Finance Committee on Feb. 27th, 2008

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Yes, Mr. Chairman, and then we can do it very quickly afterwards.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Okay.

Mr. Wallace.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Am I before Mr. Martin?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Yes, go very quickly, though.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

I asked you earlier about the length of time, and you said you could qualify for up to the $8,000, but it might take you a couple of years to get there. But in the actual definitions in your bill, which is all I have to go on, it talks about the base period meaning the first 52 weeks of the aggregate of all periods, each of which the period of the individuals.... So you're saying that they have to work full-time for 52 weeks each year?

To me, I read--and I could be reading it wrong--that they work for the first year ther and they'll qualify for the credit, but after that they don't qualify for any credit, and they can move on.

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

An amendment was moved on this. I don't know if you have it there.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

I have January 1, and I have the 3,000....

Is it in the second part?

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

As far as the amendment dealing with the 52 weeks is concerned...

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Yes, but there's no amendment to the base definition here.

Was there another one?

[A voice]

Yes.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

But where does it say it changes?

This is my final question. That doesn't satisfy me, by the way.

If you're saying 30,000 young Canadians may take advantage of this, is there an average that you've multiplied that by that the tax credit would be, or do you think they'll absorb all $8,000 worth? Have you done 30,000 times $8,000, and what does that come to in dollars and cents that pays the treasury?

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

If you look at 2006, there was $30 million the first year in Quebec, $45 million the second year and $60 million the third year. It has held steady at $60 million since then. Whereas for Canada it's $90 million for year one, $135 million for year two and $180 million for year three. It would level off at $180 million for subsequent years.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Thank you.

Before we go on to the last questioner, I will ask the committee, because I believe there is an intent to go to clause-by-clause today—that was the reflection of the motion that we have waived for the time being—whether, if this goes over the 4:30 allotted time and there is no opposition to continuing to do clause-by-clause and take a couple of extra minutes, it would be fine to do so.

Seeing no opposition to that—

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

On a point of order, or whatever you want to call it, what if I don't agree with the bill? Can I not vote against it?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Yes, absolutely.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

But do I have to do it clause by clause?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

I would do it clause by clause.

We could go to clause-by-clause, or there could be just a motion not to proceed with the bill—either one—if that's what you wished to do.

Fair enough. I'm just wanting to respect the time of the committee. So I have consensus to go beyond 4:30, if we need it.

With that, I would ask for the questioner, unless there's a point of order.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

Mr. Chair, I was going to move a motion, if I could.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Let's get the question first, because I committed to Mr. Martin.

Go ahead, very quickly.

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

You said earlier that you understood that government could determine which regions would be appropriate and qualify. Other than Quebec, are there any other examples you could give us that we could look at that would help us understand how this might work?

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Are you referring to guidelines the federal government might propose?

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Yes, I am.

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

I think that the federal government could perhaps put forward two criteria. To begin with, you could deal with regions facing negative growth, demographically speaking, based on the statistics for any given province. Then, you could look at the regions in one particular province where the unemployment rate is higher than the Canadian average. These benchmarks could be used by the federal government, but I don't think they are quite there yet. The onus really is on the federal government to set these criteria. And I would suggest two, in particular.

In my opinion, the regions that are experiencing tough economic times would be the main focus. Another would be regions in a particular province which are in trouble financially, dealing with shrinking populations and very high rates of unemployment.

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

On a point of order, what was the original plan for this? Was it to come back for clause-by-clause at a further—

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

No. The original plan would be to proceed to clause-by-clause at the present time.