Finance Committee on Oct. 22nd, 2012

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

It's the member's time. It's Mr. Hoback's time.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

It's my time, just as I gave you your time—

[Chris Aylward]

Will I get an opportunity to respond?

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

It's up to the members how they want to use their five minutes.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

You talked about attracting the brightest and the best. What can we do for programs to attract the brightest and the best from around the world? In what we're doing now, are there things we need to change in the program? Do you have any ideas that would be positive?

[Dr. Ilene Busch-Vishniac]

Yes, and in fact that was the nature of two of the recommendations I was trying to make. To attract the best and the brightest, we not only need the best facilities, but we need to know that those facilities have the operating funds to continue and funds to improve as technology improves. We don't build the building once and then expect everyone else to maintain it and never provide any funding for upgrading equipment or maintaining operations.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Is there more that we could be doing outside of having first-class facilities at the University of Saskatchewan? We've got a great community to live in, a great environment to raise a family in. Is there something we should do in the tax structure or in the promotion abroad that would attract these bright people?

[Dr. Ilene Busch-Vishniac]

I won't speak about the tax issue because I'm simply not qualified, but there is much we can be doing to make ourselves more visible nationally and internationally. One of the things that Canada has not done is create a federal science policy. If we had a federal science strategy that included what we were going to fund, how we were going to do it, and how we would make sure we were using all the facilities effectively and efficiently, and in that way attracting the best and the brightest to Canada, then that would really have a dramatic impact on what all of the research-intensive universities are doing.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

You talked about aboriginal students. In the riding of Prince Albert we have a fair number of aboriginal students coming to start their first and second years of post-secondary education, whether it's university or trade school. One of the things is transition, and the extra support they need at the start. What are you doing at the University of Saskatchewan to provide that support?

[Dr. Ilene Busch-Vishniac]

You're absolutely right. Our aboriginal students at the University of Saskatchewan find they have the hardest time, not with their preparation for university academically but with the cultural dissonance they encounter when they suddenly arrive on a campus and there is no longer a majority aboriginal population.

We are not only providing services that ease that transition, but—what works best—we are working with families rather than working just with students. We are introducing new students to aboriginal communities in and around our campuses. We're also in the very early stages of talking about creating residence facilities for families, rather than simply for students. That will have a disproportionately big impact on our aboriginal students who come to campus.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

You have about 20 seconds, Mr. Hoback.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

I have a quick question.

In The Economist on October 6, there was a comment by Mark Carney about “dead money” in the business community. Is the University of Saskatchewan doing anything with the business community to attract some of that dead money into investments in research and development?

[Dr. Ilene Busch-Vishniac]

Yes, absolutely. In fact, the University of Saskatchewan ranks number two in the country in terms of the revenue we generate through our patents and intellectual property. That's because we have traditionally had a very strong relationship with the business community. We intend to continue to do that. We have been the beneficiaries of a wonderful relationship, some of it philanthropic.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Hoback.

Mr. Caron, you have the floor.

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

Thank you.

I'll start with Mr. Hoback's drive-by smears. It's actually a fact that of the 700 inspectors that were hired, 170 were meat inspectors, none of them in slaughterhouses; they were in processing plants. XL Foods is a slaughterhouse.

It's also a fact, as reported by Sarah Schmidt from Postmedia, that in April, 59 meat inspectors were cut following the budget, with 800 staff at the CFIA actually receiving notice that their positions were in danger. There was no way of knowing which jobs. She asked repeatedly. The department would never give her an answer.

Mr. Aylward, can you actually confirm what I'm saying?

[Chris Aylward]

Yes, sure, exactly, and the issue is the slaughterhouse issue. That's the problem. For months now, the Public Service Alliance of Canada has been telling Canadians that our food safety is at risk. This government said that we were misleading Canadians. It's obvious now that we at the Public Service Alliance of Canada were not the ones misleading Canadians.

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

Thank you.

In another silly game...and I'm sorry to bring in this kind of silly game that we're playing since we came back from this summer, but my next question will be to Mr. Collyer. The issue about carbon is that you can use carbon pricing or you can use regulations to address climate change. There are three ways, actually, to address climate change: one is a carbon tax, one is cap and trade, and one is the regulatory approach.

Liberals have favoured a carbon tax, we have favoured a cap-and-trade market system, and the Conservatives have chosen the regulatory approach, which is actually fairly expensive. Canadian Press and Maclean's actually reported that their approach so far is probably costing consumers close to $16 billion.

Can you confirm that the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers is on the record as supporting carbon pricing as opposed to the regulatory approach?

[David Collyer]

Let me just make a couple of comments.

The first, I think, is to always keep in mind that action matters. There's a lot of work being done in industry, in our industry, to reduce carbon emissions, and the broader use of natural gas I think is an opportunity to do that.

Second, there are a variety of mechanisms by which one can implement carbon policy. You've touched on all of them. There's no strong consensus among our membership as to which of those is the best. They can all be applied. I think the issue is how they're applied. There's no ideal mechanism.

We've been working with the government to proceed with carbon management and a policy framework for the oil and gas sector. We'll continue to do that. I think it's important that we move forward with policy, but more importantly, that we move forward with action.

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

I was referring to the Shawn McCarthy article in The Globe and Mail, which I'll quote:

Individual business groups—from the Canadian Council of Chief Executives to the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers—have urged Ottawa to move forward with a market-based system that would create certainty for companies that have to make long-term investment decisions.

That was as opposed to the regulatory approach.

[David Collyer]

Yes, I think there have been various representations by various groups in the past about which form of carbon policy is preferred. I think it's also fair to say that the current government is moving down the regulatory path and we're working with them to try to find something that works for the oil and gas sector.

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

So there's no way of knowing at this point.... Because honestly, Sustainable Prosperity, which is a group that tracks various groups' positions, also says that you're in favour of carbon pricing as opposed to the regulatory approach, so there must have been some declaration or some statements made by your association to that effect.

[David Collyer]

Yes, as I said, we have said in the past—and I think if you looked at our membership today, they would also say broadly—that a market-based system of some kind over the longer term is something that our members would prefer, but we've also been very clear that we want to work with the government to put something in place in the near term.

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

I understand. Thank you.

I feel a little badly for Mr. Dubreuil and Mr. Blanchet because I barely have enough time for one question and I will be putting it to Mr. Dubreuil.

I think the suggestion to use RRSPs to start up a business is interesting. However, I do have one concern. It's all very well to purchase a profitable business, but many small businesses are not very profitable and will even fail. The rate of failure is quite high and it's quite risky.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Please ask your question.

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

What would happen if RRSPs were used to purchase a business that then went bankrupt? There would no longer be a way of paying back those RRSPs in the manner in which you're proposing.