Evidence of meeting #118 for Finance in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was measures.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
April 30th, 2013 / 11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB
Thank you.
Welcome on your first time here. It's really nice to have you here.
I would like to continue along the same lines with these job numbers, because I think there's some misleading information out there about these 67,000 jobs we're talking about. I want to make sure that you have an opportunity to be very clear about those jobs.
As I look at the stats that were provided, overall it looks like the PBO expects the unemployment rate to decline starting in 2015, lowering to about 6.3% by 2017, which is in fact broadly in line with the March survey done by the government, isn't it?
No one can hear you if you just nod your head yes, so I'd appreciate it if you'd say yes for the transcript.
11:45 a.m.
Assistant Parliamentary Budget Officer, Economic and Fiscal Analysis, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament
Yes, I think our unemployment rate forecast is pretty much in line with what the government has in its projection in the budget.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB
Right, and I'll come back to the jobs in a minute.
On GDP growth, if you look over the time period, there might be a discrepancy between whether we believe commodity prices might go up as quickly as you do, but over the period to 2017, from 2013 to 2017, your numbers are exactly the same as our March survey, are they not?
11:45 a.m.
Assistant Parliamentary Budget Officer, Economic and Fiscal Analysis, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament
As far as the nominal GDP is concerned, we are just a slight—
11:45 a.m.
Assistant Parliamentary Budget Officer, Economic and Fiscal Analysis, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament
For real GDP, we're almost the same.
Chris?
11:45 a.m.
Senior Director, Economic and Fiscal Analysis and Forecasting, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament
Yes, on average, they're the same.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB
Let's get back to the jobs for a minute. Your report notes that if the government had spent more money in the budget this year and last year, 67,000 jobs would have been created in 2016. To be clear, these hypothetical jobs would have been created only if we, as the government, increased spending, right?
11:45 a.m.
Assistant Parliamentary Budget Officer, Economic and Fiscal Analysis, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament
Had you not taken the measures that you have taken in budget 2012—
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
11:45 a.m.
Assistant Parliamentary Budget Officer, Economic and Fiscal Analysis, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament
That's right, and—
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB
Again, you're saying that if we had increased spending and had not taken away that $38 billion over two budgets—and actually, it's probably over three budgets that you're looking—we would have had to spend $38 billion to maintain those 67,000 hypothetical jobs. That's what you're saying.
11:45 a.m.
Assistant Parliamentary Budget Officer, Economic and Fiscal Analysis, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament
Well, there were also some stimulative measures during that period of time, so it wasn't just savings measures, but the total amount, that type of thing.
Yes, I mean, the way to look at it is that we are expecting the government—well, the economy—to create about 600,000 jobs over the next five years, so on average, an increase in employment of about 120,000 jobs per year. The way to look at it is, had the measures not been taken, based on our estimates overall, that number would be about 667,000.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB
Correct. I'm glad you qualified that because it is in fact government that makes the policies that make the environment to help our economy. Although you may not want to use the words that the government created those 900,000 jobs that have already been created, the government policies, as you've just indicated, will provide an environment to create 600,000 jobs. Am I correct that with the hiring credit for small business, with the accelerated capital cost allowance, venture capital, $50 million for young entrepreneurs, the competitive corporate tax rates we have, the free trade agreements that we have, again, it is government policy that actually lends to an environment for those 600,000 jobs you're talking about that will be created?
11:50 a.m.
Assistant Parliamentary Budget Officer, Economic and Fiscal Analysis, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament
Again, in the way we look at this we can't really separate that from what happens in the rest of the economy, from what other factors have affected the job creation. Whether it's an external environment, whether there are certain other events, whether it's lower interest rates in the economy that have caused more investment or more spending, those are all the different factors.
We separate the actions of the government and the impact of that, as the government did in budget 2009 when it introduced the stimulus package. It provided the impact only of that stimulus package, separately from other—
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB
Right. But what you're saying, sir, is not consistent with what your report is saying and what you've said. You've said that the 67,000 hypothetical jobs are lost as a result of what government has done, and you've said that you've evaluated the budget...the budgets. Those are government policies. It doesn't say that you've evaluated all those external factors to come to that 67,000.
You either need to correct the record here and tell us if those 67,000 jobs are influenced by outside measures.... I'd love to know that. But from what your report says, you've looked at the budget and it's the budget that will lend to those increases in jobs.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
11:50 a.m.
Senior Director, Economic and Fiscal Analysis and Forecasting, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer, Library of Parliament
Sure. Those 67,000 jobs are related exclusively to the measures that were in the 2012 and the 2013 action plans. All the other factors that underlie the increase that we see of 500,000 or 600,000 jobs would be affecting those, but this is an all else equal, holding everything else constant, that if there was a dollar measure provided in the budget we were able to translate that into employment—
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB
I'd like to know the direct measure of the government's measures that created jobs.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
There is another Conservative round. We'll come back to that issue.
We'll go now to Mr. Rankin, please.
11:50 a.m.
NDP
Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, witnesses, for attending this morning.
Last Monday a court ruling dismissed part of Mr. Page's case on a technicality, but it seems it gave a significant boost to the PBO, stating that the office is answerable not only to the government but also to members of Parliament of all parties. The ruling strongly upheld the right of the PBO to take the government to court if it refused to provide requested information.
Its decision to go to court was, of course, prompted by a request by Mr. Mulcair, the leader of the opposition, to the PBO to analyze $5.2 billion in cuts made in the 2012 federal budget and their impact on jobs and service levels.
How valuable is this court decision to the work of the PBO in your view?