Evidence of meeting #78 for Finance in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was industry.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Alicia Milner  President, Canadian Natural Gas Vehicle Alliance
Henry Van Ankum  Chair, Grain Farmers of Ontario
Shannon Bittman  Vice-President, Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada
Tom King  Co-Chair, Finance and Taxation Committee, Associate Partner, Tax, KPMG LLP, Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada
Peter Bleyer  Senior Advisor, Policy and Communications, Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada
Bruce MacDonald  President, Chief Executive Officer, Big Brothers Big Sisters of Canada
Michael Atkinson  President, Canadian Construction Association
Barb Mildon  President, Canadian Nurses Association
Robert Peterson  Staff Lawyer, Ecojustice Canada
Magali Delomier  Director General, Fédération de la relève agricole du Québec

5 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

The most recent fiscal year is the highest in terms of public support from the federal government for research and development.

5 p.m.

Senior Advisor, Policy and Communications, Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada

Peter Bleyer

Not.... The trend line in public support for intramural science is a downward trend. We are heading towards the bottom of the OECD tables in that regard, and there's a clear sense from all the partners in the scientific community—

5 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

I'm sorry, but there's a point of order from Ms. Glover.

5 p.m.

Conservative

Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB

Before PIPSC embarrasses itself any further, I have to correct the record.

The $20 million that was suggested by Ms. Nash and then corrected by Ms. Bittman—

5 p.m.

NDP

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

This is not a point of order.

5 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

This is a point—

5 p.m.

Conservative

Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB

It's a point of order because it's not $90 million. That's a fictitious number—

5 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

I know, but these are—

5 p.m.

Conservative

Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB

—just like the rest of what was said.

It's $20 million.

5 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

These are points of debate, and they may be valid points of debate.

Anyway, I'm over my time so I'm going to have to.... But I welcome continuing this debate, and we can receive further information.

I do want to thank all of you for being here today.

I want to thank colleagues for a wonderful debate.

We will bring the next panel forward.

Thank you.

5:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

I call this 78th meeting of the Standing Committee on Finance back to order.

I want to welcome our second panel here today.

We have the first organization, Big Brothers Big Sisters of Canada, and then the Canadian Construction Association, the Canadian Nurses Association, and Ecojustice Canada.

Lastly, we have representatives from the Fédération de la relève agricole du Québec.

Welcome to the committee. You have five minutes for your presentations.

Then there will be questions from members.

We will start with you, Mr. MacDonald, for your presentation, and work our way down the table.

5:10 p.m.

Bruce MacDonald President, Chief Executive Officer, Big Brothers Big Sisters of Canada

Good afternoon, everyone. Thanks for the opportunity to share our thoughts with you today.

As part of a vibrant non-profit sector that represents 11.1% of Canada's workforce and whose $106 billion in economic activity counts for 7.1% of GDP, Big Brothers Big Sisters is an on-the-ground organization providing direct service to more than 36,000 children and youth each year. Our 122 local Big Brother Big Sister agencies have been serving Canadian children and families for a very long time. In fact, we're fewer than 100 days away from celebrating the beginning of our 100th anniversary. As you can appreciate, a healthy and thriving economy is critical to the sponsorship and donating climate in which charities such as ours exist.

With a vision that “every child in Canada who needs a mentor has a mentor”, we have big dreams, and we will need to maximize both traditional and non-traditional sources of sustainable funding and fundraising.

For our part, Big Brothers Big Sisters is looking at developing new sources of funding that not only provide long-term revenues but also contribute to job creation. Having just partnered with the University of Waterloo, we're in the final stages of assessing the feasibility of launching a social enterprise.

Tentatively branded “First Mentors Incorporated”, this for-profit corporation would secure private sector clients and develop, implement, and monitor mentoring programs to attract and maintain new, young employees. The profits from First Mentors would then be channelled back to Big Brothers Big Sisters as a corporate donation.

Another area that will be critical for our organization in the future will be the development of a better understanding of the economic climate and forces at play in the world around us and of how the non-profit sector needs to respond.

We're fully supportive of a new initiative by Imagine Canada that will see the creation of a chief economist for the non-profit sector. When the chief economist begins work in early 2013, he or she will analyze the economic implications of both government-initiated and sector-initiated policy proposals for charities and public benefit non-profits.

Through the work of the chief economist, the charitable and non-profit sector will inform federal and pan-Canadian public policy in order to create a more supportive environment that will enable charities and public benefit non-profits to better serve and engage Canadians. As well, the sector's first chief economist will interact with parliamentarians, government officials, other economists, and the media to ensure that the impact of the sector is more fully understood.

We're also delighted that our organization has become involved with other voluntary sector organizations in two new partnerships aimed at providing additional support to northern and remote communities, first with DreamCatcher Mentoring, and second in conjunction with Boys and Girls Clubs of Canada, YMCA Canada, YWCA Canada, and the United Way of Canada. If we can positively affect the life trajectory of young people primarily from aboriginal and Inuit families, we can work to develop a healthy and sustainable workforce of the future.

I've mentioned the notion of partnerships. Being seen as a credible and important partner is essential in today's world. I'd like to draw your attention to a recent Ipsos-Reid/TrojanOne sport marketing study on the most valuable sponsorship properties in Canada. Big Brothers Big Sisters found itself in 11th position in a pool of 35 causes and properties. We're delighted that our organization was cited as a leader in two of the seven categories that comprise excellence in corporate and government sponsorship, impact of cause, and responsible management.

Big Brothers Big Sisters recognizes that it has multiple roles in contributing to a healthy economy, first and foremost in helping to develop children and youth into the workforce of the future; second, as an employer of staff across this country; and third, in the development of innovative approaches to organizational growth and sustainability.

Finally, as you may be aware, 25 young people from across Canada arrived in Ottawa on Monday to begin our social innovators summit. Each young person is a current or former “little brother” or “little sister”. While they share a common background of having a formal mentor in their lives, we are hoping to hear from them about the issues they care about the most and to provide them with skills and tools to go back to their communities and initiate a social change project. This summit is fully funded by the private sector, with MasterCard Canada, WestJet, and Roots Canada having stepped up to the plate.

Upon the conclusion of this session and after the vote, you're all invited to come down the hall to visit with these dynamic young people, volunteer leaders from Big Brothers Big Sisters, and representatives of other youth-serving organizations.

Thanks very much.

5:15 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

Thank you very much, Mr. MacDonald.

We will go to Mr. Atkinson, please.

5:15 p.m.

Michael Atkinson President, Canadian Construction Association

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank you and committee members for providing the Canadian Construction Association with the opportunity to appear before you today.

Our association represents the non-residential side of the construction industry. We build Canada's infrastructure. We have an integrated membership structure of some 70 local and provincial associations from coast to coast to coast in Canada, with a membership of just over 17,000 member firms, over 95% of which are small and medium-sized businesses.

The construction industry employs just under 1.5 million Canadians, or nearly 10% of Canada's total workforce. Our construction market is projected by international economic projections to be the fifth largest in the world by 2020, behind only China, the U.S., India, and Japan.

Our pre-budget submission addresses the areas of economic recovery, growth, job creation, demographic change, and productivity.

With respect to Canada's continued economic recovery and growth, it will probably come as no surprise to you that we continue to emphasize the importance of ensuring that Canada's key critical public infrastructures—its highways, roads, bridges, seaports, border crossings, inland trade routes, water treatment facilities, water distribution systems, schools, and hospitals—are not only repaired and restored, but improved and maintained. Why? Because there can be no economic growth without state-of-the-art and well-maintained critical public infrastructure.

Canada's critical public infrastructure is our national economy's health care plan. Despite the fiscal challenges, we cannot reduce our efforts to rebuild, improve, and maintain our vital infrastructure. We must not repeat the neglect of the past.

We very much support the focus of the current economic action plan on economic growth. Economic growth cannot occur without state-of-the-art public infrastructure. The current $33-billion Building Canada plan comes to an end on March 31, 2014. In order to ensure no gap in funding and not to lose a construction season, the new plan's successor long-term infrastructure plan must be part of the next federal budget.

We are hopeful that this summer's consultations with stakeholders around the country on the new federal long-term infrastructure plan helped reinforce the importance of ensuring that this plan continues and that we continue our sustained effort to ensure that Canada's infrastructure is world class. From our perspective, the long-term infrastructure plan must be truly long term, must be funded at a level equivalent to that of the current Building Canada plan, and must be flexible enough to meet the changing needs of the diverse regions and participating partners.

In addition to the next long-term infrastructure program, we also believe the federal government needs to provide greater support and certainty for municipalities in the maintenance and rebuilding of their key municipal infrastructure. To this end, we commend the government for continuing and making permanent the gas tax transfer fund of $2 billion annually to municipalities; however, we would like to see that indexed so that it is not eroded over the years by inflation.

That brings me to my second recommendation on red tape. As an industry, we strongly support the efforts of the government to reduce the regulatory burden on small business, chiefly in areas where provinces or municipalities already have robust regulations essentially performing a similar function. Signing interjurisdictional agreements to deliver joint services, harmonizing regulations where possible, and creating a single federal-provincial service delivery window for small business would all be welcome. Certainly, your efforts in the area of environmental assessment and, indeed, the recommendations to the red tape commission, are positive movements.

With respect to the needs of our workforce of the future, and in training especially, we very much support the reforms that are being made to our permanent immigration system and also to our temporary foreign worker program, especially the measures that will see employers more involved in the process. With that, we commend the recent announcement by the government to bring in an expression of interest program for skilled worker immigration to Canada. We think that's a very positive step. We would certainly want to have it ensured by this committee that the necessary measures and resources to put that in place are there.

With that, Mr. Chairman, I will conclude my remarks. I look forward to your questions.

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

Thank you, Mr. Atkinson.

We'll now hear from Ms. Mildon, please.

5:20 p.m.

Dr. Barb Mildon President, Canadian Nurses Association

Bonjour.

As president of the Canadian Nurses Association, which represents more than 146,000 registered nurses in our country—the largest group of health care providers—I thank you for this opportunity to present the nursing profession's solutions for a transformed health care system that will support and contribute to economic growth.

A healthy economy and a healthy nation are inextricably linked. To strengthen and grow our economy, we must first tend to the health of our nation and its ability to support this economy. It just makes good financial sense. We are presenting strategies and tools that the federal government can use to achieve better health and a healthier economy.

The CNA has two key recommendations:

First, the federal government should work collaboratively with the Canadian Institute for Health Information , Canada's registered nurses, physicians, and other health providers to select five health and health system indicators on which to focus our efforts. The federal government should then convene a consensus conference with these stakeholders, as well as provincial and territorial representatives, to endorse the indicators and commit to having Canada within the top five ranking nations on each indicator by 2017.

The federal government has the opportunity to set forth a pan-Canadian vision for better health, but it must be built communally, based on consensus from all levels of the government and leaders in health care and business. The incentive to act now could not be greater, with direct medical costs in Canada at $200 billion annually and chronic disease estimated to cost the Canadian economy $190 billion every year.

This brings me to CNA's second point: the need for policy interventions to support healthy aging. Canada's population over the age of 65 is projected to more than double by the year 2036, bringing it to more than nine million. More than 40% of Canadians currently report having at least one of seven chronic conditions. If the current trend continues, Canadians will suffer from several chronic conditions as they age. These further complications, once in place, are costly to treat.

As our seniors age, the broader social determinants of health, such as income, literacy, and employment, have a deeper impact. The Canadian Nurses Association recommends that the federal government support healthy aging by expanding federal tax credits and home care benefits to help older Canadians stay in their homes longer, receive the right care at the right time, and remain resilient and independent.

In addition to improved quality of life for seniors, Canada's economy could save more than $15,000 per patient per year by moving palliative care patients from costly and scarce acute care beds to robust home care services. For example, as one family recently shared with me in despair, the four hours of help that they were allocated per week was simply not enough.

A system that is heavy with overburdened hospitals and emergency departments cannot be sustained. The absence of a healthy aging strategy means increased rates of chronic diseases and their related complications and rising costs on an already overtaxed acute care system. These consequences strain the generations that follow, who put aside their careers, productivity, and personal lives to care for aging family members. It is clear that implementing a healthy aging strategy to support a healthy and productive nation is key to a thriving economy.

On behalf of Canada's registered nurses, I thank you, and I look forward to answering your questions.

5:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

Thank you very much for your presentation.

We'll now hear from Mr. Peterson, please.

5:25 p.m.

Robert Peterson Staff Lawyer, Ecojustice Canada

Thank you for inviting Ecojustice to this committee meeting.

Ecojustice is a group of lawyers in Canada who have been in practice for 20 years with an objective of seeking a healthy environment, using the law as a tool to achieving that.

You may wonder what a lawyer has to tell this committee and to say on the economy. No, we're not economists, but there are obvious places where the law and the economy do intersect. I will offer two concrete examples that Ecojustice has identified. At the very least, if adopted they would be cost-neutral, if not ultimately affording government savings in the end.

As I was in the audience, I heard the earlier comments about Canada's fragile economy. We're certainly cognizant of that and are not in the position of advocating enormous spending on environmental enforcement that simply won't happen. We're trying to be creative and look at ways in which we can achieve better outcomes for the environment, enforce and uphold Canada's environmental laws, and not put us in an economically disadvantaged position.

The first of those two ideas is making environmental law enforcement information readily available to Canadians. This is something that's available in the U.S.; it's something that is available piecemeal in Canada. If one wants to know if enforcement action has been taken against a certain polluter, for example, it can often be very hard to get that information.

From a transparency standpoint, I think it's obviously not good for the public to be unable to get that information, but it has deeper consequences that we're aware of. One of those, for example, is the inability for investors to easily obtain information when they're doing their due diligence on a facility as to whether they ought to buy an entity. Such information is not very easy to get right now. It requires access to information requests that can be costly and time-consuming. These go into the government bureaucracy and are not an ideal way to get that information.

What we're advocating is the creation of a database that would be easily searchable online. It would contain the following: inspection information, investigations, warnings, orders, prosecutions, convictions, and penalties. It would be a comprehensive database that would allow all of the different agencies throughout Canada that engage in environmental law enforcement to put their information there. The obvious cost saving would be that this information would no longer be subject to access to information requests; it would simply be available. So we're putting this forward as ultimately a cost-neutral outcome.

Beyond that, there are the greater, loftier ideals about democracy and the notion that access to information is democracy in action, more or less. I think it would be a good thing. No matter what our environmental laws say and what they are, we want to enforce them—whatever is on the books—and this would be an excellent tool for doing so.

The second issue is the notion of capped liability for offshore drilling. This is something that's very important to Ecojustice. Right now, our legislative regime caps liability at $40 million for a spill in the Arctic, like the BP Horizon offshore spill. That's a very low figure. In the U.K, I believe it has gone up to $125 million. To give a perspective to this, the BP spill has cost around $40 billion already, so there really is no reason for a government to be acting as an insurer for these companies. It creates disincentives for companies to enact proper policies to ensure safety and that kind of thing.

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

You have one minute.

5:30 p.m.

Staff Lawyer, Ecojustice Canada

Robert Peterson

I'll wrap it up.

On that issue, we're not necessarily suggesting that there be no cap on the liability. Obviously, a balance probably ought to be struck. Again, I'm not an economist, but right now it simply does not make sense to have a $40-million cap.

How this ties back to the economy, in my view, is that Canadians will be ultimately holding the bag if a spill happens place in the Arctic, and right now, bidding is closed on 195,000 hectares of Arctic oceans. This is a new issue. The licences haven't been really issued that much in the past, and now they are. It's something that's very important to us.

Thank you very much for your time.

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

Thank you, Mr. Peterson.

Ms. Delomier, you have the floor.

5:30 p.m.

Magali Delomier Director General, Fédération de la relève agricole du Québec

Good afternoon. I will speak in French, which will be a bit of a change.

My name is Magali Delomier, and I am the director general of the Fédération de la relève agricole du Québec. I would like to thank you for inviting us to appear before the committee. As far as I know, this is the first time we have been asked to appear. This is probably because a little more importance is being given to the next generation of farmers, which is very good news.

First, I will give you a little bit of information about my organization.

My federation is the only spokesperson for the next generation of farmers in Quebec. We have been working for 30 years to improve conditions for farmers to get established. We have also been trying to make the profession more attractive to young people, to give them information and to offer them training. The federation has over 2,000 members across Quebec. They are between 16 and 40 years of age and have a shared passion for farming. These young people are in training, in the process of getting established or already established.

I would like you to take four things that I am going to talk about from my presentation. The first is the need for a strong agricultural policy. The second is tax measures. The third is implementing a transfer savings fund. The fourth is the renewal of the agreement with the Canadian Young Farmers' Forum. These are important elements for making it easier for young people to get established in agriculture and making it easier to maintain agriculture in Quebec, and across Canada. We think that a strong agricultural policy that supports farmers is critical and that it must be the basis of other future measures.

Recent cuts to support programs under Growing Forward will affect young people in particular and make their situation more precarious. Young people are especially at risk because they are, for the most part, in the development stage. They are especially sensitive to variations in price and changes in weather conditions. That cuts have been made to these support programs has not really helped them.

One of the major problems in Quebec, in particular, is that it is more cost-effective to dismantle a farm than to transfer it because the next generation is not in a position to buy it at the market value. So we need to have transfer incentives, if not some kind of positive discrimination for dismantling. I have three tax recommendations to make in that regard.

Today, incorporated family farm operations are not considered capital gains under the Income Tax Act and, therefore, they are not covered under the capital gains exemption. We are therefore asking that operations sold to a family member be considered an exemption from now on. This would simply require a change to the Income Tax Act. In addition to this measure, and to encourage transfer rather than dismantling, the capital gains exemption could be increased from $750,000 to $1 million, only in cases where operations are transferred.

We also recommend that a transfer savings fund be created. It would be similar to the educations savings plan, where the parents would contribute to a fund that would be complemented by contributions from the provincial and federal government and would be paid out upon retirement, but only in the case of a transfer. This would encourage parents to plan for their retirement and the transfer of their business. There are serious gaps in this respect, and I think this is true across Canada. This would also enable these people to have additional funds when they retire in order to meet their needs, without depending on dismantling their farm. Lastly, this would help reduce financial pressure on the next generation when the transfer occurs.

The fourth and final point is important, with respect to funding, renewal of the financial framework agreement between the government and the Canadian Young Farmers' Forum. This agreement will expire in 2013. Without the funding, this organization will no longer be able to exist. The Canadian Young Farmers' Forum brings together all the young farmers organizations from all over Canada. It has been around for 15 years and enabled the next generation of farmers to structure itself, network, train leaders and dispense information on best practices in agriculture. It is the spokesperson for young farmers at forums and discussions involving Growing Forward 2. It is truly important to continue this support, if not increase it.

Currently, this organization can only afford to hire one resource person to take care of the entire Canadian network.

In closing, we would like to see the Canadian Young Farmers' Forum relaunch the National Future Farmers Network, which was started by Minister Blackburn in 2009 and was completely abandoned when the minister left. But time and money had been invested in this network. Work had been started to look into the problem of the next generation of farmers, and we think this network needs to start again through the Canadian Young Farmers' Forum.

5:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative James Rajotte

Thank you for your presentation.

We will begin members' questions with Ms. Nash, please.

5:35 p.m.

NDP

Peggy Nash NDP Parkdale—High Park, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to begin with Mr. Atkinson. I couldn't agree with you more about your comments concerning the importance of investing in infrastructure and how sound infrastructure investment boosts Canada's productivity. Just yesterday at this committee, we had the representative of the Toronto Board of Trade, who talked about a $6-billion drag on that region's economy specifically because of the lack of transit infrastructure.

I'd like to hear you speak a little more about the Building Canada fund. I know that you're asking for that to be renewed in this budget. You'll be happy to know that the Toronto Board of Trade also called for the indexation of the gas tax. I would like you to elaborate on that. I'm someone who is a big transit fan, and I'd like to hear you speak a bit more about the impact on jobs and the impact on the productivity of our economy.

5:35 p.m.

President, Canadian Construction Association

Michael Atkinson

I think it goes without saying that everyone understands how related the state of our highways and the state of our trade routes, etc., are to our economy and to prosperity for our country, and indeed, for our standard of living, and even our health, such as when it comes to our drinking water and the environment. What has pleased us over the last while is that not just the federal government but the provincial and municipal governments have seen the need to continue to ensure that our public infrastructure is in a state such that it can provide this.

In fact, it's even more important, coming out of a recession, that Canada is strategically positioned with state-of-the-art infrastructure that can continue to attract foreign investment and continue to ensure that we're competitive in a very competitive marketplace. It is key. Quite frankly, we're encouraged by the position that governments of all stripes at all levels in Canada have taken. They have shown a real, renewed partnership to ensure that. Indeed, it's the private sector as well; there is a role for the private sector in ensuring that Canada's public infrastructure continues to improve and is maintained.

What's so important about this is having a long-term plan, because the more long-term planning we have, the more that we as an industry, one of Canada's largest—if not the largest—industrial employers, can also plan. We can plan our human resources, our training, and what we're going to need to meet that future demand. It makes it so much easier in many other areas as well. It's absolutely key. It's not a question of “should we?”; it's a question of when and how committed we are.