Evidence of meeting #112 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was research.
11 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
We thank you for coming.
We will turn, then, to the Recreation Vehicle Dealers Association of Canada.
Mr. Moore, welcome.
11 a.m.
Ian Moore Past Chairman, Recreation Vehicle Dealers Association of Canada
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the invitation to present to the committee.
Good morning, honourable members. My name is Ian Moore. I'm a past chairman of the Recreation Vehicle Dealers Association of Canada, RVDA. It's my pleasure to be here today to discuss our recommendations to support the federal government in its efforts to increase productivity and competitiveness in the Canadian economy.
Here's a little background on our association for those of you who are unfamiliar with the RVDA. We are a national volunteer federation of provincial and regional associations that have united to form a professional trade association for all the businesses involved in the recreation vehicle industry. The RVDA of Canada has 640 members from coast to coast and has been representing our industry's needs for over 30 years.
RVing is an iconic form of Canadian tourism. In 2016, one in five campers in North America reported an RV as their primary use of accommodation for camping. The popularity of RV camping for new campers has grown from 18% to 26% over the past year. Not only is RVing an important component of Canadian tourism, but RVing also has a considerable impact on the economy. The manufacturing, purchasing, servicing, and use of RVs contributes billions, both directly and indirectly, to the Canadian economy each year. In 2011 the total economic activity associated with the industry was $14.5 billion. RV dealers are small business owners who help the Canadian tourism industry and foster economic growth, particularly in rural and northern communities. In every region of the country, tourism creates jobs and opportunities for Canada's middle class.
I'm here today to ask that the federal government consider three of our recommendations that would not only help the tourism industry but would also help the federal government in increasing business productivity and helping small business owners who are the backbone of our economy.
First, to increase productivity, Canadians need to access the labour market, skills development, and training opportunities. We recommend increased support for skilled workers in the RV industry. There are currently only two programs in Canada that offer RV service technician apprenticeship training, in Kelowna, British Columbia, and Calgary, Alberta. Both programs provide Red Seal designation that is accepted nationwide. The existing programs reach full enrolment each year and often hold waiting lists for an additional several dozen prospective students.
Due to the geographic constraints of these existing programs, we recommend that the Government of Canada create an apprenticeship travel grant that could be used by those who are required to travel in order to undertake an apprenticeship training program. This grant should be targeted toward those enrolled in programs that are not offered in their city, town, or province. This grant should be a taxable cash grant of $2,000 to $4,000 per person per year in order to provide support for such items as travel costs, lodging, and care arrangements for families.
Second, the Government of Canada should provide targeted and dedicated investment in the camping and RV infrastructure in Canadian national parks. Investing in camping and RV infrastructure would play a critical role in overall contributions of the tourism industry to future economic development and prosperity. There are more than 4,231 campgrounds operated across Canada, each offering a unique experience for Canadians and international visitors. As campground services continue to rise in demand, critical infrastructure needs, such as sizing requirements to accommodate large RVs and access to appropriate electrical outlets and waste disposal facilities, remain unfunded.
Upgrades in infrastructure are essential if we want to be able to ensure the future of this industry and make it more accessible to all Canadians. We recommend that the federal government provide targeted and dedicated investment in camping and RV infrastructure in Canada's national parks. Investing in the infrastructure will play a critical role in the overall contributions of the tourism industry to future economic development and prosperity.
Finally, with the review of Canada's tax planning using private corporations, we would like to make our voice heard in this process. As it stands, the RVDA takes issue with the current proposal as outlined. RV dealers are family-run, small business owners who are able to make a living by working many more hours than the average salaried employee. If these proposed changes go through, these family-run businesses will no longer have the capacity to ensure the longevity of their operations, let alone build up their communities.
As small business owners, our RV dealers must be able to save a portion of their annual profits and keep them inside their corporations to plan for future capital expenditures and set aside funds to account for seasonal fluctuations and the leaner years. In the RV industry, there is significant revenue fluctuation between seasons that can leave businesses suffering for many months of the year.
RV dealers also need to plan for their own retirement, which they fully fund out of pocket without the same assistance a salaried employee at a larger company might have access to. When this money is eventually withdrawn, it will be subject to very high personal tax rates. However, applying the same high personal rates, well in excess of 50%, to returns on personal savings while still in the corporation will have a severely negative impact on small business owners and their ability to save and invest for the future of their businesses.
We hope that our arguments are heard, and I am very thankful for your time and attention today. I would be happy to take any questions you might have.
Thank you.
11:05 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Thank you, Ian, for those comments.
We'll turn then to Rogers Group Financial. Mr. Gillespie, welcome.
11:05 a.m.
Clay Gillespie Managing Director, Rogers Group Financial
Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee, for allowing me to take part in this year's pre-budget consultation in my home town of Vancouver. I greatly appreciate each of you travelling to B.C. for this meeting. This happens to be my second appearance before this committee and I do appreciate the work you do on behalf of the government and all Canadians.
I would like to touch upon the theme of this year's pre-budget consultations: productivity and competitiveness. The two issues I wish to raise today are the proposed changes to small business taxation and long-term care for our aging population.
The first comments are in respect to the proposed changes to small business taxation. I'm an advisor who deals with many small business owners and I want to share some of their perspectives on these proposed changes. Small business owners are typically very practical and look at these changes as just an increasing cost to running their business. Therefore, to maintain their current lifestyle, they will need to make some structural changes to their businesses.
I've had two clients say they are not hiring any new employees for a while to allow their businesses to hopefully absorb these additional costs. I've also had another small business owner suggest it might be easier to go back to being an employee rather than running his business. In his case, he would need to lay off five employees.
I would strongly suggest that the government spend some additional time on the unintended consequences of these changes. I know these examples are anecdotal in nature, but nowhere in the material released about the proposed changes is there any discussion on how they will affect the management of a small business. In fact, many small business owners do not disagree with many of the changes in the proposed legislation, but they are annoyed that they are being portrayed as individuals not paying their fair share and who are using loopholes in running their businesses.
The second topic I would like to discuss is long-term care. As the past chair of CALU, the Conference for Advanced life Underwriting, a national professional membership association of established financial advisors and actuarial professionals, I think it is critically important to think about the long term.
This is particularly critical given the opportunity and challenges various levels of government are beginning to face due to our aging population. According to Statistics Canada, it is estimated that approximately 11 million Canadians will have reached the age of 65 by the year 2036. That represents 23% of the population.
Given this reality, in order to be productive and competitive, we need to think critically about how this act will place additional strains on both our workforce and governments. In particular, I submit that providing quality long-term care support should be one of the country's top public policy priorities. As Canadians live longer, the more likely it is that they will be managing a chronic disease either for themselves, or for their loved ones, and will need some degree of long-term care support.
Unfortunately, many Canadians have the mistaken belief their long-term care needs will be met through programs and services funded by provincial governments. Long-term care, however, is not included under the Canada Health Act, and therefore is not available to Canadians on a universal basis. It is my view that broader ownership of long-term care insurance can help reduce these financial pressures on individuals, families, and governments.
Long-term care is designed to help cover the costs of care for individuals who have lost the ability to care for themselves. Despite the growing number of studies documenting the concerns of Canadians about their ability to afford long-term care needs, ownership of long-term care insurance is low due to a general lack of awareness relating to the extent of long-term care and an uncertainty regarding who is responsible for funding these costs.
To address these changes, I submit two proposals for consideration.
First is that the federal government work with provincial and territorial governments to develop a national approach to informing Canadians of the need to plan for long-term care funding expenses and developing a more unified approach to determining subsidized access to long-term care services.
Second is that the federal government permit RRSP annuitants to withdraw up to $2,000 per year from their RRSP or RRIF on a tax-free basis to fund the purchase of qualifying long-term care insurance. This program would be similar to the lifelong learning plan and the home buyers' plan that are currently part of the Income Tax Act. These two actions would reduce the burden of family support obligations for Canadian workers and would serve to help preserve government resources through reduced reliance on public programs and institutions for support. Crucially, as well, these actions would maintain a tax fairness inequity between younger and older generations of Canadians.
I thank you for your time today.
11:10 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Thank you very much, Clay.
Turning to Unite Here Local 40, we have Ms. Travis, research coordinator.
Welcome, and thanks for this short notice.
11:10 a.m.
Michelle Travis Research Coordinator, UNITE HERE! Local 40
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning.
My name is Michelle Travis. I'm a representative of Unite Here Canada, which represents hospitality workers across the country. Thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak to you this morning. We appreciate it, and welcome to Vancouver.
To get here today, all of you likely came through YVR airport, the workplace of nearly 1,000 airport members who our union represents. Unite Here represents over 25,000 workers across Canada and more than 275,000 throughout North America. Our members are the backbone of the tourism industry. They're the room attendants, front desk agents, bellmen in hotels, and the servers, cooks, and dishwashers in restaurants, including those at the Vancouver International Airport.
Our members are among the friendly faces who greet you when you land, and they are that unseen army responsible for the preparation and delivery of thousands of inflight meals each day. Our diverse membership includes many recent immigrants and a high proportion of women. Our members have made thousands of traditionally low-wage jobs into good family-supporting, middle-class jobs. I will touch on that again in a moment.
Your committee is posing the question of how the federal government can help Canadians be more productive in their workplaces and communities. We want to focus attention on one aspect of the tourism industry that the federal government can play a critical role in addressing, and that is the issue of airport authorities. There is no question that our airports are critical components of our economy and an important source of employment. Some of Canada's airports have received attention for being among the best in North America. However, there's another side that is often overshadowed that can have an adverse impact on our communities, and that is the lack of accountability and transparency on the part of airport authorities, which impacts our members, our communities, and our municipalities. For years various stakeholders have criticized Canadian airport authorities over this issue.
The Emerson report, in its review of Canada's transportation sectors, noted concerns that airports can potentially abuse their monopoly position by assessing fees and by competing in the same businesses as their tenants. The Federation of Canadian Municipalities has urged the government to review the special privileges enjoyed by airport authorities, which can impact municipal finances, and to compel them to abide by municipal bylaws. There have been two attempts to create a legislative framework to improve airport governance and accountability, but those attempts have failed in the past and the issue has been sidelined.
When the Government of Canada originally transferred the operation of airports to non-profit corporations in the 1990s, it failed to create an adequate oversight framework for airport governance. That failure has given airport authorities the unfettered ability to raise user fees, the freedom to carry out land development projects without local approval, permitted the appointment of board directors who are beholden to airport authorities and not necessarily to the municipal and elected officials who appoint them, and the freedom to enter into business ventures without checks and balances.
Similarly, airport workers contracted by airport authorities see a lack of accountability. Airport authorities take no responsibility for ensuring that outsourced airport jobs are decent jobs. I'll give you an example. You my have grabbed a cup of coffee on your way through the airport. The typical airport concession worker who sold it to you is a women, likely older, who immigrated to Canada for a better future. However, many airport concession workers hold two jobs, work long hours, and juggle long commutes to make ends meet.
Unionized workers tend to be better off, but whether they're union or non-union, airport concession workers face precarious, unstable work because airport authorities will flip contracts to cheaper bidders, and that can push workers out of their jobs. There's little recourse for workers to make their case to a governing body that is self-governing. Right now in Canada, Canadian airport authorities, who act as stewards of public infrastructure on behalf of Canadian citizens, are essentially self-governing.
The federal government is currently reviewing the future of airport ownership and considering whether to privatize airports, as recommended in the Emerson report. We think that what has been overshadowed also is the question about airport government that was also raised in the Emerson report. We recommend that the federal government ensure airport authorities more productively contribute to our communities by compelling the authorities to comply with municipal planning bodies, pay an equitable share of taxes to our cities, create an advisory role for a local and regional body to have a say in setting airport improvement fees, shine a light on board of directors' deliberations and better reporting on certain business ventures, and urge airport authorities to adopt responsible contractor policies that would create more stability for outsourced workers and end the race to the bottom.
We believe that the question of accountability should be tackled now to remedy some of the errors of the past and create better practices for Canada's major airports going forward.
Thank you.
11:15 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Thank you very much, Michelle.
From the University of Victoria, we have Mr. Cassels, president and vice-chancellor, and Ms. Napoleon.
11:15 a.m.
Jamie Cassels President and Vice-Chancellor, University of Victoria
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
It's a pleasure to meet with your committee as you make your way around our country. Thank you for your efforts to reach out across the nation.
As president of the University of Victoria, I welcome this opportunity to speak to you about our proposed indigenous law program and how it directly responds to the focus of this committee. In my remarks this morning, I'll outline what it will take to deliver on a groundbreaking program at the University of Victoria and the impact this would have across the country, and indeed around the world.
The University of Victoria is one of Canada's premier research and teaching universities, educating over 22,000 students a year. In particular, UVic is a national leader in closing the educational gap for indigenous students. Over the last decade, our enrolment of indigenous students has more than tripled, and it continues to grow along with a vibrant body of research conducted by indigenous scholars at the university.
Right now Canada and indigenous peoples are working to build the elements of a nation-to-nation relationship and establish a new era of respect and reconciliation. The Government of Canada and indigenous peoples expect that by restoring their relationship and by building robust institutions, they will promote effective governance and inclusive economic growth. UVic shares that commitment to reconciliation. Just last month, we launched our most comprehensive indigenous plan ever. It outlines how UVic strives to integrate and honour indigenous cultures, histories, and ways of knowing into our curriculum, our teaching, and our research. We believe that indigenous peoples must share in a socially, culturally, and economically viable future for all of us. Our programs of education and research focus on matters like indigenous language revitalization, culture, and social and economic capacity building with nations across the country.
Today I want to speak specifically about our proposed indigenous law program. Like other laws, indigenous law is about citizenship, governance, managing conflict, and interacting with peoples beyond one's own society. As indigenous peoples increasingly exercise jurisdiction over their lands, resources, and affairs, they draw upon their own legal traditions and principles of social order.
The indigenous law program would be composed of two key components that respond to those needs. The first is a four-year dual degree in which students would acquire degrees in both common law and indigenous legal orders. Students would participate in practical, hands-on learning in field schools and would work on indigenous territories across the entire country, learning from indigenous experts and contributing to the operation of indigenous institutions. They would gain the skills to build processes that draw upon indigenous traditions to translate across indigenous and non-indigenous legal, social, and economic structures.
The second component is the “indigenous legal lodge”, which is a national forum for critical engagement, debate, learning, public education, and partnerships on indigenous legal traditions and their use, their refinement, and their reconstruction today. This would house the educational programs that I've described and be both a national gathering place for professional and community education on indigenous legal traditions and a research institute promoting rigorous engagement across Canada, and indeed around the world.
As I said, this will be an institution of national significance, and indeed international significance, as countries worldwide are struggling with similar challenges in how to recognize and work with indigenous legal orders. It will serve as a global centre of excellence for understanding, developing, and deploying indigenous legal institutions, including the structures that can build and sustain healthy relationships between indigenous peoples and states.
The programs will be led by some of Canada's finest indigenous scholars and leaders, including Dr. Val Napoleon, who joins me here today. Dr. Napoleon, for example, leads the indigenous law research unit at the University of Victoria, which has worked with over 40 communities across Canada to create robust legal resources, tools, processes, and practices grounded in indigenous legal traditions.
The University of Victoria is requesting financial support from the federal government to build the indigenous legal lodge and to fulfill this vision of an iconic, culturally appropriate facility and a marquee legacy investment, fulfilling the calls to action of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
Both the program and the lodge directly fulfill the TRC's call to action number 50, which calls for the establishment of institutes of indigenous law. They support the Government of Canada's commitment to a nation-to-nation relationship, advance the 10 principles respecting the Government of Canada's relationship with indigenous peoples, and help to provide substance to the implementation of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
By supporting this program, the government would also be responding to indigenous peoples from across Canada who've expressed support for this program. This support culminated in a resolution, unopposed, and by a consensus of the chiefs in assembly. At the 2017 AGM of the Assembly of First Nations, the resolution was passed to urge the Government of Canada to fund the establishment of the University of Victoria's indigenous legal lodge as a foundation for understanding, researching, and deliberating upon the nature of indigenous legal systems and their continued use today.
Reconciliation is intrinsically dependent upon the recognition of the rights and traditions of indigenous peoples. This program furthers reconciliation by recognizing and supporting the legal orders on which self-government depends—indeed, which form the very fabric of indigenous nationhood. In doing so, it lays the foundation for a new era of economic partnership and resource development by contributing to robust governance structures anchored in the communities' own laws. It lays the foundation for mutual respect and shared prosperity for indigenous peoples and for all Canadians.
Thank you very much for this opportunity. Both Dr. Napoleon and I are available and happy to interact with the committee if there are any questions.
11:25 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Thanks to all of you for your presentations.
We'll go to six-minute rounds this time.
Mr. McLeod.
11:25 a.m.
Liberal
Michael McLeod Liberal Northwest Territories, NT
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks to everyone who presented here today.
I am very happy that the University of Victoria is here. I've heard your presentation before. It's something that I think is very important and that we need to hear more about.
I think I'm the only Liberal MP who has gone through the residential school system. Out of all of us in the House of Commons, I think there are only two MPs who have. I'm not 100% sure, but I think I'm the only one who lives in an indigenous or aboriginal community, and it's a small one.
One of the reasons for my involvement with politics at this level is my concern over the youth and the future of our younger people in the north, especially in the indigenous population. Many of us recognize that our way forward is through education. Opportunities and possibilities can arise throughout a person's lifetime, and people will not be able to take advantage of them if the education levels are not where they need to be.
We really see that in a lot of the communities in the north. We have one tribal council, the Tlicho, which has hired people to work full time to support students in post-secondary education. They call every month. They find out if they need mentors. They find out what mechanisms they need to make their education possible. It's working. We are seeing doctors and lawyers. We are seeing people coming out of the education system with degrees that we've never seen before, so we know it's possible. They're all getting good jobs.
They've also recognized that it has to start earlier, that it can't be for just post-secondary programs. They're looking at the aboriginal head start program and those types of programs in order to do more and to get them involved younger and earlier. We've seen the Nunavut law program really provide some quality people in society who are making a difference. They're taking all kinds of positions—political positions and business positions—and are really making good contributions to society.
I want to ask a couple of questions. First of all, I recognize that for too long institutions in the south didn't allow aboriginal people to be aboriginal. If you went south, you had to push your culture and everything to the side and focus on education. Does your program allow you to stay proud of your culture and your traditions?
11:25 a.m.
Professor Val Napoleon Associate Professor, and Law Foundation Professor of Aboriginal Justice and Governance, University of Victoria
Thanks for that question. I have had students from the Tlicho First Nation and Decho First Nation in the city, amazing people to work with in my experience.
The starting place for us in working with indigenous law is that law from our society is central to who we are as peoples, as citizens. That is the starting place for talking about law in the world, and law between peoples and within peoples.
We understand it as being a way that we think about ourselves and our relationships, our families and our communities, and its tied to land. It's tied to language. It's tied to how we treat non-human life forms and the world beyond.
From that starting place, that fundamental starting place, which by the way is the starting place for Canadian law as well just expressed differently, then we look at the full scope of what indigenous law is, all that is required for societies to manage themselves to their fullest. We look at lands, families, economics. We look at the whole range of business that a society has to have in order to properly manage itself as a people.
There are questions of government and questions of human rights, how we deal with harms and injuries, all of those kinds of things. What we're doing with this program is having students start from their own intellectual traditions, from their own starting places, their integrity as indigenous peoples within their society. So absolutely, pride in who one is, it's how the program is built.
11:30 a.m.
Liberal
Michael McLeod Liberal Northwest Territories, NT
Thank you. I think that's so important because we've seen many, too many, suicides in our society. Even people with good educations are committing suicide. The rationale a lot of times is that they become disconnected with their culture and they feel they've failed even though they have succeeded in life. That's really important.
You mentioned, and it's something that I totally agree with, that self-governance is the very fabric of nationhood. I think in my riding of the Northwest Territories we have six large aboriginal populations that are all focused on becoming self-governing. In a few years, we probably won't see the Indian Act or that type of paternal approach anymore and they'll work towards making things work the best for themselves.
How would you incorporate that as a goal in your program? I see you have put together a nice plan. How does this incorporate into your plan?
11:30 a.m.
Prof. Val Napoleon
When we think about how Canada governs itself, how the provinces govern themselves, how powers are distributed and people act on those authorities and systems of accountability, that governance and law is a central part of how we govern ourselves. Therefore, indigenous law for indigenous peoples, indigenous societies, is also central.
The work that we've been doing for a number of years is substantively researching and articulating indigenous law across the spectrum of subjects, including lands and resources. Right now we're working on water law and we're working with human rights and governance and moving into other areas.
We're creating resources that will be used to develop curricula within the indigenous law degree program, but there are also materials that are available now to the communities that we're working in partnership with. We've been working intensely with community partners. We've trained community members in working with indigenous legal methodologies and tackling tough questions. We create videos and printed materials and other kinds of resources for people.
We understand that we have to work in a variety of ways to engage people in what they care about with their communities and with their regions and with their territories and how they interact with neighbours and with Canada.
11:30 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Thank you.
We'll come back to Mr. Sorbara, he's going to give you half his time so that you can finish that round.
Mr. Albas.
11:30 a.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Thank you Mr. Chair.
Thank you to all of our witnesses for your testimony and presence here today.
I'd like to start with Mr. McMaster. I had first-hand experience with health research hospitals and whatnot, when the University of Alberta and Dr. Shimizu conducted a vertical skin graft. I was one of the first recipients of an experimental technique when I was quite young, and it was 100% successful, so I certainly value many of the things you've represented today.
In regard to your particular ask, that individual research hospitals be able to apply for federal funding, first of all, it's my understanding that those hospitals are owned by the health authorities they run under. Is that correct?
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
I understand it's a very simple request you have, but I also know how intensely difficult it is to plan long-term infrastructure within a health authority. It's very complicated, and it's very, very.... An example is Penticton Regional Hospital and the upgrades it has. It's near my area, and it was extremely difficult and upsetting to many professionals that they had to wait as long as they did to get on the list.
One of my questions to you is whether you still believe, given the fact that it is so difficult to plan these infrastructure investments for a health authority, that to suddenly have it where an independent hospital starts applying for something that may have material impacts on a long-term plan for the health authority...? How do you square that?
11:35 a.m.
Member of the Board of Directors, HealthCareCAN
The way we square it, and I think the way most research hospitals square it, is long-term planning on their site. It's clear that research aids in clinical care within the site. It should be embedded within the design of a hospital. By having access to federal funds when the hospital is constructed or renovated, it allows the research to be embedded within the hospital, and that allows the patient contact, patient-oriented research, as we are referring to it these days.
It's part of the planning of the hospital. It cannot be independent. I think what does not work would be to build a hospital research building that is separated from the care. The advantage of having research in a hospital is the interaction with physicians, surgeons, patients, and the public. It has to be an integrated plan.
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
I just think it would be very difficult to do that, and—
11:35 a.m.
Member of the Board of Directors, HealthCareCAN
Most of the research hospitals have been doing this for years, and we are certainly extending it to our community hospitals.
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
I think it's a fair statement. I just think it would be very difficult because, when you start to do infrastructure upgrades in one area and there's a lot of interoperability within the system, there would be a lot of complications.
11:35 a.m.
Member of the Board of Directors, HealthCareCAN
I couldn't agree with you more. It's very difficult.
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Thank you.
I'd like to go to Mr. Moore. Thank you for your presentation. Are you concerned that many private campgrounds are voicing concerns about CRA's denial of the small business tax rate because they're considered to be passive investments?
Many small family private campgrounds in my area, the Okanagan, have said that if they end up in that end of it, they would probably just sell off the land, and it would go to development and not toward further campgrounds. Are you concerned about that, sir?
11:35 a.m.
Past Chairman, Recreation Vehicle Dealers Association of Canada
Yes, we are concerned. We are very concerned with that. As dealerships go, we need the campgrounds, both public and private, for people to go camping. I apologize. I know Eleonore wasn't able to be here today, but I know they're working very hard to try to get the federal government to understand that campgrounds being changed in their legislation and taxed.... I know for a fact there are two on the island that, if that happened to them—you're exactly right—they would go to development and you'll no longer have campgrounds. They'll just end up being condominiums.
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Many of your association members probably have holding companies where they'll hold land in a particular company and then the actual operation is in the other. With these changes proposed—again, the chair has been very specific that these are proposals—I'm sure under Canadian-controlled private corporations, that would drastically affect your business model.
Is there anything specific when it comes to how people hold certain properties and how they would be taxed on their own land, in many cases?