Bill C-288 (Historical)

An Act to amend the Income Tax Act (tax credit for new graduates working in designated regions)

This enactment amends the Income Tax Act to give every new graduate who settles in a designated region a tax credit equal to the lesser of
(a) 40% of the individual's salary or wages,
(b) $3,000, and
(c) the amount by which $8,000 exceeds all amounts paid for a preceding taxation year.
The purpose of this measure is to encourage new graduates to settle in designated regions, thereby curbing the exodus of young people from those regions and promoting their economic development.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Mr. Chair, the notice of motion I filed on Friday is very clear. The motion reads as follows:

That the Standing Committee on Finance complete the clause-by-clause study of Bill C-288, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act (tax credit for new graduates working in designated regions) by Tuesday, December 1, 2009.

The deadline is December 2. So we absolutely have to have completed the clause-by-clause study today, if we want to avoid it being postponed indefinitely. Last week, I argued that this bill had to be studied quickly, before the end of the session, because the deadline was December 2.

Last week, the member for Laurentides—Labelle, Johanne Deschamps, who introduced the bill, answered all the questions asked by committee members. Because the deadline is Tuesday, December 1, I will take this opportunity to say that once the motion is passed, it is not necessary to proceed right away, but the committee absolutely has do it today. We will agree on the mechanics later.

Young People in the Regions

[Johanne Deschamps, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, my colleague from Chicoutimi—Le Fjord and I delivered 3,000 postcards in support of Bill C-288 to the office of the Minister of State responsible for the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec.

Bill C-288 proposes the introduction of a tax credit to encourage the return of young graduates to designated regions, and allow the development of secondary and tertiary processing industries by giving our entrepreneurs access to qualified workers.

In the last parliament, only the Conservative government refused to put in place these measures that would benefit both our young people and the regions.

With Bill C-288 soon heading to committee, we hope that the Liberals and the New Democrats will continue to support this Bloc Québécois initiative and that the Conservatives will set aside their partisan ideology and act in the interests of young graduates and the regions.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Order.

Mr. Pacetti, we're here to discuss Bill C-288.

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to thank you for being with us this afternoon.

I understand, from reading your document, that Bill C-288 is similar to the program put in place by the Quebec government. We know that the government of Quebec's budget estimate for 2009 is $45 million. The population of Quebec represents 23% of Canada's overall population. If we do a mathematical projection, we arrive at about $195 million for Canada.

Do you think that $195 million figure is more realistic than the $600 million figure put forward by the Conservative Party?

[Kevin Page, Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament]

Thank you, Chair.

My staff and I appreciate the opportunity to appear before the committee today to answer your questions regarding our cost assessment of Bill C-288, which is intended to provide a non-refundable tax credit to new graduates who settle in certain regions of the country.

Before we begin with questions, I wanted to first take the chance to provide members with some context regarding the terms of reference of our assessment, the key findings, and future analysis that may be warranted.

We prepared the terms of reference in consultation with committee members shortly after receiving the committee's request in September of 2009. This is a standard aspect of our work, intended to ensure that there is a common set of expectations between the requester and my staff regarding the scope of work, depth of analysis and timelines for delivering. The terms of reference are attached as Annex A to our cost assessment. At the time, there was a general consensus among members of the committee that the most useful contribution I could make to your deliberations would be to analyze the cost estimates that had been presented to this committee and to the House of Commons.

In addition, there was also interest expressed in determining the regional impacts of the proposed legislative amendments, if possible. A key aspect of the terms of reference was agreement among members to share the substantial work that had been completed to date and underpin the $180 million and $600 million cost estimates. By building on these earlier efforts, I ensured that I could avoid duplicating work already completed by others and respond to the committee's request in a more timely manner. With this in mind, my work focused on two key activities: reproducing each of the two estimates and determining their implicit assumptions; and, building a framework to assess if the assumptions' corresponding results appeared to be reasonable. I want to thank officials from Finance Canada and Statistics Canada, in particular, for their timely and patient help in preparation of my assessment.

Over the past seven weeks I have drawn on the expertise and experience of provincial governments, academics, and government executives to assess the reasonableness of the cost assessments presented to the committee. As I outlined in my note, the two cost estimates are based on different assumptions regarding the size of the regions that would be designated as eligible for the proposed tax credit and the propensity of new graduates to take up the new tax credit.

The lower estimate of $180 million is based on actual data from the Province of Quebec. The Quebec tax credit that has been available since 2006 is generally consistent with the proposal in Bill C-288. It is available in regions that comprise approximately 14% of the provincial population and has an actual take-up rate of roughly 7% of total graduates.

The higher estimate of $600 million is based on a model developed by Finance Canada. It assumes that the tax credit would be available in regions of the country that were originally designated under the Regional Development Incentives Act in 1974, including urban centres such as Winnipeg and Halifax, comprising closer to 28% of the national population. It also assumes a take-up rate that would be closer to 20% of annual graduates.

Relying on data from Statistics Canada, I have also prepared an objective assessment of costs using sub-provincial census and labour market data. This analysis generally corroborates the low and high-cost estimates for the proposed tax credit, depending on the size and the number of the regions, as well as the take-up rate among new graduates.

ln general, the data suggest that the larger the coverage of the designated regions, the greater the take-up rate among new graduates and the higher the cost of the tax credit. The bottom line is that both estimates appear reasonable given their respective assumptions. ln effect, I conclude that the question posed by the committee is not really a costing issue, but rather a policy issue that is best left to you for further deliberation.

As committee members are aware, the proposed legislation would use the statutory authority of the Regional Development Incentives Act to establish designated regions. While there are regions that were designated at the time the act was brought into force in 1974, these expired in the mid-1980s.

Given the sensitivity of the tax credit's estimated cost to the size and number of the designated regions, members may wish to further refine this proposal to determine how many regions should be designated, and are these regions intended to cover an eighth of the population, as in the $180 million estimate, or a third of the population, as in the $600 million estimate? Members should also consider whether designated areas should include urban areas. Finally, there is the issue of prescriptive selection criteria for designated regions, such as the unemployment rate or some other factor.

After this additional policy work is completed, I am certain that I could calculate a more precise estimate of the potential forgone revenues that would arise as a result of this tax credit.

Thank you for the opportunity to make an opening statement. I look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

I'll call the meeting to order. I would ask that any conversations be taken outside the room.

We are continuing our discussion of Bill C-288.

We have before us for the next hour, from the Library of Parliament, the Parliamentary Budget Officer. Welcome back to the committee, Mr. Page.

With Mr. Page are Mr. Khan, the assistant parliamentary budget officer; and Mr. Jacques, the financial advisor on expenditure and revenue analysis. Thank you all for being with us today.

Mr. Page, I understand you have an opening statement with respect to your report on this bill, so we will ask you to present your opening statement. Thank you.

[Lysiane Boucher, Coordinator, Federal and International Affairs, Fédération étudiante universitaire du Québec]

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen. First of all, allow me to express my thanks for this opportunity to take part in your work on Bill C-288.

My name is Lysiane Boucher, and I am the coordinator, Federal and International Affairs, for the FEUQ, or Fédération étudiante universitaire du Québec. Mathias Boulianne, our policy assistant, is with me today.

The FEUQ represents more than 16 member associations. Today we are speaking for more than 125 000 university students in Quebec, almost half of whom are in the regions. Twenty years after this organization was first created, we continue to defend the rights and interests of university students before, during and after their studies through our interaction with the appropriate government and educational authorities.

The exodus of young people from the regions is a very real problem, the effects of which are deeply felt. Our member associations see students leaving to study in major urban centres, but not often returning there to live, for a variety of reasons. For example, the perception of greater job potential, relationships that have built over time, and so on. Migration to the urban centres is very much a reality. The effects of negative migration and prospects for population growth are now being felt. An example from Quebec would be Abitibi-Témiscamingue, which had negative net migration and population prospects, in 2006 and 2007, of minus 12.9% over the longer term. Studies have shown that people's propensity to migrate to the urban centres or other regions increases with age and over time. The number of people returning is not adequate to completely compensate for that progressive migration. As a result, the net population of some regions has declined.

That is the reality in Quebec, but also in the rest of Canada. At relatively comparable levels, all the provinces are experiencing an aging population, decreased birthrates and youth out-migration to the larger urban centres. Some examples of that would be the maritime provinces or northern Ontario.

Bill C-288, which is now at second reading, is an excellent way of encouraging new graduates to go and live in the designated regions, in order to slow the youth exodus while at the same time fostering economic development in those regions. Some might say that this is only a stopgap measure. However, this incentive should be seen as an immediate solution in terms of lifting barriers to student mobility—one which, in particular, will complement regional revitalization measures. When they are fresh out of school, young graduates or couples don't necessarily have the money to pay back their student debts or purchase a home, for example. It should be noted that students in the regions generally have higher debt levels, because of the fact that they are required to be far more mobile in order to continue their studies. This tax credit would lower their tax burden, once graduates had established themselves in a region, enabling them to invest directly in the new life they are beginning.

Once the tax credit is exhausted, the graduates will finally be established and more comfortable financially, having the assurance of a stable salary. The idea of spreading the tax credit over three years is excellent, as it will encourage people to stay. After three years spent in a region, graduates are far more likely to establish themselves there—for example, by starting a family, buying their first home or setting up their own business—all of which serve to anchor them to the community.

In Quebec, a similar form of tax credit is already in place. It is yielding concrete, positive and—most importantly—irrefutable results. In the first year of operation, 4,578 students or new graduates returned to work in the regions. And, four years later, in 2007, 15,991 new graduates went back to the regions. So, every year, more and more new graduates are contributing to the revitalization of a designated resource region, by stimulating the local economy and providing skilled labour.

Certainly, in times of economic crisis, where political action is focused on economic recovery plans, it may seem ambitious to propose depriving the government of tax revenues. Most of the steps taken recently are intended to stimulate the economy by creating new jobs. But what happens if no potential candidate is interested in taking the position because of its geographic location? As a means of keeping young people in the regions, stopping the demographic hemorrhaging and fostering the development of processing industries, by giving entrepreneurs the ability to access the skilled labour they require, this investment is relatively small—not to mention the fact that the economic stimulus plan focuses on short-term measures.

The problem of the youth exodus can be seen in connection with the current economic crisis. However, this was an issue long before the crisis emerged and it probably will not diminish over time, if we don't act now. And, it is important to remember that Quebec's society will, sooner or later, be confronted with the obvious problem of an aging population. Now is the time to take action through legislation that will provide a stable, long-term solution to the problem of moving the necessary skilled labour to the regions.

The days when resource regions could rely on natural resource extraction are gone. Development of the processing sector and an ongoing concern for innovation are an absolute must in order to stimulate regional economies. Only with skilled labour can this challenge be met. And the first step is to attract and retain new graduates.

In a word, the FEUQ has always felt strongly about regional development, as we see it as a necessary ingredient for a prosperous Canadian economy. We believe that it is by responding to the youth exodus that we will be in a position to meet this societal goal. The introduction of skilled labour, thereby revitalizing the targeted regions at multiple levels, will serve to guarantee our long-term economic prosperity and competitiveness.

For all these reasons, the FEUQ is strongly recommending that Bill C-288 be passed. Thank you very much.

[Johanne Deschamps, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you very much.

First of all, I would like to thank committee members for inviting me to appear today to discuss Bill C-288, which is intended to create a tax credit for new graduates working in remote areas.

The main objective of the bill is to attract young graduates to remote areas. It is also intended to mitigate two problems affecting these regions—an exodus of young people and a serious labour shortage. It is important to encourage young graduates to move to the regions to take up their professional activities and ensure, in the best interest of the regions, that they are able to recruit skilled workers.

As mentioned, the youth exodus is a growing problem in terms of the economic vitality of regions located some distance from the major urban centres. They need the contribution of young graduates to stimulate regional development and increase their capacity for innovation. There is no doubt that providing a $3,000 annual tax credit, up to a maximum of $8,000 over a three-year period, to new graduates working in the regions would help to revive the local economy and meet labour requirements.

Many students leave their home region to pursue post-secondary studies in the major urban centres. Young people who leave their regions to study in these centres establish ties there, develop friendships and build networks. It is thus more likely that, when they complete their studies, they will have many more reasons and opportunities to establish themselves in their new environment, as opposed to returning to their home area. According to Statistics Canada, people with the highest educational attainment generally migrate to the major urban centres. The tax credit proposed under Bill C-288 would give young graduates an incentive to go back to the regions and establish themselves there.

The youth exodus has negative consequences both socially and economically. There is an acceleration of population aging and a decrease in average educational attainment among those who remain, which undermines the capacity for innovation. The most remote regions are those losing the most people. Often, they depend on a particular type of industry—the so-called single industry regions. Often there is little room for skilled jobs in the traditional economic base of these regions, which tends to be extraction or primary processing of natural resources. The time when resource regions could rely solely, for their prosperity, on the extraction of natural resources intended to be processed elsewhere, has come and gone. In order for the regions to develop, they must make the technology shift and further develop their processing industry.

My riding of Laurentides—Labelle clearly illustrates the disparity between a remote region and one close to an urban centre, as well as the impact of a resource crisis in a single-industry region. I am referring here to the crisis in the forest industry. The most southerly part of the Laurentians region has, for some years, seen an increase in its population because of quite significant interregional migration, primarily from Montreal and Laval. However, in the RCM of Antoine-Labelle, which includes the municipalities north of the Municipality of Labelle, the population is experiencing considerable decline. The forest industry crisis has hit that RCM with full force. Although its decreased population cannot be attributed to the forest industry crisis alone, many young people have had to leave the area due to inadequate job opportunities following the closure of forest companies and related businesses.

Of the 17 forestry companies in my riding, 14 have been forced to shut down their operations. More than 1,250 jobs have been lost. Heavy machinery operators, engineers, technicians and truckers are the ones most affected by these job losses. The people with the most education, with skills or with special expertise—engineers, for example—have been forced to leave this beautiful region in order to seek employment in their field elsewhere.

As for the Government of Quebec, it believes that diversifying the economies of these regions will mean developing new business activity in other areas.

This is a significant brake on development of secondary processing activities and high-tech industries in the region.

In all the studies that have been done, many entrepreneurs have said that they could only keep their business operating in the region if they were willing not to expand. As long as the business remains small, they can handle anything requiring professional or technical expertise. However, if the business expands, they have no choice but to hire skilled personnel. The problem associated with finding that kind of personnel in their region could mean they might have to move their business to urban centres, where they would be more likely to find skilled labour.

Bill C-288 would be a beneficial tax measure for all eligible young Canadian graduates. The youth exodus phenomenon does not only affect Quebec. All across Canada, economic activity has gradually been moving from the so-called rural areas to the major urban centres. Some provinces, including Quebec, Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Manitoba, have developed a tax credit for young graduates. The government of Quebec created its own such tax credit in 2003. It was subsequently amended and now resembles the one proposed in the bill I am discussing with you today.

Many young graduates have taken advantage of this tax credit and, according to the most recent available statistics, more than 16,000 people used it in 2007. In the Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean region alone, as of April 2009, 22,074 individuals had claimed it since it was first introduced. So, the tax credit is enjoying tremendous success. In Saskatchewan, the government introduced a tax credit to encourage graduates with a post-secondary degree to remain in the province. The provincial government also created a tax exemption of up to $20,000 for graduates, depending on their educational level.

Bill C-288 has received support from many different groups and generations across Quebec, including the Fédération étudiante collégiale du Québec, or FECQ, and the Fédération étudiante universitaire du Québec, or FEUQ, which represent 40,000 and 125,000 students, respectively, all across Quebec. The FADOQ network, with 255,000 members, as well as the Fédération québécoise des municipalités, representing 972 municipalities across Quebec, have voiced their full support for this bill. In addition, the bill is supported by many RCMs, chambers of commerce and Carrefours Jeunesse.

When we toured Quebec to promote Bill C-288, people expressed strong support for this bill. The youth exodus is only too real for the people of Abitibi-Témiscamingue, Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean, the North Shore, Gaspésie, the Magdalen Islands, the Lower St. Lawrence region and northern Quebec.

According to the reference scenario used by the Institut de la Statistique du Québec in its most recent publication on population prospects from 2006 to 2031, there could be slightly negative growth by the end of that timeframe, one of the factors behind the decline being higher levels of regional migration in the later years.

The federal tax credit for young graduates could prove to be an effective means of countering too significant a population decline in the regions. The challenge today is to keep our young people in the regions and encourage others to establish themselves there.

I am therefore calling on the finance committee to help the regions of Quebec and Canada and support our young people. We must put a stop to population decline and the youth exodus, which are far more significant in the regions than in the urban centres.

What is at stake here, gentlemen, is the future of our young people and our regions.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

I declare the 65th meeting of the Standing Committee on Finance called to order.

Our order of the day, pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, May 27, 2009, is Bill C-288, an act to amend the Income Tax Act--tax credit for new graduates working in designated regions.

Colleagues, we have two panels today of an hour each. In the first panel we're very pleased to have our colleague, Madame Deschamps.

Welcome to the Committee.

Ms. Deschamps is the member of Parliament for Laurentides—Labelle. She is accompanied by Mr. Jean-David Beaulieu, a researcher for the Bloc Québécois.

I would also like to welcome Ms. Lysiane Boucher and Mr. Mathias Boulianne from the Fédération étudiante universitaire du Québec.

Welcome to the committee.

We will give each of you time for opening statements. You have an hour for questions and opening statements.

We'll start with Madame Deschamps for your opening statement. You may proceed at any time.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

I have something to say. When the subcommittee met, it completely disregarded Bill C-290.

Since the committee was not scheduled to meet the week of November 16 to 20, I move that we meet on November 17 to consider Bill C-290, which, like Bill C-288, seeks to amend the Income Tax Act. By the way, that bill was referred to us last week.

Since we do not have anything that week and given the fact that these workers have lost money because of their pension plan, I move that we hear from them that week. It would give us an opportunity to expedite our work, even after the holidays.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Page, for being here today.

Mr. Khan, it's nice to see you again. You've been in my office lately.

Before I get to your report, I have a question regarding Bill C-288, which is a private member's bill that has been sent to this committee. I've asked your office to do a review of its financial issues. I'd like to know how much it's going to cost us if it's implemented. And what type of timeframe do you need to get that work done? I know we've talked about that.

Income Tax Act

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

The House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division of the motion at second reading stage of Bill C-288 under private members' business.

The House resumed from May 15 consideration of the motion that Bill C-288, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act (tax credit for new graduates working in designated regions), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

I think that a couple of hundred of votes should do it.

In Saskatoon people talked about the need for this very effort, that regional economic development hinged upon their ability to retain and attract graduates and young people. Young people have been leaving. Those human resources are critical to the development of Saskatoon and Saskatchewan in general and yet their representative today was speaking against such an effort.

This also speaks to a fundamental philosophy that seems wrong with the government and needs to be altered with respect to resources in general. We are talking about natural resources as well as the human resources in our young people who go through the training programs. The bill attempts to address the disastrous loss of human capital we have seen in many parts of rural Canada.

I come from northwestern British Columbia. While we have exported minerals, forestry products and fish, we have also exported a great deal of our young talent. We on the New Democrat side support the bill. We believe this could help alleviate some of the strains within our community. This is important in a national context as well simply because failing to attract this young raw talent back to our regions, will inhibit the ability of the country to bounce back from this recession. That is getting more doubtful today as the Prime Minister puts on his rosy glasses. The IMF and the Parliamentary Budget Officer are forced to correct him time and again.

The recession seems to be deepening and the only way out is to have a national vision. The only way out is to have a strategy and a plan. We must encourage the redevelopment of our rural communities. We have been losing people and talent. It affects things in a cyclical way. The more difficult it is to attract young professionals to a community, the more difficult it is to attract anyone to that community, and the more difficult it is to have the services to give Canadians the quality of life they have come to expect.

We hope that the bill can address the professional shortages in particular. We are talking about the doctors, the nurses and engineers who can help stimulate an economy. When the tipping point has already been crossed it is very difficult to attract other nurses, doctors, engineers and architects into the community when there is a shortage. A doctor may not come if that doctor is going to be the only doctor on call. If two or three doctors are already there, it is much easier for a small town to attract another doctor or nurse. Architects, artists and all the other professionals do not come if the pool is too small. We have seen the trend over the past 20 years. Some of it is partly due to demographic trends. However, it is also because of a lack of vision on the part of the federal and provincial governments. It affects the urban and rural landscapes of this country.

Today I was pleased to welcome a group from my community of Thornhill. Members of the junior secondary band were here on a triumphant tour. The band had just won a bunch of gold medals at a national competition. These young people are in Ottawa for the first time. They are celebrating in our capital. They have such bright young faces and so much talent to exhibit over their lives. However, after they graduate from college, in the trades, or university, what will our ability be in northwestern British Columbia, or any part of rural Canada, to attract that talent back? How can we make it more welcome for them? Bill C-288 seems to help address that, to at least take some steps toward helping those who are interested in living in rural parts of Canada.

The history of this country has been driven by an idea that we would expand into some of the more remote and rural regions in order to access the incredible wealth in resources. Much of that was done in an ad hoc way, but there was always an understanding that the resources were common property, that the resources were of a collective good that Canadians were endowed with.

Time and time again we have seen natural resource policies from the government which shut down communities. We have certainly seen it across British Columbia in the forestry sector. It is absolutely devastating. Fifty-four mills have closed and 28,000 people have lost their jobs in a five year period.

Then when someone brings forward a bill to counteract that and make it more attractive for graduates to get back into those communities to start up their own businesses and have a professional career, we hear Conservative members say that we do not need that either. They will strip down our basic industries, and then when we suggest ideas that could attract professionals back to those communities, the Conservatives say that they are too busy for that. They are occupying their time with free trade deals with Colombia to which they are not applying any kind of intelligence whatsoever. If there were a better form of investment than this, I would ask the government to make that claim and stand on it.

The government has claimed that attracting our young people to rural parts of the country is just too expensive to do. Yet the Conservatives can find $1.3 billion every year to dump into the tar sands, into companies that make hundreds of millions of dollars especially in times when oil was $140 a barrel. They did not know what to do with the money, and the problem was it was overheated and the government was absolutely complacent with the previous regime and it continued to overheat.

That was considered a good choice and is still considered a good choice by the government. We see that as fundamentally flawed. The government should use that $1.4 billion to help graduates move into rural parts of Canada. It should stop these tax handouts to companies that do not need them, and put that money in places where it would actually make sense to help alleviate the strains that are happening within rural Canada.

The second point to this speaks to another vision that seems to be absent, which is what a restoration of the economy would look like. South of border we see quite an inspirational movement toward a green economy, toward making the recovery and the investments that are happening on behalf of the taxpayers lead to a betterment of and a creation of a sustainable economy.

The government says it is agnostic and it will just step back and let the invisible hand do its nefarious work. Yet time and again young professionals and new companies say that the investment environment here in Canada for green and new sustainable technologies pales in comparison to that in the United States, Europe and Australia.

The money will flow to the places that actually create the environment to attract the young professionals that we are talking about in this bill. The government cannot simply wash its hands of this and say that it is going to dump a bunch of money into the oil sands but do nothing on wind energy, which is running out in two months' time. Wind companies have been petitioning the government for months now, asking what it is doing to catch the shortfall.

Canadians are interested. Companies are being set up. People have made the investments. They are ready to create those jobs, and now the government is saying that the subsidy, which is one-quarter of the one in the U.S., already tipped out of scale, is just going to die out completely.

To young folks who are coming out of the colleges, universities and the trades right now, it is perplexing to encounter a government with a policy and a budget that was perfectly designed for 1950. It would have been an excellent set of numbers and initiatives from a government two generations ago, but not for a government looking to the future, to a new economy for the graduates of today.

We get these mixed signals all the time. And we wonder why young people do not get more involved, why the voting rates are so low, and why they do not stand for office as frequently as they should. I have talked to those young people. I know that even my Conservative colleagues sneak into a school from time to time, or encounter a young person, by accident, perhaps. The Conservatives need to ask the young people what they need. The things needed in rural Canada are initiatives that allow young people to feel some sense of hope of returning to their communities and reinvesting in those communities, creating the kind of economy and communities that we want to see for the future.

The Conservatives have to get out of the dark ages. Those guys have to turn around and support initiatives that are proactive and progressive. They should at long last leave the ideology behind and support the bill. Let us get on with attracting young people back to rural Canada.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my Bloc Québécois colleague's passion for his family, his region and all of Quebec is remarkable. It is wonderful.

With respect to Bill C-288, I was quite intrigued to hear the speech of the Conservative Party member from Saskatchewan, whose region I recently visited upon invitation. We held forums on community economic development. It was quite ironic because the member from Saskatchewan narrowly beat out a great person I know, Nettie Wiebe, who will win it next time.