Evidence of meeting #43 for Finance in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was research.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:45 a.m.
Bloc
9:45 a.m.
Director, Policy and Programs, Canadian Association for Community Living
If you have no objection, I will answer in English.
9:45 a.m.
Director, Policy and Programs, Canadian Association for Community Living
We definitely have some concerns about the cancellation of PALS. To date, it is the only comprehensive disability strategy we have.
Is it flawed? Is it problematic in some regards? Absolutely. Can it be improved? For sure.
So at this point we are willing to work in partnership with the government. The Department of Human Resources and Skills Development is in the process of developing a disability data strategy, but we do remain concerned. We have not seen, from our perspective, significant resources committed to this or significant effort to ensure that we do actually have ways and means of accessing these data on a go-forward basis.
9:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Paillé.
We'll go to Mr. Menzies, please.
9:45 a.m.
Conservative
Ted Menzies Conservative Macleod, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to our witnesses.
I'm assuming that Perrin Beatty is going to be the star witness today. He seems to be getting most of the questions.
9:50 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Chamber of Commerce
It's making me feel very much at home, Mr. Chairman.
9:50 a.m.
Conservative
Ted Menzies Conservative Macleod, AB
Welcome back.
We do appreciate all of the prepared comments today, but I do need to clarify a few inaccuracies in Ms. Coady's question to you. In fact, we'll all remember that in real dollars, the Liberal deficit way back when was three times what we're running right now, so that's an important thing to remember. No matter how many times you repeat the false statement, it doesn't make it any more correct.
The Liberals continue to suggest that we're borrowing to fulfill a legislated tax reduction, and “legislated” needs to be emphasized. They keep using this $6 billion figure, which of course we know is wrong. It never was right. You were more accurate, Mr. Beatty, when you said the $5 billion to $6 billion. In fact, it's about $4.5 billion with the slowdown in revenues. But we would remind this committee that the Liberals in their promises have probably spent that ten times over in the last few weeks.
They also commented about how serious the 5¢ increase was in EI. And we do thank you, and I appreciate the efforts that your group put forward in making sure that we heard loud and clear, that rather than take the recommended 15¢, we needed to keep it at 5¢, and we appreciate your support on that. But God knows what the 45-day work year that the Liberals were supporting would have cost us.
Let me just quickly move on. Provinces need to, and have agreed to...and my home province of Alberta--Mr. Kobly, you'll appreciate this--has done a lot to reduce taxes. Ontario as well. We've heard a lot of people complaining about high provincial taxes. In fact, let me read a quote from a speech from October 2 of this year:
High taxes on investment are high taxes on productivity. Nova Scotia also has the highest corporate tax rates in the country, including the highest marginal effective tax rate on new business investment at 11.2 per cent. Our provincial corporate tax rates are six per cent higher than New Brunswick.
The politician who gave that speech was actually our good friend, Scott Brison.
What's the difference between provincial taxes and federal taxes? They're taxes on your members. Is there any difference?
9:50 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Chamber of Commerce
Mr. Chairman, I'm detecting a certain partisan overtone in some of the questions.
9:50 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Chamber of Commerce
I hope everybody will play nice today because it bruises my ears if I hear this.
In principle, obviously there's none. The net impact is the same.
If I can also go back on the issue of the $4.5 billion versus $5 billion or $6 billion, I understand the Department of Finance uses the $4.5 billion figure for the tax reductions. The $5 billion to $6 billion that we referred to was used by the Liberal Party at the time they announced their intention to defer the tax reductions. If those are not included in the tax reductions themselves, if there's a further $1.5 billion in addition to that, obviously that would be of concern to us.
9:50 a.m.
Conservative
Ted Menzies Conservative Macleod, AB
Thank you.
To Mr. Kobly, you invited the Alberta members of Parliament to a dinner a few weeks back. It was very productive for us to hear what your issues are. Some of the people around the tables were actually talking about labour shortages already in Alberta. Can you share with us this concern that your membership is putting forward?
9:50 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Alberta Chambers of Commerce
Certainly we're starting to see signs that the employment rate is increasing. Areas such as Cold Lake right now are sitting at about 4.4% unemployment, where 3.9% could be considered full employment. Anecdotally, when you take a drive around certain parts of Alberta you're seeing the “help wanted” signs come out again. It's not unexpected. I think most Albertans knew that we were going to come out of this little downturn faster than the rest of the country, and the signs are showing that. I think what we have done in Alberta is we've become poised for the next round of shortages. Employers are taking it to heart that there are some things they're going to have to do.
9:50 a.m.
Conservative
Ted Menzies Conservative Macleod, AB
Thank you.
Just to change gears, if we can.... To the Canadian Diabetes Association, you've shared some pretty troubling numbers with us. The number of people suffering will be doubling over the next 10 years. I think everyone here has at least a friend, if not a family member, who is suffering from it. Why 62% in Alberta, if I did hear that number correctly? It increased?
9:55 a.m.
Executive Director, Office of Public Policy and Government Relations, Canadian Diabetes Association
It's 67%.
9:55 a.m.
Conservative
9:55 a.m.
A voice
Oh, oh!
9:55 a.m.
Executive Director, Office of Public Policy and Government Relations, Canadian Diabetes Association
I would say that Alberta currently has the lowest prevalence rates in the country. The government there has done a lot of things to support people with diabetes. What's happened is that we have a growing and aging population in Alberta, and we have a different ethnic mix. In fact, 80% of the immigrants who come to Canada are from high-risk populations. They're more susceptible to diabetes. So you have a growing and aging society, a different type of mix, and a growing mix of different populations within Alberta.
I would also mention that these are locked in. There's nothing we can do to prevent this from happening. These rates are going to happen. So really our focus needs to be on what we can do to prevent those people from developing the serious complications. Eighty per cent of the costs associated with diabetes aren't from treating diabetes itself; they're from treating the complications when folks with diabetes don't comply with their regimen.
9:55 a.m.
Executive Director, Office of Public Policy and Government Relations, Canadian Diabetes Association
Exactly--limb amputation, heart attack, stroke, and blindness.
That's where the government needs to focus over the next decade, making sure those people stay healthy. Otherwise, this not only threatens the sustainability of our health care systems across Canada....
We'll be in Newfoundland at the end of the month to release that model. It's by far the worst result in the country, and it will really threaten that province's ability to afford health care going forward if the province does not take aggressive action to stem the tide and to provide services for people living with diabetes.
In Alberta, for example, they don't cover test strips for people with diabetes, the means to be able to monitor their performance. That's one of the things the province needs to do.
9:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Menzies.
Mr. Mulcair, you have the floor.
November 2nd, 2010 / 9:55 a.m.
NDP
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
Mr. Chair, I also want to address Mr. Doucet from the Canadian Diabetes Association.
I would like to go back to another aspect of your presentation, the stretch tax credit as proposed by Imagine Canada. Have you done longitudinal studies to assess what that might cost the public treasury? We are doing a lot of work in this area. In the next few weeks, we will have to release our own analyses. There is a way to do it.
We support Imagine Canada's idea, but as long as we have Mr. Doucet here, who seems to be very familiar with his subject, we are going to take advantage of it and ask him whether his organization has been able to determine exactly what it would cost the public treasury. That is the question. What we're talking about today is a future budget.
9:55 a.m.
Executive Director, Office of Public Policy and Government Relations, Canadian Diabetes Association
First of all, cost--it's deferred taxes. We've adopted Imagine Canada's recommendation, and we've estimated it would cost the government about $20 million incrementally. However, the benefit to our society is tenfold. The impact would be $200 million in terms of things that various charities can do in investing in diabetes--for example, in our case, diabetes services. The Canadian Diabetes Association not only invests in diabetes research to the tune of $7 million a year through those donations, but it also provides direct services to Canadians living with diabetes--everything from diabetes education...and, in some provinces, devices and other supplies to help Canadians manage their diabetes.
This is truly a real investment in Canadians, and it's a tenfold investment from the deferred tax that the government wouldn't collect by making this change.
9:55 a.m.
NDP
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
I'm going to stay with the same subject. I'm going to continue to take advantage of having a representative here of the association fighting what is currently one of the most serious diseases. It is on the rise in this country, for reasons that have been cited.
If we're talking about the budget cycle and negotiations at the federal level, that is, for 2014, that is in the fairly near future. We are completing the 2010-2011 fiscal year. So this is for tomorrow, from the standpoint of the federal government. The existing agreements have to be renegotiated. Health is under federal jurisdiction, but for 40 years the federal government has made agreements with the provinces in this area.
One fact you mentioned startled me. I think my friend Ted Menzies said earlier that we all knew someone with this disease. My father died of it. So it's a disease I am very familiar with. You said that in some provinces, they don't even pay for the tests used to monitor glucose levels. Is that right?
10 a.m.
Executive Director, Office of Public Policy and Government Relations, Canadian Diabetes Association
That's right. A number of provinces don't--New Brunswick, Alberta. Some other provinces don't cover some of the recommended medications under the clinical practice guidelines of the Canadian Diabetes Association. In fact, the average is that about 14 out of 30 of the medications are covered.
Also, one of the more important tools for people living with diabetes is an insulin pump. These pumps change lives and they save lives. In this country, we only have three jurisdictions that cover insulin pumps for their populations. These insulin pumps cost between $6,000 and $10,000 to purchase. Most people living with diabetes cannot afford to pay that, and in provinces such as Ontario and in other jurisdictions that provide them, we've seen markedly increasing performance in terms of health outcomes when people have access to them.
It's a real investment in people, because we know that if they don't comply, and 57% cannot afford it, they are going to develop a series of complications--
