Evidence of meeting #59 for Finance in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was unions.
A video is available from Parliament.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Brison.
We'll go to Mr. Allen, please.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Allen Conservative Tobique—Mactaquac, NB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'll start with Ms. Durdin and Mr. Dobrzanski, please.
Ms. Durdin, you didn't get a chance to finish your comments. I wanted to pick up on a couple of things and seek some clarification.
I think what I heard from both of you is that the key element here is time, because you have a membership-driven organization so there is that kind of thing you need to do within your organization to get this sorted out and how that works.
Also, Mr. Dobrzanski, you said that the changes are something that will give the credit unions a choice to go federal or provincial, so the important thing is to set that framework in place, which this legislation basically does. That's an important thing, and I agree with you. We want to make sure that your service gets to as many places as we can. On that point we see that a lot of the major financial institutions have pulled out of the small communities.
If I understand correctly, the department has given you some indication that this probably could be two years before it would actually go into effect. Is that true?
5:20 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Credit Union Central of Canada
That's right. The Department of Finance issued a technical paper in mid-October, discussed the framework around some of these changes, and asked for our feedback by the end of December of this year. They are allowing a two-year timeframe for these changes to be implemented, but it's unclear to us when the clock starts.
Does the clock start at the end of December when the period is over or will it start when Bill C-43 is enacted? When does it actually start? We're asking for a minimum of two years, a timeframe that's more related to what needs to be done once we understand the full scope of what changes are required, because some of them are beyond our control.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Allen Conservative Tobique—Mactaquac, NB
You would prefer the two years from the time the bill is passed, as opposed to going back to October?
5:25 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Credit Union Central of Canada
Yes, or later.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Allen Conservative Tobique—Mactaquac, NB
Have either of you started in terms of discussing with the provincial regulators, to this point in time, to assess the impact of those changes?
5:25 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Credit Union Central of Canada
Yes. The provincial regulators, as I understand it, have met and met with federal financial officials. That discussion is under way.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Allen Conservative Tobique—Mactaquac, NB
Mr. Dobrzanski, this applies to the centrals and the question.... Is the nuance with the way the centrals are providing these back-office services? Is this nuance different from maybe one of the major financial institutions? Is it the centrals that are the key, like the fly in the ointment, on this one? Is that the issue?
5:25 p.m.
Chief Economist, President and Chief Executive Officer, Citizens Bank of Canada, Vancouver City Savings Credit Union
It is fair to say that for the line of sight for a small business member at Vancity, or a social enterprise or a not-for-profit agency at Vancity, we can explain to them in the current framework or through our central, which is part of that federal landscape at the clearings level, how their cheques and their deposits clear. They have the confidence, therefore, to carry on transactions with us.
It is not clear to us where we need time to understand the different proposals as they emerge if the centrals change who regulates them. Does that change and impact the payment systems? Or is there, in some clauses here, reference to wholesale financial institutions from the cooperative sector? Will another technical wholesale cooperative sector be enabled or an institution be enabled to support this sector in the area of the evolving payment?
We're speaking from a member lens that—you're absolutely right—passes through not only the credit union and the central, but into how we cooperate regionally so that we can create a cooperative credit-union-based space at scale for financial settlements.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Allen Conservative Tobique—Mactaquac, NB
I have about a minute left. I want to pick up on one of the comments that Mr. Brison was talking about in regard to the tax changes and one of the proposals you made in the prebudget consultations for the tax on the capital and the retained earnings. I understand that it's roughly $69 million.
The existing tax, which is being phased out I guess over five years...and it still doesn't apply to the real small credit unions, but as you merge, you get bigger, so therefore you would lose that tax advantage. My understanding is that it's roughly in the order of about $46 million today for that.
5:25 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Credit Union Central of Canada
I think that's correct.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Allen Conservative Tobique—Mactaquac, NB
The incremental that you're asking for is something like $23 million over that. Is that correct?
5:25 p.m.
A voice
Exactly.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
5:25 p.m.
NDP
Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I will share my time with Mr. Rankin.
Mr. Yussuff, I would like to come back to the issue of employment insurance.
You are very familiar with the program and the 2008 and 2014 Supreme Court rulings. In 2002, the former Auditor General stated in her report that the employment insurance fund surpluses, at that time, were contrary to the spirit of the law and that, under such circumstances, the government should review the premium rate-setting mechanism.
The Supreme Court agreed with that opinion in its 2008 ruling. Moreover, in 2014, the court reaffirmed its statement from 2008. Despite everything, the government uses the employment insurance surpluses for an initiative whose only goal is to provide businesses with premium holidays, with no strings attached.
Do you agree that one of the government's responsibilities would be to establish an independent premium-setting mechanism to ensure that employers and employees would pay premiums proportional to the benefits they can receive?
5:25 p.m.
President, Canadian Labour Congress
Yes, I would agree with you.
When former finance minister, Jim Flaherty, brought in the changes for the rate-setting processes, it established an independent board or was supposed to accomplish that. For the most part of their work, they got it wrong and they got it wrong many times. We had made some argument that the structure was flawed and they needed to fix it.
Again, we're seeing that the amount of revenue generated by the EI fund exceeds, obviously, the benefit payments that are going out. The challenge that we see here is that the ability to access benefits had been so restricted that the workers who were supposed to benefit from the system are becoming marginalized more and more. It's so restrictive they can't gain access.
I think workers have a role to play in terms of what should happen here with the premium they're paying, but more importantly, the entire structure needs to be looked at. The qualification mechanism for getting benefits is far too restrictive, and of course, the workers end up paying the biggest share of that.
When they don't get the EI benefits, fundamentally, they have to go on social assistance in their provinces and the provincial governments end up paying the cost that the federal government is escaping any responsibility for.
5:30 p.m.
NDP
Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Thank you.
I will now yield the floor to Mr. Rankin.
5:30 p.m.
NDP
Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC
Thank you to the witnesses for coming.
I'd like to ask Dr. Taylor a question. When you confront a public health issue like ebola, are you free to speak out publicly if, as, and when you wish?
5:30 p.m.
Chief Public Health Officer, Public Health Agency of Canada
I speak very often to the public. I speak to the media. I speak to parliamentarians on a regular basis. I speak very frequently.
5:30 p.m.
NDP
Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC
The reason I ask is that with this new arrangement, with the president and yourself, clause 256 only talks about you providing advice to the minister and the president on public health matters.
Do you consult with the ministry first before you provide advice? Are you free to go out on your own if you wish?
5:30 p.m.
Chief Public Health Officer, Public Health Agency of Canada
When I'm speaking to Canadians, I'm speaking on behalf of the Public Health Agency. Part of the role of the CPHO has always been speaking to Canadians and that will continue. There's also an annual report, the CPHO report, that goes directly to parliamentarians.
5:30 p.m.
NDP
Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC
I'm familiar with the annual report but this section changes now, and only contemplates speaking and giving advice to the minister. I wasn't sure, do you have a communications protocol or something to confirm your ability to speak independently to the media?
5:30 p.m.
Chief Public Health Officer, Public Health Agency of Canada
It's advice I give to the minister that goes to the president, the cabinet, and the Prime Minister. Speaking to Canadians is continually a clear role that happens, and as I say, I'm speaking on behalf of the entire agency and oftentimes on behalf of the entire government.
When I'm speaking on behalf of the government, I confer within the agency and confer that we're having the right message consistent with other departments, for example.