Evidence of meeting #91 for Finance in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was know.
A video is available from Parliament.
NDP
Wayne Marston NDP Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON
I can't sit here with you before me without asking when you're going to start increasing the CPP. It would be out of character, if I hadn't asked that, sir.
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Thank you, Mr. Marston.
Minister, do you want a motion to the effect of appointing Wayne as the next PBO?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Maybe Mr. Hoback will move it.
Mr. Hoback, please. You have five minutes.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
I think we could take a look at that.
Again, Mr. Minister, it's great to see you tonight. The NDP seems amazed at the number of people who have come here to watch you tonight, but you are one of the most successful finance ministers in the world at this point in time, running a great economy. On a Wednesday night, I think this is a great place to be, listening to you and talking about this great budget implementation bill that we have in front of us. I can understand why they're all here. What else can you do on a Wednesday night?
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
They're finance junkies, maybe.
Mr. Minister, one of the things I think we really want to highlight is the PRPP program and the importance of that program. Sixty per cent of Canadians did not have access to a workplace pension. If you're self-employed, like a farmer, like many people in my riding, you had no ability to even create a pension for yourself.
I understand there are some measures relating to that in this bill. Could you talk about that aspect and how we're providing a low-cost pension option for not only self-employed people but all Canadians?
Conservative
Jim Flaherty Conservative Whitby—Oshawa, ON
Thank you for the question.
This goes back to the smaller businesses and medium-sized businesses in Canada. Most big businesses, as we all know, have pension plans, but 60% of Canadian workers, including self-employed people, don't have even any access to a pension plan, which is why we brought forward the idea of pooled registered pension plans, so that smaller employers can pool their employee groups and get professional advice and better rates.
That's where we are. As you know, the bill passed previously. There are some technical changes that we've been asked to make by different participants, including broad-based eligibility, making sure that the costs of administering the pension plans will be spread over a larger group of people, and many of the employers find the costs a bit too high.
We're making some changes. We're shifting fiduciary responsibilities and reducing the administrative burden for the employer so that more employers will offer, we hope, pooled registered pension plans for their employees.
Savings at retirement, as this committee well knows, constitute a significant problem in Canada.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
We had CFIB here for a different meeting earlier this week. They spoke about talking to their community about the options they had looked at for increasing pensions, and they reported their members as saying that this is a great low-cost option. They did not want to see any type of increase in so-called payroll taxes.
I think you've done a great job. I think Mr. Menzies should also be patted on the back for all the work he's done in the background to provide this tool that Canadians can use.
Another thing we may want to talk about is the Canada pension plan triennial review. You might want to touch on what that means in this budget.
Conservative
Jim Flaherty Conservative Whitby—Oshawa, ON
The Canada pension plan is one of the great Canadian success stories. I certainly don't take credit for it; it's been around for a long time. It's a well-funded plan. It's actuarially sound for the next 75 years.
The governance of the Canada pension plan is quite interesting, because it's shared by the provinces and the federal government. When we do a review, we do it together. Then when the finance ministers meet, we look at the results of the review, take advice from our officials, of course, and then approve it.
What is brought forward in this bill with respect to the Canada pension plan are some technical changes, which were sought by the plan itself. All of them have been approved by all the finance ministers of Canada.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
I think I'll leave it there and pass it on to you, Chair.
Conservative
November 7th, 2012 / 7:55 p.m.
Conservative
Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB
Thank you, Chair.
Welcome again, Minister. It's been a great pleasure for me to learn by working with you. Every time you appear, I learn something new, so thank you for enlightening us.
When the CFIB was here the other day, they distributed a pamphlet I know you haven't been able to see, but I do want to share some information from it with you. I'm particularly interested in the challenges of older workers. I know we've done a number of things to help older workers. You yourself have pushed for things like the targeted initiative for older workers, approved the ThirdQuarter project that was put forward by the Manitoba Chambers of Commerce in the last budget, which will help to link employers to older workers who still enjoy working, and want to continue.
The CFIB surveyed their members and they asked this very question: “At what age do you believe you will be able to retire comfortably?”. They had almost 10,000 responses. What shocked me was that the majority of responses said age 68 or later.
Having said that, I know that in Bill C-45 you've taken some more measures to try to help older workers. Obviously it's needed, according to surveys like the CFIB's.
Can you enlighten us as to what we're doing for older workers? For example, under CMHC, you've taken some measures with regard to retirement age. Can you tell us a little about that?
Conservative
Jim Flaherty Conservative Whitby—Oshawa, ON
Yes, we want to make sure it's easier for people to deal with their money when they're a bit older. We're fortunate that we're living longer. This isn't something we should feel bad about. I think it's a good thing for men and women to have the longevity they have today in Canada compared to a generation ago. It's really quite remarkable, and they're in relatively good health in most cases.
What I hear from people, and I'm sure you hear this too, is that they'd like to be able to move up the RRIF age, for example. We moved it from age 69 to age 71. Some people would like us to bump that higher because a lot of people are continuing to work to age 68 or later, if they're fortunate to have good health. That's one thing.
We want to ensure there aren't unnecessary restrictions on mortgage eligibility and mortgage insurance eligibility for older people just because they happen to be older. We want to make sure we get the pension issues right because some Canadians are legitimately worried about their pension plans, especially defined benefit plans. There's a lot of work to do at Finance, as you know as parliamentary secretary, to try to make sure we make the financial path smoother for older Canadians.
Conservative
Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB
I appreciate that. I know how important that is to you. I've sat with you many times as you talked about the importance of securing the long-term prosperity of not only those who are working into their later years, but future generations, so I appreciate that.
I want to comment as well on the fact that it is very much appreciated that you've clarified for the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters who were here the other day that there is going to be a transition into direct programming with the money that is saved. They were pretty clear about not really knowing whether or not that was going to happen, so thank you for that reassurance. I'm sure they're listening tonight.
I want to share with you some of the other things they were thankful for that haven't come out here tonight, but they've been very well received. These are things like the fact that we decreased the GST. I asked them about that. They were happy about that. They were happy about corporate tax decreases as well as limiting EI premium increases to 5¢ as opposed to 15¢. They appreciated the accelerated capital cost allowance for manufacturing equipment. With respect to opening up trade, we know that some opposition parties really don't support us on that, but manufacturers believe that's important.
Things they didn't think were necessarily helpful were things like the carbon tax. I want to give you an opportunity to tell us what that would do.
Conservative
Conservative
Jim Flaherty Conservative Whitby—Oshawa, ON
I really liked your list of good stuff, and then you went to the bad thing, the carbon tax.
Yes, we're against raising taxes, and the carbon tax would be a $21 billion tax on Canadians, which is shocking. It's the last thing the Canadian economy needs. Quite seriously, the last thing we need in Canada are new taxes, especially large taxes that are not incentive taxes, that don't create any wealth, that just take wealth and give it to government.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Thank you very much, Ms. Glover.
Minister, I just want to wrap up with a few comments.
First of all, I do appreciate your report about the pre-budget committee. I think it is important to show members of this committee, who spend an awful lot of time in pre-budget hearings, that there is a thread between the pre-budget report, the budget in February or March, and the budget implementation bills.
I also wanted to indicate that our hope is to have the report on the charities study to you before Christmas, both the pre-budget report and the report on charities.
I did want to touch on one specific thing. You were in discussion with Mr. Mai about your department's commitment with respect to credits for the fossil fuel sector. As someone who represents a lot of that sector, I would just encourage you to do the approach that was followed in this bill. In this bill there were changes made to the corporate mineral exploration and development tax credit, but at the same time, in the same budget the government extended the mineral exploration tax credit. I think that kind of surgical approach in terms of phasing out some tax credits, there are certain tax credits that do cause a lot of growth and investment, and do result in exactly what you said, which is the billion dollars of revenues back to the government. I don't know if you had any specific comments with respect to that.