Evidence of meeting #22 for Finance in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was federal.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Massimo Pacetti Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
Yes, but then I could subtract the reduction in taxes and the reduction in GST. There has to be some kind of estimate you made.
Director, Economic Analysis and Forecasting Division, Economic and Fiscal Policy Branch, Department of Finance
The GST measure was included in the forecast of October, and we'll let the minister—
Liberal
Liberal
Massimo Pacetti Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
If the Bloc wants to ask questions, you can give it to them.
Liberal
Massimo Pacetti Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
For the budget, I understand this fund has been separated; it's just been announced. Are you aware of this, or that the communities trust fund...?
General Director, Economic Development and Corporate Finance, Department of Finance
I've only seen a story on the wire service that an announcement may be made.
Liberal
Massimo Pacetti Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
Is that going to affect when the budget's going to be tabled? Do you have any idea of when that's going to happen?
Liberal
Massimo Pacetti Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
I'm sorry to ask this of the Department of Finance, but if you're telling me that we should be asking this in the immigration committee, then we'll have the immigration folks come over.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield
The time is gone, but we'll allow a response if there is an answer.
General Director, Economic Development and Corporate Finance, Department of Finance
Mr. Chair, the convention is that the Minister of Finance announces when a budget day will be, and we find out at the same time the announcement is made.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield
That's okay. He's on a learning curve.
We'll go to Mr. Wallace.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I'll be brief, and I will share my time with my colleague, Monsieur Petit.
I have one question about one of the items mentioned in the motion here, the Technology Partnership Canada fund, which I think is now defunct or has been redone to become what I would say is a more specific program with aerospace and defence initiatives. I want an answer whether I'm right or wrong about this. I think there were some issues with the transparency of TPC and how it was operated.
I did get one person come to my office to tell me a story about how a company that he worked for handled getting money and what not. It was a bit disturbing, but hearsay, so I'm not going to repeat it.
From a finance department point of view, what is the difference between the old TPC program and the new SADI program?
General Director, Economic Development and Corporate Finance, Department of Finance
Mr. Chair, the question is correct. There was a TPC program that no longer exists; its terms and conditions expired at the end of 2006. It was replaced by the strategic aerospace and defence initiative that the new government announced. That program is limited to aerospace and defence, as opposed to being more generally available, and its funding level was reduced accordingly.
General Director, Economic Development and Corporate Finance, Department of Finance
Yes, it's more specifically targeted at specific areas of industry.
Conservative
Conservative
Daniel Petit Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Thank you very much. My question is for Mr. Dunlop.
I want to be sure that I understand you correctly. You stated in your opening remarks that you were here to provide information, and nothing more. At least, that is what I understood. I am curious about one thing. I am from Quebec and for some time now, the federal government has been transferring funds to certain programs. I either heard about this in Ottawa or read about it in the Quebec press. You spoke of transfers to the province for program implementation, for instance, for immigration programs.
For starters, the federal government awarded $200 million, $120 million of which were spent. No one knows what became of the remaining $80 million.
Secondly, through equalization, Quebec received $466 million, funding that was not included in the province's budget. That money is gone.
Thirdly, with respect to manpower qualification, the federal government has shifted responsibility for labour force training to the provinces, which have set up single-window offices to deal with areas under shared jurisdiction.
I find this situation disturbing. First of all, how do you keep track of the funds allocated to the provinces and which, as a rule, should go to workers? There is something seriously wrong here. The provinces are taking these funds, but are not giving them to workers or directing them to existing programs, such as manpower qualification or manpower training, all because a network of single-window offices is now in place.
I am also curious about another thing. When we talk about employment insurance, we often talk about older workers. In the forestry sector—my son works in this sector for Kruger in Trois-Rivières—most workers are unionized. Collective agreements are in place and the youngest workers are laid off when a plant closes. The shop steward remains on the job, because he is protected by the collective agreement.
Furthermore, these persons are said to be older workers. Perhaps Mr. Dunlop could tell me how one defines an older worker. Young people start working at the plant at the age of 18 years and stay there anywhere from 25 to 30 years. By then, they are 43 or 48 years old. Is that person considered an older worker? What exactly do you mean by that? Are you talking about someone who is 60 or 65 years old? That is what I'm trying to get my head around.
Once you have determined who the older workers are, how do you ensure that the funding goes to them? I don't know how it works in Ontario, but in Quebec, the money that comes in is not necessarily used to help workers. I would like to know what oversight mechanisms the Department of Finance has in place.
General Director, Economic Development and Corporate Finance, Department of Finance
Mr. Chairman, I believe my colleague Yves Giroux is the person to answer these questions.
Director, Social Policy, Federal-Provincial Relations and Social Policy Branch, Department of Finance
You have asked several questions. On the positive side, the federal government provides transfer payments to provincial governments and generally allows them some flexibility in terms of allocating the funds to priority areas.
With respect to labour force training, older workers are one targeted group, along with others, for example, workers who have been unemployed for some time, new labour force entrants and new immigrants. How do we determine if the government is spending the money well in a particular sector? Pursuant to the transfer agreement, the provincial government undertakes to allocate the funds to labour force training, including training for persons with disabilities, new entrants, and so forth.
To my knowledge, there is no specific target as such for these categories of workers or individuals. Indeed, the funding is earmarked for labour force training in general, and this includes the agreement respecting criteria. Therefore, it is impossible to say for certain if older workers receive a specific share of the contributions. We trust that the Quebec government will spend the money on labour force training. As for whether a specific amount of money is earmarked for older workers, that is a question for the Quebec government to answer. I know that funding is allocated differently, according to the regions and their respective needs.
As for when a worker is considered to be an older, or senior worker, as a rule there is no set criteria, but unfortunately, after the age of 50, a worker is often considered to be an older worker. I haven't yet reached that milestone, but sometimes I feel quite old, especially when we are working on a budget to be tabled lord knows when.
You also spoke about immigration. That is a very unique case. There is a very special and very generous agreement in place between the federal government and the Government of Quebec respecting immigration. Transfers for immigration continue to increase, regardless of the number of immigrants who choose to settle in Quebec or where they are from. Worst case scenario, federal funding for immigration will remain constant. However, funding levels never decrease, but rather tend to increase steadily.
Recently, the newspapers reported that the Quebec government spent a considerable amount of its own money on immigration. The fact remains, however, that it also spends money that it receives from the federal government. It is very difficult to ascertain how much of its own money its spends over an above the federal funds it receives, given that the agreement was signed almost 20 years ago.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield
Thank you.
We were going to go to the question on the motion, but we have one more questioner.
Mr. McKay.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
This community trust that's just been announced—which you're reading off the wires just like we are—I take it would require a creation of a third-party entity in order to be able to receive any funds at all. Is that a reasonable assumption?