When it's fully running, $10 billion a year.
Evidence of meeting #28 for Finance in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was investment.
Evidence of meeting #28 for Finance in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was investment.
2:10 p.m.
Facilitator, B.C. Child Care Advocacy Forum
When it's fully running, $10 billion a year.
2:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
Ten billion dollars? Okay.
On the foreign aid front, how much is that going to cost to get to 0.7%?
2:10 p.m.
President, Results Canada
That would be $10 billion to $12 billion, depending on what the economy grows to.
2:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
So those are going to require some tax increases. Which taxes would you suggest we increase, Mr. Salmon?
2:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
It most certainly would. Which ones would you suggest? Would it be the GST that you're talking about here? A 1% increase would be approximately $10 billion, so we could just raise the GST to 8% and pay for both those programs.
You see, this is the challenge we face, and that's why I'm asking these questions. We need some specific suggestions and recommendations.
Mr. Goldberg.
2:10 p.m.
President, Results Canada
Just to start, to get to 0.7% we need about $700 million. We just had a surplus of $13 billion. That's the answer.
2:10 p.m.
Chairperson, First Call: BC Child and Youth Advocacy Coalition
The answer is yes, I would very strongly urge that you increase the GST, perhaps to 8% or 9%, to get the revenue that you need, on condition that you also continue and expand the credit for low income so that it doesn't have the disproportionate effects that Mrs. Ablonczy was raising.
2:10 p.m.
Conservative
2:10 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
Thank you for that neutral, non-partisan question, Mr. Chairman.
2:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
I don't like being put on the defensive, but we're here to discuss specifics, not vague generalities and ideologies that were preconceived before these meetings began.
I'm asking for numbers. That's what we're here to do.
Mr. McKay, it's your five minutes.
2:15 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My first question is to Dr. Winter, who I have to declare a conflict of interest with, because Alan and I have been friends for 30-plus years, more years than we care to admit.
You made the point very graphically that if Genome Canada doesn't get funding, your access to funding may in fact dry up, or at least part of your funding may dry up. What is the timeline in terms of a typical project? If you're not getting funding, how long does it take, effectively, for your projects to dry up?
2:15 p.m.
President, Genome British Columbia
Most of the large-scale projects are of an order of three to four years. That's from science through to application--so application in terms of, for example, a lung cancer project or something like that.
Some of the projects are ongoing, with a life of about a year and a half beyond this point, and some of the projects go to about 2008. That's the length of time that the longest project goes. Part of the issue, though, is not only that but the fact that, to attract very good people into places--for example, Dr. Tom Hudson just moved to Ontario to take over the cancer effort there--the sort of people who have come from the States and other places generally look well ahead in terms of funding. So if there is not a plan for ongoing sustainability, then within a fairly short time--I would say within a year to a year and a half--you'd probably lose some of the very good people.
2:15 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
So it's a huge signal to the research community that if funding doesn't come to Genome Canada, or funding doesn't come to CIHR, or funding doesn't come to the health or sciences research, or to the research chairs, or to the variety of foundations that we've funded over the last number of years, within a year or a year and a half some of the top researchers will be finding alternate places in which to do their work. Is that a fair comment?
2:15 p.m.
President, Genome British Columbia
I think the issue, John, is really the fact that there needs to be some signal, one way or another, of the plan of the government to invest in science and technology generally, and that plan needs to be well understood. Any particular government needs to be able to send that particular signal, and that signal is the one that will determine our place in any particular area of research.
October 3rd, 2006 / 2:15 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
Thank you, Alan.
To Blaise Salmon and to Michael Loo, first of all, thank you for the endorsement of Bill C-293. We're out of the House and into committee and hope to encourage the government members to see the light. We'll see.
I picked up on your point with respect to microcredit. I was kind of surprised to see, and in fact I'm shocked by, the reduction in microcredit funding. So I take it that it would be a specific recommendation of yours that it not only be restored to original levels, but actually enhanced. I see that as probably one of the leading tools for a reduction of poverty. Is that fair?
2:15 p.m.
President, Results Canada
Correct, and I think it's also part of the answer to the concern about aid, and about aid not working. This is a form of aid that actually is not pure charity; it's aid that becomes self-sustaining.
CIDA does not have an explanation as to why their microfinance funding has declined. It's actually more than I have in the brief; it was close to $100 million seven years ago.
2:15 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
I take it, Mr. Loo, you would adopt that answer.
With respect to the school funds, if in fact Canada picks up supplementing school tuition or whatever, how do you prevent the actual national government from simply, in other ways, replacing that money? In some terms, it has no effect.
2:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
Unfortunately, your time is up.
Mr. St-Cyr, you have five minutes.
2:15 p.m.
Bloc
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
First, I'm going to ask a few questions to Mr. Salmon, from Results Canada.
You are certainly aware that an act requesting that foreign aid be given according to the fight against poverty objective was passed in Parliament. This legislation was passed and only the government did not support it.
Despite everything, do you think that the government should conform to this legislation, respect the advice of the House and devote all its international development efforts to the fight against poverty?