Finance Committee on Oct. 15th, 2012

[Denis St-Pierre]

No. I know that some were just signed, but I would not know the number.

It's easy to find. We can answer—

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peggy Nash]

Thanks very much, Ms. Glover.

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

Madam Chair, Ms. Glover wants to ask a question.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peggy Nash]

No, I am sorry.

It's not in order.

We have a couple of minutes left in this session, and I'm going to take the liberty as chair to ask a couple of questions before we wrap up. I'm sorry we don't have more time with the witnesses.

I want to first of all express my condolences to Mr. Unrau, and the whole Canadian Cattlemen's Association, for the challenges your members are facing right now. I'm sure it's very difficult for your members, and I regret that we haven't had more time to hear from you about the kind of challenges, economic and personal, that many of your members are facing. We do appreciate your being here.

I'd like to ask a general question to all the panellists. We only have a couple of minutes, so maybe anyone who wants to answer could take this.

The current issue of The Economist has, as its largest section, an investigation into the whole issue of inequality, both within countries and globally. It talks about the economic and social and personal impacts of inequality.

Could you leave our committee with any thoughts or measures you believe the federal government should take that would help to make sure we're addressing income inequality and that we're not having the subsequent problems that were outlined in The Economist? If you haven't read that, it's very interesting reading.

Do you have any final thoughts on that?

Go ahead, Mr. St-Pierre.

[Denis St-Pierre]

I'll be brief. I think if you remove trade barriers, you allow people to work, and when the people work, there's less inequality. Trades people should be able to work.

The second thing is to keep it simple for them so that they can focus on working. The more complex their tax return is at the end of the year, the more complex the trade barriers are and the more complex anything is.

Just let them work. I think that's what we should do, and allow people to freely travel across Canada.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peggy Nash]

Okay. Thank you very much.

Is there anybody else?

Go ahead, Ms. Brocklebank.

[Andrea Brocklebank]

From our perspective, the biggest thing you can do to improve industries in terms of equality is access to markets and trade, and opportunities for that industry, whether it's domestically or internationally. Likewise, it's access to workers. There's also regulatory reduction and harmonization. We want to ensure the safety of our product, but we also want to ensure we can compete globally with others.

It's always trying to find that balance between risk reduction and mitigation. As well, it's access to workers when it's necessary to support sustainability.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peggy Nash]

Thank you very much.

I'll take a last comment, and then we're out of time.

Go ahead, Mr. McCaig.

[Kim McCaig]

Quickly, I agree with the other panellists. Part of that discussion is clarity around the rules: make sure it's as clear as possible so that people can understand. That helps them to make informed decisions.

If we can make our rules and regulations with a sense of purpose, a sense of objectives, we can measure whether we're on the right path. With clarity around how you achieve them, you'll help to overcome a lot of these barriers that we've been talking about.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peggy Nash]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, to all of the panellists. We appreciate your being here today.

We'll take a few minutes so we can change the panel for our next session.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peggy Nash]

Thank you very much. I want to wish a warm welcome to all of our witnesses for the second half of this meeting.

Welcome to the witnesses.

First, we have Daniel Bergeron from the Agence métropolitaine de transport, followed by Claude Péloquin from the Association québécoise de l'industrie touristique.

From the Canadian Labour Congress, we have Sylvain Schetagne. Bienvenue. From the Forest Products Association of Canada, we have David Lindsay; from the Social Economy Working Group. we have Patrick Duguay; and from St. Boniface Hospital, we have Dr. Michel Tétreault.

Welcome to all of you. You each have five minutes to make your presentations. I regret that I will need to interrupt you if you go over.

We are going to start with you, Mr. Bergeron.

[Daniel Bergeron, Vice-President, Strategic Data and Metropolitan Affairs, Agence métropolitaine de transport]

Thank you.

I am—

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peggy Nash]

Could you please speak slowly enough for the interpreters?

[Daniel Bergeron]

I would be happy to.

[Shelly Glover, Conservative, Saint Boniface, MB]

I have a point of order.

I'm so sorry to interrupt. I have a quick point of order I need to clarify, if you wouldn't mind.

Madame la présidente, we've prepared based on the submissions that came to us. There were some 800 submissions. I know that we were only allowed to take 120 to 150 of those that were submitted, but two who are here today never submitted. I'm wondering how we deal with that.

Of the 800 who submitted, we picked the ones that were supposed to come here and present, but we've just now received something from two organizations that didn't submit, as required, by the deadline of August 3. I'm asking for your help in trying to determine how we deal with this. We haven't had the time to read their submissions, so we're ill-prepared to move forward.

I'm asking for your advice. I would like your interpretation of what was decided. I apologize to the witnesses.

[Hoang Mai, NDP, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

On that point of order, we know that this time we changed the whole system. We used to be able to get briefs. Questions were put online.

I think there was a lot of confusion among the witnesses in terms of how they appear and in terms of the briefs. I think in this case, since it's the first time we have actually put in place the new system of having them answer questions rather than having briefs, we should accept the fact that we have witnesses. It would be respectful to hear them, since we have people who came all the way to Ottawa. It used to be that we would go there and were able to prepare.

The fact is that there is a new system, with maybe some glitches. We can talk about it afterwards in terms of a post-mortem and see what we can do, but now that we have witnesses here, I think the least we can do is listen to what they have to say, and then we can ask questions of them.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peggy Nash]

Go ahead, Ms. Glover.

[Shelly Glover, Conservative, Saint Boniface, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Mai, for the suggestion. I'm happy to hear from the witnesses. They've come all this way, and we're happy to hear from them.

However, we do have to address this issue, because we have several meetings. I'm looking for your interpretation, because it was very clear. There were 800-plus submissions. Folks submitted because they knew that they had an opportunity to present.

We have a few of these organizations present, but we discounted more than 600 other organizations that followed the rules. That is why I'm asking for an interpretation for future meetings. If you'd like to take it elsewhere and discuss it or pass it on to discuss with the chair, I'm happy to move on to listening, but it is something we need to address so that it doesn't reoccur.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peggy Nash]

Thank you, Ms. Glover, for raising that point. I think that in the interest of respect for the witnesses, we should hear from them today. It's something that perhaps we can take to a subcommittee and look at for future witnesses so that we're addressing your concern. I'm not sure exactly what that means in terms of the witnesses who may have already been invited. Let's take it to a subcommittee, where perhaps we can have a fuller discussion.

[Shelly Glover, Conservative, Saint Boniface, MB]

That's a good idea. Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peggy Nash]

If you are ready, Mr. Bergeron, you can finally continue. Thank you.

[Daniel Bergeron]

Thank you.

My name is Daniel Bergeron. I am the Vice-President of the Agence métropolitaine de transport in Montreal. We are very honoured by the invitation to appear before this parliamentary committee.

The Agence métropolitaine de transport is responsible for public transit in the Montreal area. Our region includes 83 municipalities with approximately 3.6 million people. In terms of public transit in the region, 15 transport authorities are responsible for providing bus, metro and commuter train services. We are talking about 500 million trips a year, which makes public transit a key component of the region. More specifically, public transport agencies in the region provide 10,000 direct jobs, in addition to, obviously, transporting more than 50% of the region's workers daily during morning rush hour.

This year, public transit represented about $1.5 billion in operational costs and region-wide investments. The amount was $1 billion in 1996 and it will be $2 billion in 2017. The funding for current services mainly comes from public transit users—who cover 40% to 50% of costs—as well as the municipalities, the Government of Quebec in terms of investments, and the federal government through various existing funds.

In addition to public transit trips in the Montreal region—and the same goes for Toronto, Vancouver, Calgary and other major Canadian urban centres—there are also a lot of congested highways, blocking the transportation of goods, which slows down economic activity.

To address those concerns, the Agence métropolitaine de transport, with all the transportation agencies and all the cities in the region, including the City of Montreal, the STM and its other partners, has developed a 10-year investment plan to reduce traffic congestion and to foster economic activity by transporting goods and by making the city appealing to its residents. This investment plan provides for a $17 billion investment over the next 10 years; that is a huge amount. Municipal and provincial governments are the main players, but we think that the government has a major role to play on three fronts: first, by creating a public transport investment fund in the range of $1 billion for the next 7 to 10 years; second, by continuing to allow public transit programs to be eligible for existing programs; and third, by proposing economic development guidelines for public transit through a 10-year action plan that would include the two investment funds I mentioned.

So these are the recommendations that AMT would like to submit to you: first, creating a new fund for public transport infrastructure in cities across Canada, for a period of 7 to 10 years and in the amount of $1 billion a year; second, maintaining current funds and the eligibility of public transit for those funds; finally, creating a national public transit action plan to encompass all that.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peggy Nash]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Péloquin from the Association québécoise de l'industrie touristique now has the floor.

[Claude Péloquin, Vice-President, Board of Directors, Association québécoise de l'industrie touristique]

Good afternoon. Thank you very much for having us here today.

My comments will deal with the importance for the Canadian Tourism Commission to capitalize on the international tourism market. I am vice-president on the board of directors of the Association québécoise de l'industrie touristique. I am also the president and general manager of the Association des stations de ski du Québec and chair of the Canadian Ski Council.

The Association québécoise de l'industrie touristique represents close to 10,000 Quebec businesses, and sector and regional associations. Its mission is to represent the various members and ensure that the tourism industry thrives economically in Quebec and Canada.

The Canadian tourism industry contributes $7.8 billion in revenue to Canada's economy. It operates year-round across the country and employs Canadians of all educational backgrounds and ages. Contrary to other economic sectors such as manufacturing, tourism creates employment that cannot be outsourced. A job in the tourism sector will not be transferred anywhere else in the world.

The Canadian Tourism Commission is Canada's national tourism marketer. It sustains a vibrant and profitable Canadian tourism industry. As worldwide tourism receipts keep growing, Canada's share in this growing export sector continues to erode. International arrivals have increased by 4.6% globally, while international arrivals to Canada are down by 0.8%. Canada's international travel account deficit balance of payments was $16.25 billion in 2011, a 14% increase over 2010. This is not good news for us.

Taking into account Canada's tourism deficit and the enormous economic potential of the industry, it is absolutely incomprehensible for the CTC, our country's marketing agent, to have $14 million, or 20%, of its already limited budget amputated in the 2012-13 financial exercise. While Canada loses ground, countries have invested in considerable marketing vehicles in order to face challenges from newly emerging competitors.

Some countries invest a lot of money in their tourism budget. For example, Ireland has a budget of $211 million to market their destination. In the last 15 years, Ireland has had an increase of 14% in arrivals from key markets. Australia has an annual budget of $147 million to market itself, around the world and it has had an increase of 30%. Canada, with a budget of only $72 million in 2011, in the same period had a decrease of 10% in arrivals from key markets. This is not good news.

Almost all major tourism destinations are cashing in on this incredible boom in the industry, welcoming increasing numbers of visitors every year. Only five of the top 50 most popular destinations in the world are losing ground. Not only is Canada one of the five countries that are losing ground, but we have fallen 18%. Our annual losses in terms of international arrivals amount to 3.6 million tourists since 2000.

Our recommendation is this: as other countries have been investing considerable amounts in promoting their appeal for tourists, the Canadian Tourism Commission has seen its financial resources reduced by 41.5% over the past ten years, from $99 million to $58 million in 2013-14. Canada must have a strong national marketer that will strategically position the country abroad and capitalize on our Canadian national identity, our culture, our nature, and our winters.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peggy Nash]

Thank you, Mr. Péloquin.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Schetagne, you have five minutes.