Finance Committee on Oct. 25th, 2006

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

So it's not something we're going to resolve today.

Mr. Pigeon, our time is limited, and I know my next question concerns a very complex issue.

Your first recommendation is to increase core funding for postsecondary education. Is that with or without conditions?

[Michel Pigeon]

I don't want to dictate to the government what it should do. I can only indicate the needs. In general, we see that, in overall terms, the universities are much less funded in Canada than in the United States. The Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada has documented this situation well. The public contribution to universities has increased by approximately 25% in the United States over the past 25 years, whereas, in Canada, that contribution has fallen by about 25%. So the gap between the United States and us is getting much bigger. The Quebec universities have supported the provincial government on this. One of the factors, and this has been since 1994, is that federal transfers have declined sharply. All kinds of figures are being circulated: $2.2 billion—$3.9 billion in current terms — and so on.

I'm simply saying that it is imperative that the universities be properly funded because the future of our country is at stake. The $2.2 billion figure is the amount necessary to restore funding to its 1994 level. For the province of Quebec, that represents $550 million.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Thank you, sir.

Mr. Paquette, you have six minutes.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

This is the first time I've heard that figure of $550 million since we started the consultations.

[Michel Pigeon]

That's a quarter of $2.2 billion.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Yes, but the figure usually referred to is $4.9 billion for the Canada Social Transfer, which includes postsecondary education, that is $1.2 billion for Quebec. You're saying that $550 million would go to Quebec. That's how I understand your figure.

[Michel Pigeon]

That's how it was explained to me, but I didn't go into the details.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

It wouldn't be bad if you sent us that portion through the clerk. As I told you, this is the first time I've seen this figure of $550 million. I've always been told $1.2 billion for Quebec, but that includes all social programs, not just postsecondary education.

This morning, a question was put to the FEUQ representative, and he was unable to tell us how that $1.2 billion would be shared. So I conclude that the $550 million represents the share of the transfer that goes to postsecondary education. In any case, it would be interesting to clarify that.

[Michel Pigeon]

I'll take note of your comment, and I'll send you the information. I'll study the question in greater detail.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

That said, we're in entire agreement on the principle, and I'm convinced that all my colleagues will support this request for which there is a consensus across Canada.

Mr. Saillant, again with respect to the figures, the $2 billion also represents the request you've made in recent years. There have nevertheless been investments of $800 million.

Having regard to the increase in needs and inflation, are we still at $2 billion, or should we subtract roughly $800 million from that over three years? I want to clarify the figures we're going to include in the report.

[François Saillant]

It's very clear that the $2 billion includes the amounts... The $800 million amount that was announced isn't a recurring amount. What we want is a recurring budget. Obviously, in the first years, we can include this $800 million amount. That's not a problem for us.

Our main message is that Canada is currently paying about $2 billion for housing, essentially to pay for housing built in the past. We're continuing to pay mortgage and operating expenses. We would like an equivalent amount to go directly to the construction of new social housing, for both the homeless and for people who are poorly housed.

The problem is that the $800 million amount for affordable housing can be used to fund all kinds of possible and impossible initiatives. We're anxious to see how the $800 million will be used, particularly in Quebec, where the current use of that amount is quite a concern for us.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

My next question is for Ms. Jean, because Thierry absolutely wants to ask Ms. Théberge a question.

This morning, we heard from the representative of Mouvement pour les arts et les lettres. I'm asking you a question I didn't have the time to ask him.

Are you concerned about the cuts announced two weeks ago concerning the $1 billion amount, including the 50% cut for museums and the funding plan for the Department of Foreign Affairs? Do you think that's a bad sign for the Conservative government's future response to your request that the budget allocated to the Canada Council be doubled?

[Anne-Marie Jean]

That troubles us, of course, because the arts sector is an under-funded sector in Canada. When these kinds of cuts are made to departments other than those directly concerned with the arts, it concerns us. That's why we're here. We're starting a campaign across Canada to meet with the MPs of all parties in order to demonstrate the obvious need that cultural organizations in Canada have for stable and sustainable funding. That's what's lacking.

Cuts have been made to programs intended for businesses that have to tour, for dance companies, for example, that travel a lot outside Canada. Cuts are being made to assistance programs, whereas these companies have already made and signed commitments. They can't go back on them. As a result, there are gaps in their budgets, and this contributes to underfunding and to this chronic problem. We didn't think this was a good way to manage in any economic sector in Canada whatever, but you'd think these ways of doing things are becoming systematic for arts and culture.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Thank you. Do I have a little time left?

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

You have two minutes left.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Pigeon, I want to go back to your request for funding for indirect research costs. It's said that these costs can represent as much as 40% of total costs. For Laval University, I'd like to have, not the exact figure, but an order of magnitude. We were told that it was currently 20 to 25% and that it could vary. I'd like to know this because sometimes we have trouble understanding this 40% figure.

[Michel Pigeon]

I'll give you that answer right away because I have the figure in mind.

For indirect costs, we're currently receiving $10 million from the federal government. That represents a little more than 20%, but it varies because the government grants a fixed amount, which it adjusts based on all grants given. It's in the order of $10 million for Laval University. In a budget of $430 million, it's not a negligible value.

I'll take the liberty of saying that we get the impression it's a gift. It's not a gift at all. Research entails indirect costs. If we only pay them in part, someone else has to pay them. We inevitably have to pay them out of the teaching budget.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Thank you very much.

I now turn the floor over to Mr. Blaney. You have six minutes.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

Thanks to the stakeholders from the various sectors, university, social and scientific.

Funding requests come from all quarters, and this is a challenge. These shouldn't necessarily be seen as expenses, but rather as an investment. In the last budget, an $800 million amount was allocated to social housing, and SCPI program aid was increased by $147 million. The program was extended until March 2007, that is until the next budget. I think the minister is aware of these needs and of others, particularly as regard the $20 and $30 million amounts.

My first question concerns a project dear to the Quebec City region and is for Ms. Théberge. I've had the opportunity to meet Ms. Théberge, and I've supported her in her efforts for the Boîte à science project for a number of months now. I'm pleased to see that our colleagues opposite also support this structural project. This is an example of a situation in which the federal government must intervene; it hasn't done so in the past 13 years. How do you see the impact from this project for the Quebec City region, and how can the Boîte à science project be presented as a budgetary investment for the Quebec City region?

[Manon Théberge]

Science centres are, by definition, investments in youth, in the role youth will play later, in the family and the influence it has on the role that young people play later on in life. They're also an investment for teachers, so they feel comfortable doing science at the primary and secondary levels throughout their lives, because they have trouble doing it. They also make it possible to let young people know what our businesses are doing and to encourage them to be inspired by them so that they too can one day create businesses and wealth.

The aproach to wealth isn't opposed to the approach to poverty. We need the former to address the latter, not to create poverty, but in order to establish social programs. I have to be careful of what I say, because I don't want to get into a dispute. I simply mean that it's like the left brain and the right brain. We need wealth creation so that our social programs are up to our values and needs. It's a response by one and the other. We have to address both.

A science centre is a place where you run, jump and play. You go there as a family, it's fun, you don't feel judged, you don't feel you're not good in science. You feel comfortable learning about everything that's being done and about opening up to wonderful things. It's a solution to problems we experience. For example, we know that one in two boys doesn't finish high school in five years and that one in five boys doesn't finish at all.

The demographic situation doesn't allow us to lose a single young person. And yet, we lose 20% of them. These young people who don't have high school diplomas won't be going to university. We can't afford that. We have to inspire young people and make an effort to prevent the social problem and needs from increasing. We have to be able to respond to those needs.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

You mentioned a $30 million project. What are the next stages in your project's implementation, according to your timetable?

[Manon Théberge]

In the next few weeks, we'll have to make sure we have the project office, that is obtain the funding required for a dedicated project staff. We have a business plan and an interpretation plan, but, to go further, we need resources. For the moment, we can't go much further. We can talk about it, but we can't act.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

What are your short-term financial needs?

[Manon Théberge]

We need $500,000 out of a $1 million budget for the project office.

I would recall that the project itself is a $30 million project, plus carrying costs. That amounts to $18 million for the federal government, that's 50%, plus $2 million a year over 10 years. So today we're making an overall request for $38 million.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

Thank you.

My second question is for the social stakeholders. It concerns the SCPI program. Governments are often prepared to fund infrastructure, but when it comes to bearing operating costs—perhaps it's the same thing in the university field—it's another story.

Is the SCPI program, in its current configuration, designed to fund infrastructure and ensure operation? Whether we like it or not, the stock is growing. I'd like to hear what you have to say on that subject.