Finance Committee on Nov. 5th, 2009

[Andrea Grantham]

I'll go back to our strategy, the strategy that's looking at a $20 million initial investment, up to $100 million. It is a comprehensive approach, which will allow all the organizations, including ParticipACTION, to work together. Within this plan there is social marketing, which is what ParticipACTION is so involved in. There are plans for the active transportation groups, for workplace groups, for school groups, and for the advancement of girls and women in sport. So in answer to your question, we absolutely can work together.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

High-performance sports is a separate concept for you?

[Andrea Grantham]

Yes. The focus of our physical activity is promoting the importance of all Canadians being physically active and inspired by Olympic athletes. If a child chooses a path toward Olympic athletics, fantastic. We want to ensure that every child, from active start through to older adulthood, has the knowledge, the ability, and the will to lead a physically active lifestyle, and we need a community that can support that.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Okay. I appreciate that.

I have one question for our friends from the graduate students' group. I'm glad you're here today. Can you clarify something? The $148 million in cuts you're talking about restoring, did those cuts happen over time in the nineties or did that happen all at once? And is that just for graduate students or is that for...?

[Graham Cox]

There was a general cut for student education funding, and that included cuts to the granting council.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

So that includes all.... Okay.

I know we've put some money in the budget, added money back, but you're saying you want to go back to where you were in 1991, or 1992--something like that? So you had cuts all through the nineties.

[Graham Cox]

That's right.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Okay. Thank you very much for that.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McCallum]

Thank you very much, Mr. Wallace.

I want to thank all of you for your presentations and your responses to our questions. We appreciate that very much. There were obviously a lot of very good ideas. You are our last open panel on pre-budget consultations. The committee will begin deliberations the week after next on the actual report.

I want to thank you all for being here.

Colleagues, there is just one item of business, very briefly. The subcommittee met, and all four parties agreed.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

I move the item.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McCallum]

The item is moved.

Monsieur Laforest.

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

I have something to say. When the subcommittee met, it completely disregarded Bill C-290.

Since the committee was not scheduled to meet the week of November 16 to 20, I move that we meet on November 17 to consider Bill C-290, which, like Bill C-288, seeks to amend the Income Tax Act. By the way, that bill was referred to us last week.

Since we do not have anything that week and given the fact that these workers have lost money because of their pension plan, I move that we hear from them that week. It would give us an opportunity to expedite our work, even after the holidays.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McCallum]

Monsieur Laforest, can I get some clarification? We had an hour of discussion on this at subcommittee and you agreed to this report, as a member of that subcommittee. Are you now saying you don't agree with the report you agreed to at the subcommittee?

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

No, I am saying that....

[The Chair, Liberal, John McCallum]

Perhaps we'll need another subcommittee meeting.

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

I am not saying that I do not agree with the report. I am simply saying that we could have added that. It is as if we forgot. I spoke to colleagues, and I talked on the phone with those affected by this bill and who asked me to expedite the process if possible. That is the reason for my suggestion.

I fully agree with the other part of the report, Mr. Chair. I was there. I am simply suggesting that we add something. That is what I am getting at.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McCallum]

Well, all four parties agreed at the subcommittee. The NDP has a replacement and Mr. Mulcair is not here. That's why we have subcommittee meetings, so that we can get agreement by all four parties. So I'm hesitant to amend the subcommittee report that we all agreed to at subcommittee. I will, perhaps, look at revisiting it at another subcommittee, but I'm not going to change this report that we all agreed upon two days ago.

Mr. Menzies.

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

Very quickly, because I don't want to belabour this, but my office has already started planning other meetings for this time because we looked at this and assumed we were going forward with that.

We put forward EI legislation just this week to address many of these concerns. The subcommittee meets to make a final decision. I would suggest we adopt this.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McCallum]

Okay.

Mr. Pacetti.

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

I don't want to belabour the point, but I will not be here. We had decided that on the 17th we were going to meet, so I'd prefer not to change. I also consulted with my colleagues and I also have agreement with my colleagues, so I think in terms of not breaking rules that we've already decided in subcommittee, I would say that we vote for the report from the steering committee, unamended.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McCallum]

Okay. All those in favour?

(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

It's carried. Thank you, colleagues.

The meeting is adjourned.