Finance Committee on May 5th, 2010

[Robert Carrier, Bloc, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

I'd like to go back to the Pathways to Education program. The information in the document indicates that the program will improve access to postsecondary education for young people. I think that's really the objective of the bill, of Part 22, at least.

As my colleague mentioned earlier, education is a provincial jurisdiction. I'm from Quebec, and there are programs there aimed at school drop-outs and education budgets. So we are interfering in a field of provincial jurisdiction.

Do you at least intend to compensate the provinces that would like not to take part in this program? You could at least allocate those amounts to the government that takes full compensation for the program to administer it itself and include it in its system. That's the problem in Canada, and what explains why it works poorly. There are provinces that stand up and stick to their jurisdictions. In Quebec, in education at least, we have a good department that takes charge of all public education through appropriate programs. So we are causing interference.

There's good will in all this. The program itself is very nice on the outside, but this is often needlessly added to existing programs. Could you compensate Quebec if it wanted to withdraw from this program and receive the amount of money that corresponds to our taxes?

[Mark Hodgson]

Mr. Chair, while I can't comment on the constitutional division between federal and provincial responsibilities with respect to education, this funding will be provided to a charitable organization that will determine where it will be providing mentoring, tutoring, and other non-financial and financial support to high school students. I couldn't address a hypothetical question about compensation for provinces, since it's not a transfer to a province. They are funds that will be provided to a charitable organization.

[Robert Carrier, Bloc, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Is the charity you refer to already known? Is there one per province? Is there a list of organizations to which you're going to allocate those amounts?

[Mark Hodgson]

This is a fairly unique charity. It has an impressive track record in reducing dropout rates. It has been in place in Regent Park in Toronto since September 2001 and has reduced the high school dropout rate from 56% to below 10%. I'm not personally aware of other organizations that have the scope and inclusiveness of the programming provided to high school students, but there may be others. I'm not an expert in the field.

[Robert Carrier, Bloc, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

What charity are you referring to? There's only one managing this entire budget, isn't there?

[Mark Hodgson]

That's correct. It provides a whole range of assistance to the youth at risk and to their parents and families to encourage completion of high school and going on to post-secondary education.

[Robert Carrier, Bloc, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

What organization is it?

[Mark Hodgson]

Pathways to Education is the name of the charity.

[Robert Carrier, Bloc, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

All right. I'd like to ask the same question concerning the Rick Hansen Foundation, which is in the health field. It's an organization that wants to solve the problems of people suffering from spinal cord injuries. In every province, a department of health manages similar programs. With regard to this foundation, will the provinces wishing to manage these programs be able to obtain compensation for this?

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

A brief response, please.

[Jonathan DeWolfe]

Likewise, I can't speak to constitutional issues, per se. I can say that this funding is for research, the 25th anniversary, and for the operations of the foundation, and not for health care delivery.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you.

We'll go to Ms. Hall Findlay, please.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks very much for being here.

On all three of these, they are only in this year's budget, they are only for this one year, is that right? Or is it planned that this money would be spread out over time?

[Jonathan DeWolfe]

I'll speak to three of those. For the Rick Hansen Foundation, the $13.5 million is in fact over three years, beginning in 2010-11. For Genome Canada, the funding is $75 million recorded in 2009-10, but it's—

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

2009-10?

[Jonathan DeWolfe]

That's right. It's lump-sum, multi-year funding. That is to say, Genome Canada can apply that against its expenses over the coming years.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

But we only have this one lump sum. Do we have a timeframe, or is it open-ended until the money runs out?

[Jonathan DeWolfe]

The funding for the innovation centres is sunset to expire in 2012-13. On the funding for the competitions under Genome Canada, the timeline is not specified, but that funding is available to them as they disburse funding with respect to competitions. That's the 2009-10 lump sum to Genome Canada.

The remaining program I have responsibility for at the Department of Finance is the Canadian Youth Business Foundation. Again, that's a payment for youth in 2009-10 and 2010-11.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

So it's this year and the next year coming.

[Jonathan DeWolfe]

That's right.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

What about Pathways to Education?

[Mark Hodgson]

That funding will be over five years.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

It is for five years. It would be helpful if it actually said that in there. But these are great; this is not a comment on the content or the.... These are terrific. But there is a recurring concern among a lot of organizations because they don't know when the funding is going to stop, and that's why I ask specifically about the timeframes. They don't know when they're going to have to reapply, or the funding is very limited in time and they have to reapply. They spend a lot of time reapplying.

We've done a bit of analysis of some of the spending over the last years compared to announcements. You are saying that the funding is “up to” $10 million and “up to” $75 million. The language is pretty clear. But I've noticed over the last couple of years that an awful lot of things have been promised, in the sense of funding promised “up to” these numbers, yet in many cases—80%, 90%, or in some cases even 100%—the money is never spent. So just in terms of the expectations of the people who are involved in these programs and who do some really good work, what are your departments actually telling them on the ground now about the kind of money they can actually expect, as opposed to just read about?

We're talking about real people who are actually needing to pay staff and lend money. What are they being told about the money that's actually available now or in the next couple of months?

[Jonathan DeWolfe]

With respect to the three programs I've identified, I'm not aware of any issue of funding not going out the door. They have established track records, and I'm not aware of any funding lapsing in the past.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Of these ones?