Finance Committee on May 15th, 2014

[Martin Lavoie]

Absolutely. I travel across the country meeting our companies, and regulations and red tape are always in the top three issues that are raised, along with R and D tax credits and labour issues. So I think it's almost an ongoing battle, because the one-for-one rule is great in principle, but it's maybe more difficult to apply. We're quite supportive of it. We dedicate a lot of time to looking at those things and trying to get feedback from our members as well.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Have you heard from your members what areas in particular they find most onerous when it comes to red tape?

[Martin Lavoie]

In the last couple of years, that would be all of the changes introduced in the scientific research and experimental development tax credit. For example, the documentation requirements are much greater than they used to be, and a lot of our members only find out when they're audited. So we actually met with CRA recently to convey that message to them and to make sure they got industry input so they could try to fix the way that.... They want to reduce red tape at the top of the pyramid, but they want that to be translated to the technological reviewers on the floor. So that's one area that is very problematic. A lot of our members think it's just not easy to apply for and to claim R and D tax credits. Also, all the changes and interpretations are very difficult to follow as well.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Okay, thank you very much.

I have no further questions, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you very much, Mr. Saxton.

Mr. Cuzner, go ahead, please.

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

It's great being here with my evil twin today.

Mr. Lavoie—

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

I'm much taller.

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

—I'll have you know that you sort of waded into some dangerous waters there. You'll notice the chairman is not only clean-shaven but in a foul mood as well, because his Bruins lost last night.

Between 2006 and 2012, the number of temporary foreign workers more than doubled in this country. Give me a profile of your organization as to, for your members, how much your investment in skills training would have increased over that same period of time.

[Martin Lavoie]

We don't have numbers on how much companies actually spend. What we hear a lot from our members in certain areas, engineering for example, is that, in some areas of the country, where there's a lot of construction going on for natural resource extraction, such as for oil sands or with the shipbuilding contracts coming in, companies are really worried about putting too much money into training and then losing the employees. So that's one area.

At the same time, though, they invest a lot of time when somebody who's out of school comes to their plant. What I hear a lot is that they're just not ready to work. Most of them have a very good theoretical knowledge of what they should be doing in the plant, but they've never worked with the equipment.

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

If I could put it this way—and we only have seven minutes here—it's sort of an arse-first approach to thinking that through, whether or not you want to invest in training. I agree wholeheartedly with the minister that industry should have more skin in the game, and I would think it would be worthwhile, before we.... Nobody's going to fight over some of the entry-level positions with low-skilled wages, but in a high-tech sector like yours, people are wondering why we can't get somebody who was trained here. For somebody who's been with the company, why aren't we investing in training to have them fill that position?”

So I would suggest that your industry should start to monitor the number of dollars they invest. I don't doubt that they invest, but I think it would be a good measurable.

Mr. Parent, this comes off something that Mr. Cullen had initiated. I don't pretend to have a deep knowledge of this, but I have had interventions on it in my office. Perhaps you could just clarify.

There was no legal obligation, more so a moral obligation, on the part of the government, and they fulfilled that moral obligation with retroactivity back to May 2012 in the wake of the Manuge decision. But what I'm hearing from people in my riding is this. Why didn't they go back to when the charter was initiated in 2006?

Are you hearing those same rumblings? Is there a constituency out there advocating for that position?

[Guy Parent]

We receive a lot of complaints every year, and I must say that we have received very few complaints on this matter. We have received some, though, I must be honest. For us it's an issue of compensation and not fairness, because the court case dealt with an insurance company and its clients, quite different from the government program.

In the case of Veterans Affairs Canada, according to legislation, money was taken back from these allowances in the earnings loss benefit. When the government decided not to carry on with the clawback, our biggest concern at the time was that the government didn't move very fast in coming up with an answer that would actually...because there were a lot of expectations out there. Certainly we thought it took too long to come up with a decision, and then, once the decision was made, it took too long to come up with the details.

We are satisfied that it actually meets the principles of fairness. There's a saying in the ombudsman world that you must be careful not to pursue fairness in such a way that you disadvantage the others. In this case, for us, fairness is to use the money that's available going forward to fund the programs that are now lacking, such as no income after 65.

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Okay.

Mr. Worswick, with regard to the temporary foreign workers program, last week, in response to a question about the low-skilled stream for the temporary foreign workers, Minister Kenney said that the Liberals began the program in 2002; all the Conservatives have done since then is put on additional regulations and restrictions.

I agree with half his answer. We did begin it in 2002, but to tighten regulations.

That's in contrast to what Minister Finley said in 2008, that “We are processing a record number of temporary foreign worker applications.... We have made it faster and simpler for employers to hire a foreign worker”.

Which would you say would be closer to the genesis of the program: more restrictions and regulations have been placed on it, or what some might think as Mr. Kenney having had to come in and sort of clean up the mess that Ms. Finley made?

[Prof. Christopher Worswick]

I'm not an expert on the details of the history of that part of the program, but as has already been articulated, the program expanded quite significantly over the 2003 to 2010-12 period. To me, it doesn't seem like it tightened up. It seems like it expanded and became easier. That's my reading overall.

May I make a quick comment related to your previous question?

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Is that on the investment in training?

[Prof. Christopher Worswick]

Yes, the training point.

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Okay.

[Prof. Christopher Worswick]

I think one of the key things to keep in mind with temporary foreign workers is turnover. We can say, look, we've advertised this job, no Canadians have taken it, and a temporary foreign worker is prepared to come. Now, what you implicitly have with a temporary foreign worker is a worker who is not going to leave, whereas I think for a lot of employers the issue is that they can bring someone in, they can train them, and then six months or a year later the person will leave. If employers are facing turnover, they're not going to be that likely to invest in training, I would have thought, on theoretical grounds.

My sense is that this is one of the reasons why temporary foreign worker programs, if they grow too large, can be problematic. Even if workers are equally productive, the employer will always want the worker who will stay.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Mr. Cuzner. That's it.

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Much as you'd like me to continue....

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

I would, yes.

You can go and watch your Leafs play tonight somewhere.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[A voice]

Speechless.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

We'll go to Mr. Keddy, please.

[Gerald Keddy, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margaret's, NS]

We'll leave the hockey analogies out of it.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Welcome to our witnesses. It's an interesting disgusting...or discussion here today.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!