Finance Committee on Oct. 18th, 2012

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you.

I want to thank all of our witnesses for being with us today, here in Ottawa and in Moncton. We very much appreciate your joining us, and your recommendations to the committee.

Colleagues, we will suspend briefly and then bring the next panel forward.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

I call this meeting back to order. I would ask witnesses and colleagues to take their seats please.

This is the second panel we have this afternoon, this evening, to continue our discussions with respect to pre-budget consultations for 2012. We have with us here in this panel the Canadian Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences, the Canadian Gas Association, Credit Union Central of Canada, the Edmonton Chamber of Commerce, and Sport Manitoba Incorporated.

I want to welcome all of you here today. You each have five minutes for your opening statement.

We will start with Mr. Carr, please, and work our way down.

[Dr. Graham Carr, President, Canadian Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences]

Mr. Chair and members of the committee, economic growth is often framed as a series of options: resource sector or manufacturing, college or university, basic or applied research. These are false choices. There is no single formula for prosperity. Society is too complex, the components of our success are too interlinked.

An economy prospers when the citizens can imagine and seize opportunities to create a better world. As president of the Canadian Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences, I represent over 85,000 students and researchers. Their work helps us to understand issues that concern us all, including harassment, safety and immigration.

Their research nurtures companies, leads the digital revolution, and fosters innovation in all sectors.

Despite what you've heard, employment for social sciences and humanities graduates does not remain low. Yes, they take slightly longer to settle into a career than engineers or nursing students, but their income trajectories remain very healthy. Indeed, eight of the eleven fastest growing occupations in Canada overwhelmingly employ graduates with social science and humanities degrees.

This is why Chinese universities recently visited Canada for advice on liberal education. They want their graduates to succeed in the knowledge economy and to be more versatile and capable of moving among different careers.

This adaptability requires analytical and communication skills paired with a international awareness stemming from a broad education enriched by research.

Significantly, the “State of Science and Technology in Canada, 2012” report confirmed that we are a powerful force in the global research community and not just in medicine. Canada is in the top four for historical studies, psychology, and visual and performing arts, and an emerging leader in digital media. This success wouldn't be possible without continued direct federal investment in research.

We also need institutions like Statistics Canada and Library and Archives Canada to collect evidence to inform policies, answer questions and form a basis for future discoveries.

A strong research infrastructure is not just nice to have in a digital and globalized world, it is essential. We know that if we stand still, we will rapidly fall behind.

Let me turn to three specific measures that will strengthen Canada's advantage in a globally connected knowledge ecosystem.

First, increase funding for the three granting agencies and CFI. We encourage the government to achieve a more balanced tri-council portfolio by allocating a future share of greater increases to SSHRC, as this government did in Budget 2011.

Because innovation is at its core a complex human process, social sciences and humanities research is essential to improving our national performance.

Second, invest in the next generation of Canadian professionals and leaders through a subprogram of scholarships as well as training.

This includes opportunities abroad, as recommended by the recent panel on Canada's international education strategy. We must build on the good work going on at home that's leading to job creation. Programs like Mitacs and Connect Canada, traditionally industrial research internships, now want to engage students in the humanities and social sciences.

Finally, building on Budget 2012 investments and Jenkins' recommendations, invest in cross-sector collaborations between academic institutions, governments, communities, and not for profits.

We're delivering on previous commitments in this area and reducing barriers to collaboration.

For example, IMMERSe, a program funded by SSHRC, which Minister Goodyear announced at our annual congress, supports collaboration between the universities and industry partners to better understand the social and economic realities of digital gaming and entertainment.

As the Governor General has said, connections between communities and campuses will help us “ensure that social innovation is a key component of Canada’s innovation landscape”.

Mr. Chair, you asked five important questions on a range of issues. Our three specific measures will deliver on all of these for the benefit of Canada and Canadians.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Merci, Monsieur Carr.

We'll now go to Mr. Egan, please, for an opening statement.

[Timothy Egan, President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Gas Association]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Natural gas is central to Canada's energy mix, meeting approximately 30% of the country's energy needs, more than electricity. Well over half of the Canadian population relies on natural gas for heat and power in over six million homes, apartments, businesses, hospitals, schools, and other facilities across the country.

Today an average natural gas bill accounts for approximately 0.6%, or six-tenths of 1%, of household spending. That's one-third the money spent on electricity and one-seventh the amount spent on transportation.

This is a significant value in difficult economic times. Add to this the versatility, reliability, safety, and environmental performance of natural gas and you get a significant competitive advantage for Canada in our resource and the infrastructure delivering it.

These key facts provide some context for our responses to the five questions the committee is asking witnesses to address.

When you ask about our thoughts on the challenges of economic recovery and growth, or about the productivity challenge, we believe our product is key to our response. Natural gas, because of its abundance, affordability, versatility, and reliability, is enabling recovery and growth, and delivering on productivity. Backed by a remarkably robust transmission and distribution system of hundreds of thousands of kilometres of pipe in the ground, we're a key part of the economic recovery and growth and productivity solution.

When you ask us about job creation, we have two points to make. First, natural gas resource development is a significant job creator across the country, and a growing one as the abundance of the resource becomes more evident. But there's another job creation benefit that's arguably much greater still. Investors look for the best return on their dollar. Affordable energy helps create that return, so investment often goes where there's affordable energy. With that comes the employment that investment creates as businesses and industry locate to affordable energy markets. Canada, because of its natural gas resource and its safe and reliable infrastructure, is one such market.

When you ask about the demographic challenge, I've little to say here beyond a reiteration of what I know you are hearing from many: the workforce is aging and we need to attract skilled talent. The case is the same in the natural gas industry, and the concern a serious one. Our industry, like most, is prepared to work with government in addressing it.

But on your final question, about other challenges, I wanted to speak in slightly more detail about three we face as a country and about the opportunity we believe the gas industry, working in partnership with the government, has to address them.

The first is with respect to the development of remote and northern communities. This development is increasingly important for realizing the promise of our natural resources, for sovereignty, and for the social and economic well-being of aboriginal and non-aboriginal Canadians in the communities.

CGA would like to work with the federal government to assess how natural gas can reduce the energy costs and improve the environmental performance in such communities for the heating and power generation needs. Together we can leverage investment by Canadian utilities and others to fund infrastructure. We can bring high-efficiency and natural gas technologies, such as combined heat and power and biogas energy systems, to reduce energy costs and the environmental footprint. We can support an information-sharing program that facilitates the development and implementation of community energy systems.

The second is with respect to the broader societal need to drive innovation and efficiency. This government has highlighted these as priorities and is seeking ways to trigger more activity to keep Canada's economy as innovative and efficient as possible.

As global leading energy producers and consumers, we've often been at the forefront of energy, innovation, and efficiency. CGA wants this trend to continue for the gas industry. In this regard, we're extending an open hand to government to cooperate with us on our energy, technology, and innovation Canada initiative to mobilize strategic investment in the demonstration and commercialization of natural gas technologies.

Second, CGA member companies have a long history as leaders in driving energy efficiency. We continue to do this, but now also work with new ventures like QUEST to deepen the understanding of efficiency in order to ensure better delivery of infrastructure. We believe there's a role for government to ensure its efficiency programs are working as closely as possible with utilities and ventures like QUEST.

Third, with respect to transportation, I know you heard yesterday from my colleague Alicia Milner of the CNGVA. As she will have noted, Canadians are significant travellers. Geography, a thinly spread population, and the nature of our economy all help to account for that. Effective transportation is dependent on energy, and natural gas has historically played a very small role in transportation in Canada. The opportunity exists for that to change.

Natural Resources Canada worked with a number of private sector stakeholders to complete the Natural Gas Use in the Canadian Transportation Sector Deployment Roadmap document, which shows that the medium and heavy-duty vehicle subsector is a good starting point in terms of where natural gas can offer significantly lower fuel costs, operating costs, and emissions.

CGA supports the concerns expressed by the CNGVA. We believe the Government of Canada should act on the full set of recommendations in its road map, and partner with industry to determine how to ensure that Canada retains a competitive position in the North American marketplace.

Mr. Chair, we believe that natural gas is smart energy and it is growing in popularity because of its versatility, reliability, affordability, safety, and cleanliness. We believe that CGA's natural gas distribution utilities and natural gas, the commodity, can support the government's economic, energy, and environmental objectives going forward.

Thank you for the opportunity to present to the committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you very much for your presentation.

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

[Gary Rogers, Vice-President, Financial Policy, Credit Union Central of Canada]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for inviting Canada's credit unions to be part of the annual pre-budget consultations. We've appeared before this committee in the past and appreciate the continuing excellent relationship we have with committee members and indeed with all parliamentarians.

We are especially pleased that your invitation was scheduled on an auspicious day on our calendars, because today, the third Thursday of October, happens to be International Credit Union Day, a day when we celebrate the continuing achievements of credit unions across Canada. Indeed, this week, the third week of October, is Co-op Week across Canada. As a result, the Prime Minister released a statement that co-ops are a model of excellence. He said:

Canada's credit unions play an important role in our nation's economic prosperity.... The health of our financial institutions, including our credit unions, has been a critical factor in helping Canada weather the global economic crisis and emerge relatively unscathed.... I commend the Canadian credit union movement for its commitment to advancing the financial well-being of its members while giving back to the community.

Last week, in Quebec City, I attended the International Summit of Cooperatives, which was attended by 2,800 people from 91 countries around the world. It was a once-in-a-lifetime experience. It was a rather inspirational gathering that illustrated the size and the enormous economic importance of co-op enterprise in the world economy. For example, we learned that co-ops employ 100 million people around the world. If you aggregate the revenues of the top 300 co-ops in the world, the result is $1.6 trillion, and that figure is equivalent to the ninth largest economy in the world.

The Quebec City summit arose from the United Nations designation of 2012 as International Year of Cooperatives. Enough of the commercial.

Today, I will be speaking from the perspectives of Canada's credit unions, full-service financial institutions that are cooperatively owned and democratically controlled by their individual and business members.

Canada's credit union system continues to be a keen competitor in the financial services industry. I work for Credit Union Central of Canada, or Canadian Central as it's known, and we are the national trade association for our member organizations and, through them, 359 credit unions.

Canada's credit unions operate a branch network with more than 1,700 locations, and these branches serve more than five million members and employ almost 26,000 people. Almost one-quarter of credit union branches serve small communities where they are the only financial institution in town.

I just want to pause there and emphasize those last two numbers: they employ 26,000 people, and in fully 400 communities they are the only financial institution.

As member-owned financial cooperatives, our focus is unlike the profit motivation of the banks. Maximization of net income or share price is not the driving motivation, rather service and sustainability continue to be our motivations. It is not surprising that, for the seventh consecutive year, Canadians ranked credit unions first in overall customer service excellence among all financial institutions. We're very proud of that recognition.

Financial performance continued to be strong even during the recent economic crisis. Canada's credit unions ended 2011 having increased their assets by 10% while generating record profitability. Our asset size then would be roughly comparable to that of the National Bank of Canada. Our co-op model is a key reason for our solid financial performance: direct accountability to our members, each of whom has an equal say in our operations. With 5.2 million Canadians belonging to a credit union, our growth has been roughly comparable to the population growth in the country.

The focus of my remarks today is the regulatory burden on small financial institutions and the connection it has with the government's red tape reduction action plan. Despite our growth and successes, credit unions remain small businesses in the financial services industry. The median asset size of our 359 credit unions is $79 million. That means that half of our credit unions, or 182, operate as very small financial institutions with less than $75 million of assets. Indeed, 337 of the 359 credit unions have assets less than $1 billion.

A strong regulatory framework, of course, protects the savings and the security of Canadians. We recognize and support that. We really rely on that. However, we share the concerns of members of Parliament that regulations are being applied in the same manner to businesses with 2,000 employees as they are to those with a dozen or fewer employees, resulting in high relative compliance costs.

In the final report, the government's red tape reduction commission emphasized that a one-size-fits-all approach to regulation tends to disproportionately burden small organizations like credit unions. We—

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Mr. Rogers, we are well over time. I want to be fair to all the witnesses. Can I ask you to just wrap up, and then we'll address it during questions?

[Gary Rogers]

Absolutely.

We're quite supportive of the direction of the action plan. We really want the government to walk the talk and really make sure that those very firm principles result in some action that would recognize small business, small financial institutions, and the regulatory burden.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Bobocel, please.

[Robin Bobocel, Vice-President, Public Affairs, Edmonton Chamber of Commerce]

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the House of Commons committee on finance. As noted, my name is Robin Bobocel. I'm the vice-president of public affairs for the Edmonton Chamber of Commerce, the largest municipal chamber of commerce in Canada. On behalf of our nearly 3,000 business members, the Edmonton Chamber of Commerce is once again pleased to have the opportunity to provide you with our members' most important federal tax and program spending priorities related to the upcoming federal budget.

In our submission to the Standing Committee on Finance last year, we presented three tax initiatives that were essentially cost-neutral priorities that will improve business efficiency, profitability, and ensure the continuation and growth of small business, small and family owned businesses in particular. Because of this, I'm extraordinarily pleased to present these recommendations to you today as we are in the midst of celebrating Small Business Week across the country.

We were pleased that at least two of our recommendations were included in last year's finance committee report to the House of Commons, but disappointed that the government has not yet acted on those recommendations. As a result, my goal today is to provide further clarification on our positions and reinforce the urgency of moving forward with the recommended changes, which we believe will help stimulate economic growth and job creation, contribute to improved competitiveness and productivity in Canada, and deal with some of the challenges associated with the aging Canadian population.

With the first of the baby boomer business owners having turned 65 last year, the most urgently needed tax changes are those related to the tax implications of business succession. In a recent survey of Edmonton Chamber of Commerce members, 15% of businesses indicated that their most likely succession scenario over the next five years would be to have the business change hands. Assuming chamber members are a true representation of the local business population, as many as 6,600 businesses in Edmonton alone could be changing hands very soon.

The survey also revealed that just 6% of all businesses intend to transfer ownership to a family member, and because under current tax laws that family member is then faced with having to pay capital gains taxes on the assets of that business, there's a real concern that the tax burden will be so high that it will seriously jeopardize the continuation of those businesses.

Our first recommendation today is that the federal government undertake a comprehensive review of the tax provisions affecting estate and succession planning in the next 24 months to determine whether the existing tax regime appropriately considers transfer of family owned businesses.

Reducing the tax administration, compliance burden, and assessment timelines for business is another area that can result in significant cost savings that will benefit everyone and is urgently needed. Ultimately, the myriad of current tax preferences enormously complicate the tax structure, increase compliance costs, and open up avenues for evasion and avoidance of tax. Additionally, broadening the tax base would facilitate lower taxes so that everyone benefits.

We have two recommendations today that we feel will address those concerns. The first is that the federal government immediately establish a royal commission to undertake a comprehensive review of taxing statutes with the objective of identifying, recommending, and ensuring the implementation of ways and means to simplify tax legislation, reduce compliance costs, and ensure Canada's tax system is as neutral, simple, efficient, and fair as possible.

The second of these recommendations is related to a comprehensive review of taxation. It calls for a more fair, transparent, and timely assessment process to provide business with more certainty. With that, we recommend that the federal government introduce legislation requiring the timely assessment of income tax returns wherein taxpayers' returns are automatically deemed to be assessed as filed after 120 days of filing, thereby initiating the statute barred period after which reassessment could be issued.

I won't at this time go into more details concerning these recommendations. However, copies of these Edmonton Chamber policies, including background justification for our recommendations, were delivered to the clerk of the committee for circulation to you prior to today's session.

In closing, I'd like to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for inviting the Edmonton Chamber of Commerce to come and speak today. Our business community is appreciative of this opportunity to have its voice heard by this committee.

I'm eager to respond to any questions the members may have.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you very much for your presentation.

We'll now hear from Mr. Hnatiuk.

[Jeff Hnatiuk, President and Chief Executive Officer, Sport Manitoba Inc.]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

My name is Jeff Hnatiuk. I'm the president and CEO of Sport Manitoba. Ours is a provincial-based organization, but we believe very strongly that some unique models that we have in Manitoba can have implications on sport delivery and programming across the country.

Sport Manitoba is creating innovative partnerships and developing new models of sport delivery so that all Manitobans, no matter what age or skill level, can benefit from their involvement in sport.

We appreciate and applaud the federal government's commitment to sport, and ask that in addition to maintaining its current sport funding levels, it will fund unique opportunities and partnerships that may fall outside of current sport funding models.

I'd like to start by addressing how sport delivery touches on various areas of the federal budget, including productivity, job creation, justice, healthy living, and health care.

According to a Conference Board of Canada report in 2005, health care spending due to physical inactivity ranges from $2.1 billion to $5.3 billion annually in Canada.

A World Health Organization report in 2005 indicates that over 80% of coronary heart disease, and 90% of type 2 diabetes, could be avoided or postponed by a combination of healthy living practices, such as and including regular physical activity.

There was an article in the Globe and Mail just two days ago indicating that a recent study in Britain suggested inactivity is quickly becoming public enemy number one in health care.

Investment in prevention and healthy living models could substantially decrease health care costs.

Sport tourism is an important economic engine in small and large centres across Canada. The sport industry has tremendous potential for growth, resulting in ancillary economic activity.

Sport engages thousands of volunteers. Volunteerism is a critical component in keeping Canada's aging population engaged and active.

Sport-based initiatives can prevent criminal activity among youth at risk, particularly with respect to gangs. However, studies have shown that programming must be very specifically designed and implemented to affect those youth. This is why many drop-in sport programs and centres oftentimes aren't as effective as they could be. Investment in innovative delivery models is very important.

Sport involvement can develop capacity and wellness opportunities and partnerships within the aboriginal community. Sport programming for immigrants assists greatly in integration into our communities.

Investment in infrastructure creates short-term injection into the economy, but the results and effects are long term with legacy projects that increase accessibility.

Critical to sports impact is the accessibility of sport, which means access to facilities, organized and professionally developed programs, and leadership development.

With regard to some innovative programs, work placement and on-the-job education, training, and apprenticeship opportunities result in permanent job placement.

With the adjustments to Canada's pension plan and the slow growth in capital markets and interest rates, it's imperative that we address the challenges of our aging population by ensuring that people are healthy, active, and able to work, as in many cases retirement ages have been increased. There is need to research best practices and motivators to keep Canada's aging population active and productive.

Aboriginal, immigrant, disabled, and low-income families face major challenges at this time. These communities need to be engaged, which can be achieved through sport and physical activity programming as well as leadership development for marginalized individuals and communities.

By creating unique programs and programming, new positions are created, keeping innovative and talented individuals here in this country.

In Manitoba we are creating a unique facility, the Sport for Life Centre, which will affect people across the province—as well as across the country, we believe. The centre incorporates sport research, sport medicine science, sport delivery, and expertise all in one particular location.

The combination of these aspects is unique in Canada. It will allow us to be innovative and flexible in addressing challenges and opportunities across the country. We are currently providing innovative programming opportunities for a broad spectrum of our community, from day cares to drug addiction and rehabilitation programs.

Involvement in our programs has kept our youth in schools, prevented suicides, developed sport opportunities available to urban and northern and remote communities, and developed leadership and program sustainability throughout coaching programs.

In closing, we'd like to recommend that there be committed funding for sport-based research and innovative programs and infrastructure. Currently, sport facilities are included in all other infrastructure programs within the Building Canada fund. This often makes it very difficult for new and innovative facilities to be seen as priorities when included with other pressures that are put on the infrastructure programs.

This investment would underscore our government's commitment to the Canadian sport policies vision to create dynamic and leading-edge environments that enable all Canadians to experience and enjoy involvement in sport to the extent of their abilities and interest.

Thank you very much for your time.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you very much for your presentation.

We are now moving on to questions from members.

Mr. Caron, you have five minutes.

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

You haven't said my riding name, though.

I would like to thank the witnesses very much for being here today.

There's a bit of a silly game that's being played since we came back from summer.

I'll ask Mr. Egan my first question. There are three ways to address climate change: carbon tax, which is to tax production, consumption of anything that has carbon in it; cap and trade, which is basically selling rights to pollute or emit greenhouse gases and can be traded, allowing large incentives for companies to decrease their emission of greenhouse gases; and the regulatory approach, which brings significant costs to companies and industries that are more invisible and are passed on eventually to consumers.

I've done some research, and I've seen that your organization is on record to support carbon pricing to allow for more predictability for future changes, but you don't have a stand on either carbon tax or cap and trade. Is that right?

[Timothy Egan]

That's correct.

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

Thank you very much. I just wanted to clear that up.

You mentioned the presentation made yesterday by Ms. Miller, which I found really interesting. What can the government do to significantly improve the internal distribution grid? She brought a graphic that was really telling about the way we have it in Canada, the way they are developing in the U.S. Right now, we are late in developing the ability to distribute Canada-wide.

In terms of this, what can government do to have a comprehensive Canadian grid distribution?

[Timothy Egan]

First of all, I would say that we actually do have a very robust distribution grid in place. The issue on transportation isn't about how effective the grid is; the issue is the cost of the vehicles and the cost of building the unique stations that are required for fuelling vehicles, particularly large vehicles, for LNG, liquid natural gas, or for CNG, compressed natural gas.

I think Ms. Miller put two slides in front of you, a very effective visual, as you noted. I'm not sure if she referenced this yesterday, but there was an announcement earlier this week that Irving Oil is building, of its own accord, a series of stations across New Brunswick for LNG. These kinds of things are happening on their own where the market conditions are such that it can actually be economical to do them, but if you're concerned about what more the federal government might do, there are a couple of things.

First of all, on the regulatory side, you don't have authority—these are provincial questions—but you do have a bully pulpit. You can make the point—and it is useful to make the point to regulators across the country—that there is a value proposition associated with natural gas. If regulated entities can be allowed to finance that value proposition on a rate base, then that's a very effective way to ensure that you get the right infrastructure in place.

The second thing you can do is look at other jurisdictions where there are mechanisms in place to lower the vehicle cost, be it accelerated depreciation of vehicles or whatever else, particularly in the U.S., because, as I believe Ms. Miller pointed out yesterday, we potentially face competitive disadvantage in our trucking industry. We need to make sure there is a level playing field in the trucking industry between the two countries.

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

Thank you very much.

My next question is to Mr. Bobocel, simply because we have somebody before you who talked about the same issues, and I'm interested in the issue of tax identification.

I didn't get an answer that I was happy with, so I'm asking you the same question again.

In 1917, when the Income Tax Act was adopted, it had 10 pages.

Now it's over 3,300 pages. What are the main reasons for the addition of those pages?

I'll tell you that one of my beliefs is that fiscal expenditures are actually playing a large role, but I want to have your take on it.

[Robin Bobocel]

One of the significant costs that business bears with such a complex tax code is compliance with it. There's a significant cost borne on simply filing tax returns and trying to ensure that you're taking full advantage of the tax code as it sits.

The last time there was a royal commission for the tax code it was 1972, the Carter commission. That was actually struck in 1962, before personal computers, before hand-held devices, and certainly before the new global accounting standard, IFRS.

It's simply time to do this. Quite frankly, the cost of not doing a full-scale review of the tax code affects Canada's competitiveness on a global scale.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you.

We'll go to Mr. Adler, please.

[Mark Adler, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I want to thank all of the witnesses for being here today. It's a very interesting discussion.

First, to Mr. Egan, in your presentation you talked about a skilled labour deficit. What, in your estimation, could we do as a government to help alleviate that deficit?

[Timothy Egan]

The deficit that we face on the skilled labour side is, as with many other sectors, due to an aging workforce. There's nothing you can do to reverse the aging trend, so that's a tough one to overcome.

Any effort aimed at recruiting young people into the technical workforce—anything that can trigger the attraction of coming into the technical side of the business—is beneficial.

[Mark Adler, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

Do you have any suggestions on how?

[Timothy Egan]

To be honest with you, the pursuit of this has not been a priority of the association, because the upstream side has been particularly focused on this.

In terms of specific suggestions, what I'd suggest is that the federal government, again using something of a bully pulpit, can look at sitting down with the provinces and industry and ensuring that we have the right identification of where the particular need is.

In the downstream industry, most of our work is done in major urban centres. It's not as though we're looking to move people to remote regions. But we need to attract them into the industry and show the economic opportunity that being in the industry represents. Having the government speak to that opportunity is significant.

I can certainly get back to you on that. I can talk to my upstream colleagues about some of the more specific programs they've recommended in this regard.