Amen.
Evidence of meeting #39 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was money.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #39 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was money.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
I don't know if the translators got that.
Does anyone else want to comment?
Mr. Mothersill.
12:50 p.m.
President, National Angel Organization
On top of the “amen”, teaching economics is absolutely right. And if we're looking at education, particularly in the grade schools, in the high schools, and of course in the universities, we have a situation in Canada where we focus our entrepreneurial efforts around the MBA programs. Wonderful. MBA programs typically teach people how to work and they play an important role in teaching people how to work in Fortune 1000 companies. Great. That does nothing in terms of addressing how to manage entrepreneurial companies. There is nothing wrong with MBAs, and I'm not criticizing them, but we have not gone far enough.
So it's a bit of an advertisement. I'm working currently with Ryerson in Toronto to actually form a group and a course of studies that will address management in entrepreneurial companies--and entrepreneurial companies alone. But this is a pilot, the first that we know of. We have to have a whole lot more of that kind of thing going on, to encourage grassroots, to give entrepreneurs the skills in order for them to take their companies to the next level.
You're absolutely right. It's not only a funding problem, but it's a cultural problem that has really come to pass because of our take on the educational system, which says somehow we're not going to touch business and economics.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
12:55 p.m.
General Partner, VenGrowth Asset Management Inc.
Similar to Mr. Van Kesteren's comment, I do agree that there are aspects of the stereotypical Canadian attitude that are not necessarily conducive to successful entrepreneurship. But that is a generalization that is very often not true.
And I do think there is great reason for optimism, because there are places in Canada where the attitude that is maybe generally lacking is certainly found in abundance. Kitchener-Waterloo.... Drive half an hour west of here to Kanata and get off the highway. Ten years ago there was nothing there. If you asked a business person, “What's Ottawa?”, they'd say, “I don't know what happens in Ottawa”. And now there's a very vibrant, exciting technology community there, and in Quebec, around Montreal, in the life sciences sector.
So we have these cores surrounding successful companies, universities where there's a growing culture of entrepreneurship. Look, it took 40 years for Silicon Valley to turn into what it is. It started in the seventies. We only started here in the nineties. So by having only half as much time, we're doing okay.
12:55 p.m.
Exectutive Vice-President, Investments, Business Development Bank of Canada
I do not want to repeat what has already been said but I agree that it would be a good thing to start teaching economics in our high schools. I believe things will start changing when people start seeing industrial parks expending, better jobs being available and young people having interesting things to do. We do have a big cultural problem but things are beginning to change.
Let me give you an iconic Quebec example, the Cirque du soleil. This is not a high-tech company. It was a set up in the eighties by people who decided to create a company rather than a cooperative. You all know how successul it has been all over the world. Everything relating to that company is a model.
The same thing applies to Kitchener-Waterloo. I went there recently and I saw how very much things have changed over the past ten years.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Merci, Monsieur Arthur. I apologize for that, but we did have a shortened time period today.
Ms. Nash, I understand you have one question. We don't have time for answers, so I'll let you put your question. I have a couple of questions. We'll just put them on the record and I think we'll perhaps have the witnesses respond by e-mail. I apologize for that, but the time is up.
Mr. Silva.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
Mario Silva Liberal Davenport, ON
I have a point of order. I just want to know if we still have time to deal with the motion.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
12:55 p.m.
NDP
Peggy Nash NDP Parkdale—High Park, ON
I actually should have asked my question earlier--it didn't occur to me then.
What everyone is talking about are the changes to IP policy, investment, the business environment, university policy, etc. But what we're not talking about is the financial state and the stability of our university graduates and young researchers, especially in the science and technology fields.
Tuition increases have gone up dramatically. I know in Ontario they're up 8%. So young people are graduating with a huge debt. And if we want them to take risks and to become more entrepreneurial, isn't it more difficult for them to do that when they're graduating with that burden of debt and that insecurity, going forward? It's less likely that they're going to be taking risks of any kind, let alone financial risks.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Okay.
I'm sorry, we're going to have to table that question.
Witnesses, I have a couple of questions myself that I do want to put on the record. Perhaps we could ask you to come back, and if you're amenable to that we could finish off this session, because you were deprived of 40 minutes of time because of the vote.
I want to put two questions on the table.
Mr. Heller, you have a very good presentation here. You talk about the four funding sources, and you talk about the role of government. How do we ensure that government funds, whether they partner with the private sector or not, continue to fund early-stage companies, where you said the need was, rather than become conservative and fund at a later stage? How do we ensure they're fair to taxpayers? What sort of a governance structure would you recommend?
The second thing is about the National Angel Organization, with respect to flow-through shares, innovation, productivity, and tax credits—very intriguing ideas. Flow-through shares have been promoted to me by Ballard and other companies for years. As you know, the finance department is not all that amenable to that. With the innovation and productivity tax credit, if there is any further information you have on those two initiatives that you can supply, stacked like that to the committee and that we can chew on, that would be very helpful to us.
I just want to put those two on the table from the chair. Unfortunately, we can't have any responses, because we are out of time. The vote prevented us from being here earlier.
I want to thank you for your time here today. It was a fascinating discussion.
Members, we are going to suspend for a minute, and then we'll discuss the motion.
Thank you.
1 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Okay, members, let's find our seats.
Does everyone have a copy of Mr. Brison's motion?
As the chair, I'm going to explain what I'm going to do in the context. The motion and the context surrounding it have put the chair in a very difficult position. I hope you all know I try my best to be a very fair chair and to govern by the rules. I am going to rule a certain way on this motion, but I do want to give the context to the committee.
This motion does not technically satisfy the 48-hour notice requirement. The clerk advised Mr. Brison's office that the committee would require unanimous consent to allow a member other than Mr. Brison to move his motion, given that Mr. Brison would be absent today. Based on this advice, the office of Mr. Brison advised the clerk not to put the motion on notice for the meeting of Thursday, May 15.
But in fact if a member is properly signed in as a substitute for Mr. Brison, that member would indeed be allowed to move the motion. That was, I think, the McGrath committee recommendation in 1985. So a substitute enjoys the same rights and privileges as a regular member of a committee being replaced. Substitutes are counted for purposes of establishing a quorum, and they may participate in debate of motions and votes.
What happened here was that the motion does not technically satisfy the 48-hour requirement, but that is a result of incomplete advice from our clerk, unfortunately.
The notice of motion was originally sent to the clerk on Monday, which was within the 48-hour requirement, but because of the advice given and because of the action of Mr. Brison's office as a result of the advice, we do not have the 48-hour requirement fulfilled.
I am going to rule this motion out of order. Obviously, if the motion is ruled out of order, any member can appeal that decision. If the decision is not sustained, the motion would be debated and voted upon, and that's an option.
Another option is that committees can deal with motions at meetings while they travel. If we do travel the week of May 26, the motion could be debated in Winnipeg on May 27.
I want to give the context, I want to give options to members, and I want to explain why I'm ruling this way. The reason I'm ruling this way is that I accept fully that incorrect advice was given unbeknownst to me, but the advice was not given in bad faith. Technically it does not satisfy the 48-hour requirement, and I'm ruling the motion out of order for that reason.
Mr. Silva.
1:05 p.m.
Liberal
Mario Silva Liberal Davenport, ON
Mr. Chair, I've sort of taken carriage of the motion, given the fact that I'm replacing Scott Brison.
I don't want to challenge your ruling, but maybe you would ask the indulgence of the committee that it would give consent to at least allow the motion, given the circumstances, given the fact that it was done in good faith by Mr. Brison to table it on Monday, given the fact that the information that was given back to his office was incomplete, and given all these circumstances.
There are times when people have to realize that it is not just Mr. Scott Brison's situation that needs to be respected. It really affects all of us as members, because when we do things within the proper legislative rules, and then we're not given full advice, we should not be punished for that. I think it would be unfair for the committee to punish Mr. Brison when he in fact did put it in as of Monday.
I ask you to ask the committee members if they would allow for unanimous consent to allow the motion to go through.
1:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Okay, I'll certainly do that.
Do I have unanimous consent from the committee to allow the motion to be discussed today?
1:05 p.m.
Some hon. members
No.
1:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Unanimous consent is denied.
Mr. Stanton, do you want to speak to this?
1:05 p.m.
Conservative
Bruce Stanton Conservative Simcoe North, ON
In support of your decision on this, we understand perfectly well that these kinds of things do happen. But in point of fact, the rule we agreed to at the start of this session was simply that the 48-hour clock was based on the time the motion was actually distributed to the committee members. It's a rule, and there are a lot of occasions when these circumstances come into play. We all have to accept them and be bound by them. As you pointed out, Mr. Chair, the obvious alternative here is to move that up to other business.
I'm also cognizant of the fact that we had a shortened session today and had to cut off our witnesses' presentations and questions from members because of the inadvertent vote--I guess it wasn't inadvertent on some people's part. The day moves on here. We're past one o'clock now.
I suggest we move this to our next order of business, which will be in Winnipeg, as you suggested, and take it up there.
1:05 p.m.
Liberal
1:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Okay.
[Proceedings continue in camera]
[Public proceedings resume]
1:25 p.m.
Conservative
Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I would like to make a friendly amendment, that after the phrase “the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology”, we add “when the committee resumes in the fall”, concerning the policy on financial assistance from the Economic Development Agency of Canada, etc.
