Evidence of meeting #17 for Finance in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was research.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:25 p.m.
Bloc
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
Relying on the comments and submissions made by the groups who have testified, committee members will be making recommendations to the government as to what it should incorporate into its next budget.
If I've understood you correctly, you maintain that regardless of the approach taken, the government has a duty to invest sufficient funds to meet the minimum targets set out in the Kyoto Protocol. For a society such as yours, this should be a minimum objective.
5:25 p.m.
Professor, McGill University, Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
We'd like to go further than that and impress upon both the government and the public the importance of adapting to the situation. To some extent, climate change will happen regardless of the efforts we make to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. We can mitigate the effects of climate change, but we can't stop global warming. We recommend that the government examine the impact of and ways of adapting to global warming. Make no mistake, we'll have to adapt.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
I'm sorry, sir, but your time is up.
We'll continue with questions from Mr. Dykstra.
Please continue, sir.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll be as brief as I possibly can. My questions are to Ms. Kirk.
Your second recommendation is on extending the elimination of capital gains tax on donations of listed stock and environmentally sensitive lands. It's the third time in the last two days that we've had that request, so it's obviously going to be a common theme.
I wonder if you could just expand a little bit on your first recommendation, specifically the focus on budget measures to support federal investment in this sector.
5:30 p.m.
Vice-President, Public Policy and Government Relations, Imagine Canada
The sector feels that it's funded significantly through grants and contributions. It's highly appreciative of that funding. That funding instrument tends to be what we might call episodic. It tends to be for a very short term, for six- or twelve-month projects. Previously, grants and contributions included funding for some overhead--what we call the full cost-recovery formula. That's been eroded. This funding model leaves organizations receiving some funding for a couple of staff but perhaps nothing to cover their liability insurance obligations, rent, or a vehicle to support their staff.
We are looking for a strategy and some funding that would complement and supplement the grants and contributions regime. We see this in place in most provinces. The Wild Rose Foundation is a wonderful example. People rally around it. We see that in other provinces. Why wouldn't we in Canada celebrate and have a national foundation that could achieve some of the things that have been achieved through the provincial foundations?
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
Thank you.
One of my questions is for the MS Society, on expanding their one recommendation regarding the home care program agreements to address the needs of people who are chronically ill and/or disabled.
I wonder how you feel about that crossing over into provincial jurisdiction. Do you feel it should be, or in fact is, a federal responsibility?
5:30 p.m.
National Vice-President, Communications, Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada
We basically looked at it in terms of the model for the funding of medicare. The money is spent at the provincial level, but a significant portion of it comes from the federal government through transfers.
I think both the Romanow and Kirby reports on health care a couple of years ago commented on the fact that home care really is an essential part of medicare; it's an expansion. Home care is a very simple, cost-effective way of keeping people out of hospitals and other institutions. It's a bit of a mind shift that health care doesn't just take place in hospitals; it can also take place in the community and be done there very effectively. That's how we're thinking of it.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
So you see that more from a federal perspective as an overall view and taking that view and passing it on to the provinces, versus trying to implement the program itself.
5:30 p.m.
National Vice-President, Communications, Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada
I think we have some models in place that already work that way. I agree with you that the federal government doesn't need to be in the business of taking over home care, but it has a leadership role there.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
Thank you.
Thank you, committee members, for your participation.
Thank you to our presenters. We sincerely appreciate your time today and your contributions to our deliberations, and we wish you well.
We're adjourned until tomorrow at 10.