

To rectify that, where do you see it going? Is it just a lack of venture capital?

[Pierre Meulien]

No, I think that is just one item. If we have good ideas and we have people trained on the entrepreneurial side, then I think capital will come. With good ideas, capital will come. I don't think that is the real deficiency. The deficiency is in that gap we have.

We have just launched an entrepreneurial educational program specifically in genomics whereby over the next three years we're going to have young entrepreneurs going into the genomics labs, understanding what they're doing, and getting new ideas into the commercial space. I think that is part of the puzzle.

Much has been written, and Canada has been criticized about this commercialization and lack of research getting out into the real world. It is up to us on the ground to actually create the programs that are necessary. I don't think there's any big-ticket item missing. I think we need to just go and do it.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you.

Mr. Giguère, you have the floor. You have five minutes.

[Alain Giguère, NDP, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Good day.

My first question is for Mr. Meulien.

I would like to know who maintains intellectual property rights at present.

[Pierre Meulien]

They are held by the institutions, meaning the universities and research institutes. We do not take any part of those rights.

[Alain Giguère, NDP, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

In the latest budget, we voted for $20 million to go to corporate support, meaning general career support.

Would you be prepared to develop that career support for companies? Would you be able to take that budget and manage it?

[Pierre Meulien]

Of course we would. However, we specialize in various aspects of genomics. That is our strength. There are other stakeholders in other areas. The goal of the Entrepreneurship Education in Genomics Program is to develop and strengthen the interface between business and science through young entrepreneurs who will work in genomics labs.

[Alain Giguère, NDP, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Very good.

I would like to ask Ms. Susan Ralph a question. Taxation is a subject that I know a little about. At present, the vast majority of individuals with a handicap are not claiming the credits they are entitled to. Furthermore, a number of private companies are filling out their returns for them, pocketing on average from 20% to 30% of the amounts claimed.

Are you proposing major reforms with regard to the simplification of taxation procedures and above all the definition of a handicapped individual?

[Susan Ralph]

If I understand your question properly, it is about a suggestion of a tax-free formula that would work for persons with disabilities. Am I right? Okay.

We have done a formula. Unfortunately, I haven't brought a copy with me. That would show how the disability tax credit could roll out to help individuals with disabilities who do not have a taxable income. I will provide that. We can send it in from our national organization. Unfortunately, I'm not prepared to answer that question right now, but we do have it listed.