Finance Committee on May 28th, 2013

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

I just want to clarify that the NDP was opposing bigger government. I'm impressed because I have not seen that before.

I just want to point out to Ms. Nash as well that we do have the biggest population, the largest number of people living in Canada, than ever before, and we also have the most MPs that we've ever had as a country. We are actually expanding democracy by adding more members of Parliament, so we will have again more MPs than ever before. It might be in line with the large population base that we seem to be growing in this country. To suggest then that the NDP are standing against big government is.... I'm curious about how they're going to vote on this. I'd really like to get to it to see.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you.

Mr. Côté, you have the floor.

[Raymond Côté, NDP, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

I would like to remind my colleague of a little something. In the early 1990s, when Roy Romanow's New Democrats came to power, it had to deal with an operating deficit of some $7 billion, inherited from the Conservative government. In fact, in the 1990s, the NDP government was the first of any government in Canada to balance its budget.

Peddling stereotypes is well and good, but you can't turn a blind eye to the reality and facts.

There you go.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Okay, thank you.

I have Ms. Glover, and then Monsieur Caron.

[Shelly Glover, Conservative, Saint Boniface, MB]

I just want to put on the record, Mr. Chair, that presently there are openings for 31 parliamentary secretaries and this government actually only has 28 because we have three cross-appointments. I just want to put that on the record, to be very clear that those are in fact the numbers that exist presently.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you.

Monsieur Caron.

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

I would just like to quickly respond to Mr. Jean.

I'd like to know this. How many ministers should the British government have, since it has over 600 members in Parliament? If cabinet is supposed to reflect the number of members in the House, some Parliaments in the world would have an overwhelming number of ministers and parliamentary secretaries.

The argument obviously doesn't hold up.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

We'll see if he wants to respond.

We will go to Mr. Brison, please.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

I'm willing to break this impasse and be constructive with a suggestion as to how we can fulfill some of these vacancies of parliamentary secretaries and at the same time demonstrate great respect for tax dollars: perhaps we could use the temporary foreign worker program.

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Pay them 15% less.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

It's just a thought.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you for that helpful suggestion.

I'll deal with them separately, then.

(Clause 225 agreed to)

(On clause 226)

Ms. Nash.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

I just want to be on the record as saying that the New Democrats have long called for an independent, stand-alone economic agency for northern Ontario. While this budget does create a ministerial position, it doesn't add any funding for regional economic development and it does nothing to approve the accountability at FedNor. I just want to make that point.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you.

Is there further discussion on clause 226?

(Clause 226 agreed to)

(Clause 227 agreed to)

Now we have division 17, “Financial Administration Act”, which deals with clauses 228 to 232.

We have a whole series of amendments here, colleagues. First of all, with respect to clause 228, we have amendments NDP-24, NDP-25, and LIB-7. We'll therefore start with amendment NDP-24.

Ms. Nash.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This bill is of great concern to the NDP and to Canadians across the country. The provisions in this bill pertaining to crown corporations—we heard several expert witnesses testify with their concerns—pose an unprecedented interference in the management of crown corporations and are an attack on the right to free collective bargaining.

These clauses would threaten the independence of crown corporations such as the CPP Investment Board and the Bank of Canada. These institutions need that kind of independence in order to fulfill their mandates. This section threatens the CBC independence as established under the Canadian Broadcasting Act. We've heard testimony in that regard that the proposed changes here are unprecedented and exist nowhere else in the OECD.

We have added our voice to the thousands of Canadians concerned with public broadcasting—unions, experts of various kinds, public figures—that the CBC would lose its independence as not a state broadcaster but a public broadcaster. Various groups have asked the government to step back.

Our amendment 24 would exempt the CBC from the new Treasury Board powers. We believe this amendment is essential to ensuring that the CBC can continue to operate without direct government control over the compensation of journalists and managers at the CBC and therefore influence the journalistic integrity of those working there.

Our amendment 25 would neutralize the powers contained in this bill over collective bargaining and non-union employee terms and conditions of employment. It specifies that the bill ensure that these binding powers do not apply. The amendment is essential in order to prevent the federal government from intruding on internal matters of crown corporations. These are arm’s-length agencies and should be respected as such.

The President of the Treasury Board and the politics of the Treasury Board and the government have no place in the direct operation of these agencies.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you.

I have Mr. Adler next, but before that, I'll point out to Mr. Brison that Liberal-7 is essentially the same as NDP-25.

Mr. Brison, you may want to address a general argument at this time.

I'll put you on the list after Mr. Adler.

Mr. Adler, go ahead, please.

[Mark Adler, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

It gives me great pleasure to speak on this. Unlike the opposition, our government remains focused on what matters most to Canadians, and that's of course jobs, growth, and long-term prosperity.

I was listening with interest to Ms. Nash's comments, and I have to tell you, there's not a scintilla of truth in anything that she said. The measures proposed within Bill C-60 do not affect in any way whatsoever—I can't be clearer than that—the independent operation of any crown corporation, including the CBC. Crown corporations are independent in their operations. Their financial bottom line, however, affects the government's bottom line and thus the taxpayers'. Unlike the opposition, this government has demonstrated time and time again its respect for taxpayers' dollars.

Now, as a responsible steward of taxpayer dollars, our government is ensuring that we have a mechanism in place to protect taxpayers' dollars at the bargaining table when and if necessary. Compensation costs can be an important element of the financial viability of a crown corporation, and this amendment provides an option for the government to give specific direction to a crown corporation in this respect.

The measures proposed in Bill C-60 are neither new nor revolutionary. The Quebec government, since 1985, has required similar prior approval of bargaining mandates from the provincial minister of the treasury board, something the leader of the NDP should know all too well. Both the government and crown corporations have a responsibility to spend taxpayers' dollars wisely, and we will work together when necessary to help ensure Canada's long-term growth and prosperity. This is our number one priority, because it is the number one priority of Canadians.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you.

I have a long list here. I have Mr. Brison, Mr. Côté, Mr. Rankin. Do I have others? I have others.

I'll go first to Mr. Brison.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

We are concerned about these changes. According to labour experts, collective bargaining experts, and people who have negotiated on behalf of employers, large companies, who appeared before committee as experts, the status quo has worked very well and Canada has stable labour relations. This has not been a problem, and unintended consequences always arise from fixing problems that don't exist.

I think it would be helpful if Mr. Duggan could help us. I have a few questions.

First, what was the original policy rationale for allowing crown corporations the independence to enter into their own collective agreements?

[Dennis Duggan, Senior Advisor, Strategic Compensation Management, Treasury Board Secretariat]

Of course, the first crown corporations were created far before I was born. Generally speaking, it allows them to operate in the areas for which they're responsible and to be able to react more easily to the particular circumstances of whatever market or business they're in, independent of the normal situations one finds in government. That's the overall situation. That's very general, I admit, but that's about as close as I can come to giving you a general rationale. Of course, individual corporations have specific reasons for their existence.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Thank you.

To an extent, you're right, it's a very general response, but I was interested in—and I appreciate your candour, Mr. Duggan, that you are not in a position to answer the question.

Another question would be this. Are culturally related crown corporations, like the CBC, currently required to submit an operating budget to the government for its approval?

[Dennis Duggan]

Yes.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Okay. So there is not an exemption for culturally—

[Dennis Duggan]

That particular aspect, sir, is not something I am familiar with. I'm not an expert in that area.

In terms of the FAA, it's part X, but those particular organizations right now are exempt from those particular parts, I to IV, as you're aware.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

So there is an exemption for culturally related crown corporations like CBC currently.