Human Resources Committee on May 29th, 2007

[Amanda Aziz]

I didn't bring any statistics with regard to the access grant itself. I know that there were over 30,000 students who were helped in their first year. Certainly any bit of financial assistance helps students.

I think there was a question earlier about completion rates, and study after study shows that students who have more debt have lower completion rates. I don't have specific statistics, but certainly, anecdotally, the less debt students have to carry, the more likely they are to complete their post-secondary education.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you. I'm going to cut you off just a little early.

We're going to make this four minutes to finish off this round, because we have a motion to get to.

Mr. Brown, you have four minutes.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Allison.

I have a question for Ms. Aziz. I wanted to delve into the alternative payments formula, which, as I'm sure you're well aware, is based on the Canada student loans program's net cost for loans and payments to individuals as per grants set out in the regulations. By enshrining the grants in this legislation, the grants would no longer be included in the calculation of alternative payments. There's been no recognition of that in the preparation of this private member's bill. This means that Quebec, the Northwest Territories, and Nunavut, which receive alternative payments, would receive less money. This would take funds away from students in those three jurisdictions. How do you explain that to people living in those jurisdictions? I imagine that there'd be concerns within your organization.

I know the number for Quebec; this would take $5.4 million away from Quebec students. I'm sure the Bloc would have a problem supporting this when you're taking $5.4 million away from Quebec, because that's what it does by changing this.

Now, have you spoken to students in any of those three areas about this lack of foresight in the bill? Are there concerns about the money being taken away from students?

[Amanda Aziz]

Yes. I didn't raise that in my remarks, but certainly we've debated internally this idea of enshrining the Canada access grants within the act versus keeping them within the regulations. I think it's an important discussion to have.

Certainly we would not support measures to decrease grant money for students. But there are two important points to consider. One is that enshrining it would ensure that if a future government wanted to cut the program, let's say, then there would have to be a substantial debate on the grants before there could be a change. At the same time, I appreciate the idea that if the grants were enshrined in the act, they would also be difficult to improve, for example, if the committee wanted to change them.

As far as I understood, the debate I had heard on the Bloc Québécois position on the act is that because the act provides Quebec with the option to opt out, as per a number of the programs that are provided by the federal government—

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

No.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

No, it doesn't.

[Amanda Aziz]

That was the understanding I had.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Actually, you can rationalize cutting funds from students, and there will be politicians who try to do that. But do you consider the fact that there's no foresight for this alternative payments formula? There's no planning for that. Do you consider that a serious flaw in the bill? And what would be the advice of the Canadian Federation of Students to politicians who are proposing this in the future? If this falls and needs to come back, would it be your proposal that any future members of Parliament pushing this should include an alternative payments formula as a means not to take away funds from students? Is that a basic principle we could all support?

[Amanda Aziz]

If you're asking me if we would support a grants program that takes away money from students, we certainly do not support the idea that grant money should be decreased for students.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

That was what I was looking for.

Do I have any time?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

You have one minute.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Quickly, Mr. Gorry, we talked a lot about the $25 million that was cut by the previous Liberal government. I just wanted to know, in your experiences on campuses, what the effects of that were. How did you find students struggled with the unfortunate effects of those cuts in their day-to-day lives? What was the kick in the belly to students during the 1990s? How did that affect your colleagues?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Scott, you have about 20 seconds to answer that.

[Scott Gorry]

In 20 seconds, I'd just say that it had a negative effect on them. It caused a lot of stress. It forced a number of my colleagues to leave school early to try to find jobs that could pay the bills. Services were cut. Infrastructure failed in the schools themselves.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

That's it. That's all.

Madame Bonsant, did you have a quick comment?

[France Bonsant, Bloc, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

What Mr. Brown said is not true. Section 14 of the federal Canada Student Financial Assistance Act refers to a right to opt out with compensation for provinces wishing to administer their own program of loans and bursaries. That is the case of Quebec, which has its own program. So who says that, if we vote in favour of this bill, Quebec would be penalized? He hasn't read section 14.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Patrick.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

On a point of order, I'd suggest that my colleague check the regulations, because the point she made was incorrect. This would be effective in that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Okay. We won't get into any more debate on that one.

I want to thank the witnesses, Ms. Aziz and Mr. Gorry, for showing up here today and participating.

We're now going to move to a motion we have. We'll let the witnesses walk away from the table; then we're going to debate a motion we have coming before us.

Mr. Savage, you have a motion before us, sir. Would you like to read it?

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

My motion reads:

That the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities calI upon departmental officials to provide evidence on the Canada Summer Jobs Program, including but not limited to the status of exact funding, and that those officials be called upon to appear on an emergency basis on or before May 31, 2007.

May I speak to that, Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Go ahead, if you want to speak to it.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Well, if there is going to be discussion, I will. If people just want to go to a vote, I'll forgo my discussion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Hold on a second. Who would like to debate?

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

Before we go to discussion, didn't we pass a motion that on June 1, I believe, we're having the documents we've asked for? We had three motions. We all agreed that's what we wanted.

This is for June 1. Why would we need the departments there?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Mr. Savage, then Mr. Chong, and then Ms. Yelich.