Mr. Starmer, you wanted to get in on that one.
Evidence of meeting #31 for Finance in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was manitoba.
Evidence of meeting #31 for Finance in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was manitoba.
9:50 a.m.
Conservative
9:50 a.m.
Executive Director, Manitoba Chambers of Commerce
Yes. We concur with Jeff. In fact, with the Manitoba Chambers, we've been in discussions with the provincial government to try to revamp the apprenticeship program.
There are things that get in the way. Some of the unions have a particular interest in seeing that their existence is perpetuated. We have problems with some of those types of groups that don't want to change, so we feel there needs to be some understanding on the part of the provincial government and the independent apprenticeship board that we have to modernize our processes and free up more apprentices--and also have the understanding that it's a cost of business when you take on an apprentice. That's not necessarily always recognized.
9:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
Merci, monsieur.
We will continue with Madam Wasylycia-Leis and go back to Mr. St-Cyr for the rest of his time.
You have seven minutes.
October 6th, 2006 / 9:55 a.m.
NDP
Judy Wasylycia-Leis NDP Winnipeg North, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks to all of you for coming to Portage and giving us a new venue for holding these hearings in Manitoba.
I think this concerns everyone and I have to ask about it. I think this is about hard choices.
I listened to Trevor, and it's something we've heard from chambers right across the country. You say we've got room for both the GST tax cut and personal income tax cuts and all of these other cuts for the corporate sector, yet I don't think we probably disagree with what our universities and colleges are saying. You also have publicly called for federal dollars for the floodway, expansion opportunities for the Public Health Agency, support for the Manitoba gateway strategy, and support for the Canadian Museum for Human Rights.
You can't have it both ways. Are you prepared to put tax cuts on hold to do some of these important items that will actually build a more competitive environment?
9:55 a.m.
Chairman, Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce
I think the key issue is that the tax cuts and those other initiatives are not mutually exclusive. It's our opinion, and I think historical evidence will show, that the key to having the money to fund all those other priorities is to have a growing economy, and that you can only have that when people feel the investment climate is one in which their efforts will be rewarded.
Tax cuts generally have increased revenues that governments have taken in over time. If you look at governments across Canada or governments across the United States, whether it's at the federal or the state level, governments today are taking in far more revenue than they ever have in the past, to the credit--
9:55 a.m.
NDP
Judy Wasylycia-Leis NDP Winnipeg North, MB
Yes, but the problem is that a lot of the money that goes to corporations for taxes doesn't come back by way of investment in this country. Even Mr. Drummond has said this.
Let me go to you, Mr. Starmer. Your paper is excellent. You go into this wonderful strategy about jobs, and you also agree, I think, that there has to be some sort of cost-benefit analysis of tax breaks. Yet your recommendations are fairly simplistic, saying 20% across the board for a corporate tax rate.
How do you justify that in the face of what's been happening?
9:55 a.m.
Executive Director, Manitoba Chambers of Commerce
You know, your question is very similar to that of a gentleman who talked to us five or six years ago--Paul Martin. As finance minister, he asked exactly the same question that you've put.
Our answer at that time--
9:55 a.m.
NDP
9:55 a.m.
Executive Director, Manitoba Chambers of Commerce
No, no, at that point in time he wasn't going that route particularly; the environment changed, as you know.
At any rate, it's a matter of balance.
9:55 a.m.
NDP
9:55 a.m.
Executive Director, Manitoba Chambers of Commerce
What we're saying is that where you have a requirement such as we have, which at the moment is with skills, you have to look at the issue of what comes first and how to prioritize. If your infrastructure of universities is collapsing around your head, then you're not going to have good skills down the road. We're building not just for today; we're also building for tomorrow.
9:55 a.m.
NDP
Judy Wasylycia-Leis NDP Winnipeg North, MB
But that's my point. If education is the key to our future, and you have crumbling infrastructure and inadequate access for aboriginal people, then surely that's your first priority.
I want to ask the university and college representatives, how do we make this case to the government? The Liberal government didn't do it. When it comes to money, we're down to single digits in terms of the federal government's share in education. How do we convince this government, a Conservative government, to have a direct transfer and an increased transfer?
Jeff.
9:55 a.m.
President, Red River College
I would start by demonstrating the government's economic return from investment in education. We as a college did a recent study with a consultant, using a methodology that's been tested across North America, demonstrating that the increased income of individuals who have education, whether it be college or university, easily pays back the investments that governments make in the form of increased income and the associated taxes. The number that we were able to demonstrate was over $1 billion in increased income, through Red River College in Manitoba, as a result of the increased wages and the taxes they subsequently paid.
So I would look at it from the perspective of both the economic and social returns for individuals who have education--they're healthier, and all those other pieces.
10 a.m.
President and Vice-Chancellor, University of Manitoba
I'd like to go back to my longer brief, where I make reference to that issue. I'll read it to you:
During the recent federal election, the Conservative platform contained a commitment to “remove postsecondary education funding from the Canada Social Transfer and create an independent Canada Education and Training Transfer to ensure that there is dedicated funding for postsecondary education and training.”
Our Prime Minister has been good about keeping his word, and I would like to see that continued through the dedicated transfer. I think it is in Canada's interest to do this.
It is my personal conviction that every provincial politician and every federal politician ought to visit China, ought to visit India, to see what is happening to post-secondary education there. There isn't national awareness of how far we're going to be left behind unless the current situation is rectified.
10 a.m.
NDP
Judy Wasylycia-Leis NDP Winnipeg North, MB
Right. And I don't think you can actually eliminate the debt, as the Conservatives want, bring in big tax cuts, as Jim Flaherty says he wants, and still invest in post-secondary education, as you want.
So what are the choices, Lloyd, or Louis, or even Lorne, since you also have recommendations for spending? If you have a hard choice between, as the chamber says, tax cuts, debt reduction, and government spending cuts versus investing in things like education and infrastructure, what is it?
10 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Brian Pallister
Thank you, Ms. Szathmáry.
We will continue with Mr. St-Cyr. I appreciate Mr. St-Cyr's cooperation enormously. Since we are having technical problems, we will continue in English.
We hope we can solve these technical problems for a second panel's enjoyment of Mr. St-Cyr's lovely language.
We'll continue now with Mr. St-Cyr.
10 a.m.
Bloc
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
Thank you, Chair.
I'll start from scratch, just to make sure you understand my point and my question. It's for all the representatives of universities.
We had a lot of colleges, universities, and student unions come before us, and the recurring recommendation was to raise the education transfer--in fact, up to where it was before the cuts in 1995, and taking into account the inflation and the growth of the student population, which was getting us up to $4.9 billion per year. That was almost everywhere, in all provinces, Quebec and outside.
When I look at your brief, there's no such number. There's not even the word “raising”, in terms of the money transferred for education. You just talk about creating a dedicated transfer. Right now, we have an amount of money that is given for both social programs and education. To say our recommendation is just to put in a line doesn't cost a lot. That's probably fine for Conservatives, but it doesn't put any new money into the education system.
On the other hand, in your brief you go into detail on where the money should go. In my opinion, it's not our role as federal MPs to do that. This is a provincial jurisdiction.
Some of you just talk about renewed infrastructure and human capital. Once again, I think it's a very nice thing, but it should be up to the provinces and the colleges and universities to decide what they will do with this money.
Others go very far, to put in place or improve a learning program for college. I really don't see why the federal government should go that way--funds to improve installation and modernization of equipment, and stuff like that.
Don't you think it would be preferable to ask this committee to just raise the transfer to the provinces for education, and then do your lobbying with your province?
10:05 a.m.
President, Red River College
I think the federal government should be interested in issues of national standards associated with education because of the potential for labour mobility. I don't think we would agree that there should be a complete retrenchment of interest on the part of the federal government in how those dollars are spent, recognizing that this does need to be negotiated with the province.
But the point on the direct transfer is that you can then define exactly what is going to post-secondary education. We are confronted by the gaping maw of health care that we constantly have to be competing against. Knowing how much of that dollar from the federal government is intended to go to post-secondary education would be a good start. Certainly increasing those dollars back to the levels of investment we saw in the 1990s would be the next step.
10:05 a.m.
President and Vice-Chancellor, University of Winnipeg
I'd like to provide just one historical perspective and a couple of quick thoughts.
First, as someone involved in the negotiations in 1995 on the Canada social transfer, I think we should understand one thing. We talk about restoring the transfer, and in fact it was restored, because the major universities, the four or five big universities, at that time lobbied very hard that the money go into research and innovation, CFI and technology. That's where the money went, and it was the lobby of the universities that asked for it.
Hopefully, the CST was to have a merged, blended form. Clearly the money was cut back to deal with the deficit issue, but the question is, how do you rebuild it? My view, which I've expressed twice now, is that if it is to be dedicated, it should be dedicated to those areas in which the federal government has clear responsibilities, such as aboriginal education, where there is a clear jurisdictional issue, and I think you can also begin to provide it in other areas where there is clear federal responsibility.
On housing--this is where I'll make one other point--I think members of the committee would be interested to know of some research that I did a few years ago, where, if you looked at what happened in this country after the Second World War, when a depression generation, which didn't have two nickels to rub together, came back as veterans--over a million and a half Canadians came back--there were two federal programs, one on post-secondary education and one on housing, and we created a middle class in this country as a result. That was the basis of our economic changeover from a depression country to a middle-class country. Those were two national programs closely integrated with the provinces and municipalities. It wasn't one on. But you can go into any city in the country and see post-war housing that was provided, which gave people ownership. It was turned over to them and they became the middle class. And it was the same thing with education.
You gave people a stake in their country--that was all you were doing--and I think that's what we have to look at now. I favour dedication, but with clear targets, meeting federal responsibilities.
10:05 a.m.
Conservative
10:05 a.m.
Liberal
Massimo Pacetti Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
Last year we were in Manitoba, and Portage la Prairie showed us some excellent hospitality. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, witnesses. Good presentations are always interesting.
Mr. Starmer, I want to understand you so I don't misinterpret what you were saying. You don't want us to concentrate on productivity? Can you clear that up? It makes no sense, especially in light of what other witnesses are saying.
10:05 a.m.
Executive Director, Manitoba Chambers of Commerce
I'm saying that we've talked to all the economists from the banks, and their sense is that Canada's productivity is going down the tube as fast as a speeding train. They call it a crisis in productivity. My point is that we shouldn't focus totally on productivity, because there are so many variables that make it up. So instead of looking at productivity with tunnel vision, we ought to consider other issues at the same time.
10:05 a.m.
Liberal
Massimo Pacetti Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
I think it's a question of how we interpret what productivity is. If we don't concentrate on productivity, then it looks like we want the whole thing to go down the drain. I just don't understand it.
That's why we're here. We want to increase productivity, and one of the best-known ways to do it is by education.