Finance Committee on Oct. 29th, 2012

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

I appreciate that. When the opposition is saying “spend money now”, you are actually feeling that to do it comprehensively and methodically is going to be helpful. Of course, it's in the not too distant future that we hope to roll out the next phase.

The other thing I'd like you to talk briefly about—you did mention P3 in your opening comments—is red tape and bureaucracy. Could you share a bit about what that does to municipal projects in terms of the ability to move forward in a timely way?

[Karen Leibovici]

Again, that's part of looking at what the new long-term plan will be at the end of the day. We recognize that there is sometimes an overlap of responsibilities and roles, but we feel very strongly that there are many times when we have to submit forms that in fact duplicate work that's been done before.

What we found through the economic action plan was that we were able to submit the forms that were required in order to obtain the money, and everything worked very smoothly.

It's very much an issue of cutting through that red tape, but also looking at what we are going to require together to build the foundation we need for the new long-term plan.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

I'm sure we'll have you here on Bill C-45, on navigable waters, as an example, but that's a conversation for another day. I'm sure that as an organization you will have lots to say.

Mr. Buy, you said “less than 60 weeks”. Were you talking 10 weeks, 20 weeks? What is the normal length for your programs?

[Serge Buy]

It varies immensely, depending on the trade or the sector. You're looking at the Canada student loans program right now, which funds programs that start at four weeks. What we're saying is that on one side the federal government recognizes programs that can be very short, and on another side, with the grants, it does not recognize those programs.

I would say that the average program at a Canadian career college is about 26 weeks. That would be the average. Our position is that to make it easy, the federal government shouldn't be looking at program A, B, and C and creating a whole bureaucracy to evaluate programs. It already recognizes a program; it is four weeks with the Canada student loans program. Why doesn't it take the same measure with a program that is a sister program to the Canada student grants program and use that?

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Do I have more time?

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Scott Brison]

You have about 20 seconds.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Okay. I won't push it. Thanks.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Scott Brison]

Thank you, Ms. McLeod.

I will be taking the next round.

I'd like to start with a question for Ms. Leibovici on the issue of infrastructure and funding.

Going back quite a long time, most programs have required three levels of government to invest equal amounts. That has been a way to help validate projects—the municipal and the provincial—so I understand that. But with the disparate fiscal positions of Canadian provinces and the growing fiscal imbalance between individual provinces—and recently the report came out from the Macdonald-Laurier group on this issue—is there a risk that federal money will go only to provinces that are in really good fiscal condition, and that potentially we will make the gap between provinces greater if we continue to rely purely on this formula or this approach?

[Karen Leibovici]

Again, this is an opportunity for all of us to work in partnership towards an end goal. The end goal is to be able to provide good infrastructure for Canadians across the country. Through our provincial and territorial associations, we've been working very closely with provincial and territorial governments to look at what makes sense within their own jurisdictions in regard to the rollout of the new plan.

We are hopeful that the new plan will be in place and that we will know what it is in Budget 2013. It's very important for us to know this so that we don't miss the construction season. The arrangements between the provincial and territorial governments and ourselves can then take place at that point in time—and the federal government.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Scott Brison]

But are you hearing from some of your members in provinces like Quebec or Nova Scotia, which have a very different fiscal situation than, say, a province like Alberta, that in fact we should be concerned about federal money only being made available to those provinces that can afford to match those investments?

[Karen Leibovici]

What's interesting is that in Kananaskis, when the ministers of municipal affairs met in I think June or July of this year, they in fact were all able to come to the same conclusion in support of the need for a long-term infrastructure plan. In the municipal sector, that was very encouraging for us to hear. I've had an opportunity to meet with some of those ministers in the last couple of months. They have all been very supportive of the fact that we need a long-term infrastructure plan.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Scott Brison]

Thank you.

Mr. Buy—and I also have a question for Ms. Robinson, too, in terms of learning—your members are all regulated through provincial organizations across the country.

[Serge Buy]

They're regulated by provincial governments, yes.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Scott Brison]

That's right, provincial governments. Do most provinces and territories have very similar standards?

[Serge Buy]

They're fairly similar, but as an example, the programs have to be approved by the provincial governments, and there's a number of standards.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Scott Brison]

So when you suggest that perhaps student grant programs and other federal funding that is made available to post-secondary students be made available to your members, it's not a free-for-all. Your members are already part of regulated bodies through the provincial governments.

[Serge Buy]

Yes.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Scott Brison]

That's important for the committee to recognize: that these private colleges are in fact already regulated and have to perform to certain standards.

[Serge Buy]

The regulations are immense, Mr. Brison. They include having your programs registered and reviewed by the provincial government. The instructor has to have been approved by the provincial government. Every career college has to put in funds, on the side, by the provincial government, etc.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Scott Brison]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Robinson, your reference to the German model and to apprenticeships is something that I think a number of members of the committee are quite interested in. We've a situation now of people without jobs and jobs without people, and that skills gap is significant and growing. We also have challenges with young people in terms of opportunities.

Do you believe that we need a national learning agenda, working with the provinces, and that there should be a more robust approach taken in terms of federal leadership? There's no constitutional barrier to federal leadership in this area.

[Nobina Robinson]

Well, on the whole national strategy issue, we hear it every year, and yet it doesn't happen, so I'm becoming more and more pragmatic about what we can do within the fact that there is this shared jurisdiction.

One of the things is that we should look to the U.K. and to Australia, and not just to Germany, because Germany is a very different model—you can't just transport Germany into the Canadian model—and we should convene expert panels for the problems that we're trying to solve.

If the problem is skills shortage, every Tom, Dick, and Harry will tell you that there's a skills shortage, but what kind of skills shortage? Now we're getting into where the shortage is: it's in the trades, and it's in skilled production workers, in technicians and technologists. Let's convene expert panels to go at those sorts of issues.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Scott Brison]

And restore the honour of skilled trades in Canada.

Thank you very much.

Now we're going to hear from Mr. Hoback.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to welcome you all here this afternoon. It's great to see you.

I'm going to direct my questions to Mr. Oakey and Ms. Leibovici. I'll be referring to one or the other.

Mr. Oakey, you talked about transparency in the tendering process. Of course, you understand that a lot of times the federal government is the sole provider of the financing for a tender, and then the province or the municipality will go out and actually be the contractor, for lack of a better word, in the tendering process.

How would you see the government getting involved to that level? How do you see that working? What would that look like?

[Terrance Oakey]

There are numerous examples where the federal government does insist on that. I referenced the Nova Scotia agreement. There are many that involve the Province of Alberta.

From our perspective, it's simply including a provision that would not allow union-only contracting, to ensure that most of the industry is able to bid on those projects. It's in many agreements now, so it's not something new.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

This is something the government is doing in other areas. Is that fair to say?