Finance Committee on Oct. 26th, 2006

[John Beaucage]

Yes, it is. I guess one of the things we're looking at is to create more initiative on the part of first nations to solve their own problems. We're looking at years and years of Indian Affairs and CMHC providing housing to first nations, and we know it doesn't work. Our proposal is give us the tools and the environment so we can do it ourselves, and then get out of the way.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Stapleton, the employment tax credit that the government put in place this year will certainly help low-income earning families. It will help families right across the board in the form of savings in personal income taxes. Your group has to be positive on that move.

[John Stapleton]

We're mostly in favour of refundable credits, especially for people who are making minimum wage, can barely make ends meet, and are trying to support their families. We think more money should go through the working income tax benefit. We're very pleased to see that Mr. Flaherty has brought that into his budget and will hopefully be rolling it out to the provinces very soon.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

Thank you, sir.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Thank you very much, Mr. Stapleton and Mr. Del Mastro.

Mr. Savage.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to all the panellists who've come today.

I want to talk to Mr. Miner. You have experience at both the university level in Canada and the college polytechnic level. I guess it's pretty obvious that colleges don't get their share of research money. In Nova Scotia I had the opportunity to go to the College of Geographic Sciences, part of the Nova Scotia Community College network. They're doing some tremendous stuff, but they haven't had access to research.

You've laid out some pretty good ideas on research and innovation. The summary of it is that you strongly advocate that the federal government increase the budgets of federal research granting agencies, with requirements that funds be dedicated to stimulating applied research done by colleges, polytechnic institutes....

Can you tell me specifically what agencies you're talking about and what you think the total dollars might be?

[Dr. Rick Miner]

You're now looking at agencies like the Canada Foundation for Innovation, the Canada research chair program funding, NSERC, SSHRC, the Medical Research Council--those federal agencies that provide research. The difficulty is that most of the focus on that research is on basic research. We've done very well as a country in our basic research--in fact, we're very well recognized in the world--but what we have not been able to do very effectively is turn that knowledge into a commercial product. The difficulty we see is that while universities are very good at the basic research, they're not particularly good on the commercialization side. The colleges are not very good at the basic research side, but they're very good at the commercialization side.

So depending on what the objective is--and I think there's value in both objectives--that would drive your proportion. If you felt one-third of it should be commercialization, then give one-third to the college. If it were one-quarter, one-half, or whatever.... You need that continuum, and we're only halfway down the continuum.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

I appreciate that. I think there is a disparity between the money that goes into research and our ability to commercialize it. I would also say there's a disparity. We have done well in research. It has tended to go to U of T, McGill, McMaster, and UBC, which have the capacity. Smaller universities, even like St. Mary's, where you used to work, have not received as much either, and then there's the disparity with the colleges. So thank you.

You talked about the dedicated transfer and you put something in there that I agree with if we're going to do it, which is that there have to be conditions; there has to be accountability. We were in Quebec yesterday and that point of view was not well adhered to at all. In fact, what we heard was, give the dedicated transfer and then get the hell out of the way and let the province and/or the university determine what happens to the money.

I'd be interested in your thoughts on that. Do you still see a role for the federal government in research and perhaps student access issues--students who are unable to access post-secondary education, be it community college, upgrading, or university?

[Dr. Rick Miner]

I'll answer both of those very quickly. Accountability is a hallmark of the college system, so we have no trouble whatsoever being accountable ourselves, and we see no reason why the province shouldn't be accountable if there's transfer funding. There may be various ways of achieving that accountability, but we think it's part of the relationship.

I think the federal government has a broader role in PSE than it realizes. There are a whole bunch of mobility issues that are obviously federal issues; they're not provincial issues. Increasingly, there are access issues around skilled trades and development, which are federal issues. So I see a much broader role for the federal government in post-secondary education than it has taken to date.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Thank you, Mr. Savage, and Mr. Miner as well.

We continue now with three-minute rounds. Mr. Dykstra.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

One thing I want to point out, somewhat in response to Mr. McCallum's question, is that the National Anti-Poverty Association's 2005 study on the impact of the GST, on both lower-income and higher-income earners, showed that of all the GST collected in this country, lower-income earners pay 8% of it, whereas higher-income earners only pay 4%. So a cut in the GST has a significantly more positive impact on those earning a lot less than it does for those earning a lot more.

Further, Statistics Canada—and I've got the document here—showed that over 50% of lower-income earners spend more money than they make in a particular year, which means they're purchasing a lot more. Again, this feeds into the theory that they're paying more GST. So the purpose around the cut, because it's a regressive tax, was to ensure that those with lower income were actually going to benefit from something that was put forward.

Mr. Davis, I have one question. It's more on a personal basis than anything else, and I'd like to remove the politics from it, if I can. You don't support another cut in the GST on a personal basis, but you do support the elimination of the GST on the educational side. It makes me think that you're being somewhat selfish, on a personal basis, about where that money goes, versus all of the other people sitting at the table here.

[Bruce Davis]

No, let me be clear. The school board has no official position, and if we asked them, it would probably take us three days to come to a position, but we don't have—

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Actually, I've seen the increase in your administrative work costs, so I would imagine that would be the case.

[Bruce Davis]

Last night we cut those by $10 million to $14 million; it was very difficult. I know we can all joke about it, but it was very difficult.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

I'm not joking; I have no smile on my face.

[Bruce Davis]

On the question about the GST, the school board has benefited directly from the GST cut, as I explained. We have proposed a very targeted GST cut, but we are still benefiting from the broad-brush cut the government implemented. So I don't want to be churlish and say that we're not interested, because that cut has benefited the school board.

My personal view is different, because I understand that we need government revenues to pay for income supports and housing. So if the school board debated the issue, I would have to agree with whatever the school board decided. At this point, I don't have the luxury of leaning on whatever the school board decided, because it has no position.

I have a pretty strong personal view about how and when we should be taxing people, but I don't want to be churlish. The school board has benefited directly from your cut.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Thank you very much.

We'll continue now with Mr. McCallum, for three minutes, sir.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

I thought I had run out of time.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Well, sir, if you've run out of ideas, we can move on.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

I'll come up with something. No, I haven't run out of ideas.

Perhaps I'll go back to where I was before I asked my question, and you certainly didn't have an answer. That was this idea that if you have a strict interpretation of the Constitution, housing is provincial, and I guess that's probably true, but nevertheless, as the Liberal government, we did see a role for the federal government there.

So I'd like to ask your view on whether you support the idea that housing is essentially provincial and the federal government should get out. Presumably you don't, so how would you respond to that argument, whoever wishes to answer this?

[Col Rick Williams]

We obviously see an interesting mixed role—certainly, historically, with the joint funding of the affordable housing expansion in 2005 and CMHC's role as a funder and coordinator of support services. We also see it as being part of an essential service within a community.

So I would think that until such time as there is a full and complete separation of tax points and responsibilities, there certainly is a transitional role.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Mr. Miner, I know that we in Ottawa, in all parties--and in the provinces as well--are struggling with this matter of how to deal with credentials of immigrants. It will only become more important over time as our labour force increasingly is dependent on newcomers.

You seem to be saying--and I'd like you to explain a little bit more--that the colleges might have a particular advantage or ability to help out in this area. Could you explain that?