Finance Committee on Sept. 26th, 2018

[Pierre-Luc Dusseault, NDP, Sherbrooke, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

If everyone agrees, I will ask a few questions.

Mr. Newman, your testimony and the figures you have given us were enough to convince us that a universal pharmacare program is useful. It is missing from what the government is currently saying, and probably even what your MP is saying. What the government and the Minister of Finance are saying leads us to believe that, for the time being, there may be private interests behind that program, which is similar to putting a small band-aid on a large wound. Money is being lost in the economy because of that.

Do you have an opinion on the direction we are taking? The government has openly stated that it was considering an approach whereby only a few holes would be plugged in the system rather than reviewing the entire approach and finding savings that would benefit society as a whole.

[Keith Newman]

Thank you for your question.

We are not in favour of a system that would only plug the holes. First, there are so many holes to plug that it would really be impossible, in our opinion. Second, that would not control our costs, which would become exorbitant. In Canada, pharmaceutical costs are extremely high. They're only surpassed by the United States or, occasionally, countries such as Switzerland or Germany, depending on the year. Our expenditures in that area are among the highest in the world.

In fact, the Quebec model, which is something of a stopgap, was a good attempt 20 years ago, when it was implemented. Unfortunately, compared with costs in other western countries, Quebec's costs are the highest. It is nearly impossible to control those costs without a publicly funded universal system. Huge amounts are being spent, but the results are unfortunately inconsistent. Some countries that are spending much less than us have far better results than we do.

In other words, the stopgap system is really inadequate financially speaking. It is also inadequate for companies. That system will not lower their costs, quite the opposite. Finally, it is a matter of justice. With such a system in place, some people will always fall through the cracks. Those people are far too numerous already.

[Pierre-Luc Dusseault, NDP, Sherbrooke, QC]

Do you think a certain amount of political courage is needed to choose a publicly funded universal system? As I was saying earlier, insurance companies would not have much to gain under those circumstances. What do you think about the courage needed to implement such a system? That may be what the government is currently lacking.

[Keith Newman]

You have put your finger on a fairly sensitive issue.

It is certain that very powerful interests are not in favour of a universal public system. Clearly, if drug prices were reduced, pharmaceutical companies would have lower profits in Canada. They would only make profits in Europe, where public systems are already in place. That is not always the system we advocate for—a universal public system or a single-payer system, if you will. Those companies will have lower profits.

Insurance companies don't really play a role in a universal public pharmacare system. For instance, when you go to a doctor, you show your health card and that's it. You make no transactions with insurance companies. That's normal. Why would you? It is completely useless.

To establish an analogy with a quote from John Maynard Keynes, which is probably 100 years old now, I would say that insurance companies dig holes and refill them. That is what insurance companies do in the pharmaceutical industry.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Dusseault.

Mr. Fergus, go ahead.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I am happy to be able to ask questions.

I would have liked to put a question to my fellow Canadian on the national pharmacare program, but Mr. Dusseault has explored that recommendation very well.

I must congratulate the Canadian Labour Congress on making a suggestion regarding the daycare program. That said, the questions I would like to ask are more for the Universities Canada people.

I really like all the recommendations you are making, and I would like you to give me more information on one recommendation in particular.

Why is it important for Canadian students to study abroad for a semester in order to gain experience in foreign education? My youngest daughter is currently in Mexico for a semester, and she is loving the experience. What is the connection between that experience and the importance for young people to become good citizens and more efficient workers?

[Paul Davidson]

Thank you very much for the question. This is something I believe in very passionately, having had an international experience 35 years ago that shaped my own career. These are 21st century skills. Employers are saying they want people who are globally savvy, who are comfortable getting on an airplane and who conduct business in new and emerging markets. That's one thing.

Also, in a world of closing borders and closing minds, our young people are amongst our best ambassadors for Canada, and that's an important aspect.

Another thing that's changed over time, and I'm really pleased about this, is increased efforts to get all students to have this experience. It should not just be an experience for the elite. In fact, there have been studies that show that for those from underserved communities and under-represented groups, one of the fastest ways of improving their economic outcomes is to ensure that they have an international experience as part of their undergraduate years.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Davidson, you mentioned the importance of having what is referred to as work-integrated learning. This is the second time that concept has been brought up in this committee. Representatives of the Business/Higher Education Roundtable made the same recommendations to us last week.

Can you explain what Canadian universities are doing to encourage that type of experience?

[Paul Davidson]

One of the really encouraging things in this space is it's not just Universities Canada. I was here for the last few minutes of the Polytechnics presentation, and I heard my counterpart there speak very persuasively about it. The Business/Higher Education Roundtable is joined by about 25 other groups who are supporting this.

At Universities Canada we are creating the space and encouraging our members to dramatically increase the number of opportunities for their students. The key component of that is to make sure there are opportunities offered by the private sector. Forums like the Business/Higher Education Roundtable have been very important in facilitating the dialogue about what the emerging skills needs are and how we can get this working at scale.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Thank you.

My question is for Ms. Bell, from the Tourism Industry Association of Canada.

It concerns your fourth recommendation. Considering the current labour shortage across Canada, you recognize the importance of immigration as a source of labour. Can you elaborate on your comments and your recommendation on that issue?

[Charlotte Bell]

It is clear that we prefer to hire people who live in Canada, instead of going abroad and hiring temporary foreign workers.

For a very long time, we were asking for permission to hire immigrants—more specifically permanent residents—to help them integrate into Canada. So far, that experience has been rather positive, but most of the Canadian government's programs in immigration are not intended for people who want to work in this industry.

For the most part, the government is focused on STEM jobs. What we're saying is, if we're looking at immigration and we're going to increase the number of immigrants coming to Canada, then we should be looking at the labour needs that Canada is experiencing so that we can actually bring people to fill those particular jobs and actually become part of our society.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peter Julian]

Thank you very much.

I'm sorry that the question period was truncated. You had a lot of rich testimony that we will be taking into consideration.

We will now suspend the meeting and reconvene at 6:45 p.m.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

We will reconvene and call the meeting to order. For the benefit of the audience and some new people on the committee, I will explain what the open-mike session really is.

This is the first time we've done an open-mike session in Ottawa. I think the main reason that they were designed is that when we are travelling the country and there is only space for about 12 witnesses, there are usually others who want to make a point. We open it up for usually half an hour before the formal meeting starts in order to give people an opportunity—a minute—to say what is on their mind. Their information gets on the record and is considered by the committee in terms of our pre-budget consultations.

We have 10 people here. Hopefully, you can hold it to one minute. We might stretch it a bit to a minute and a half, seeing as there are only 10 people. There are no questions from members, but certainly some members might have some questions for you afterwards on a personal level.

People can stand up or sit at the table, whichever makes them feel more comfortable.

With that, we will start with the first witness, Mr. David Al-Aidroos.

David, I may not have pronounced your name quite properly. Welcome to the table. Take your minute or a minute and a half and tell us what's on your mind.

Also, thanks to all of you for coming. We really do appreciate your interest.

[David Al-Aidroos, As an Individual]

I'm curious to see if you're going to appreciate my coming here after I say what I say.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Go ahead, David. The floor is yours.

[David Al-Aidroos]

Good evening,

ladies and gentlemen, you are asking for input on a very big challenge, which is to set the budget for next year. I have to say that I feel like I'm one of those little gophers in those games where you hit them on the head, because I don't feel like I belong here, but there are two things I have that I think make me different.

Number one, unlike you, I know who you voted for in the last federal election. Number two, unlike these people who came before you who had big problems and were wanting your solutions, I have a big solution for your problem or challenge that is before this committee.

Think about what it would look like. What is the solution going to look like when it comes to you? In 2013, Minister Clement picked up on it and sent me on a whole dog-and-pony show—and my clients, who were several governments—to the Treasury Board Secretariat, and people got it. All the assistant secretaries kind of got it and it got batted around and it kind of fizzled out.

You guys have your house in order, right? The most important thing you have is that the Minister of Finance is not the Auditor General. The problem for the budget to be fair and transparent is that fairness and transparency occur in the justice system and the Attorney General and the Minister of Justice are the same person. When you're going out there, if you can ask the question—when will Canada's legal system be rules-based, always, everywhere you go?—and have an answer for that, the future will be bright indeed. There are two people I've been working on a lot for six years now. If you could ask that question of the clerk and the administrator of the Judges Act, I think you'd be pleased with the answer.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Thank you, David.

Carolyn Webb, the floor is yours.

[Carolyn Webb, As an Individual]

Thanks for the opportunity to speak. My name is Carolyn Webb. I represent Sustain Ontario, which is a member of the Coalition for Healthy School Food, which is a network of more than 40 groups and a project of Food Secure Canada.

Approximately 20% of students in Canada receive a meal or a snack at school, and evidence shows that a national healthy school food program would increase children's consumption of healthy foods, reduce the risk of chronic diseases, improve mental health, improve educational outcomes, and increase graduation rates.

These programs have the potential to create jobs and to grow local economies by investing in local agriculture and food businesses.

A national school food program has been recommended by the Senate social affairs committee, a former House finance committee, the Ontario Healthy Kids Panel, the former chief public health officer, and with Senator Eggleton's June Senate Motion No. 358.

We're asking your government to invest $360 million in your next budget to join provinces, territories, municipalities, community groups, parents, and many others in a cost-shared program that is estimated at around $1.8 billion.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Thank you very much, Carolyn.

Next is Sana Musa.

Welcome, Sana. The floor is yours.

[Sana Musa, As an Individual]

Honourable members, I am honoured and humbled that I have been given the opportunity to stand here today. My name is Sana Musa, and I am a member of the ONE campaign.

Canada is the best performing economy in the G7. We should be proud. However, on average, Canada invests 37% less on international assistance than other G7 countries. In fact, our investments have dropped by 12% since 2010. As Canadians, we must do more.

Seven hundred and sixty-six million people live in extreme poverty worldwide, and women and girls are the most affected. New investments in the sustainable development goals present a massive opportunity. Every dollar invested in an additional year of schooling generates earnings and health benefits of approximately $10 in low-income countries.

Let's continue to be proud of Canada's role in the world. Let's ensure that Canada contributes its fair share in the fight against extreme poverty.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Thank you, Sana.

Next would be Mr. Alain Trépanier. You can pronounce your name properly. I believe you're from Vancouver.

[Alain Trépanier, As an Individual]

I'm from Vancouver. With your permission, I would like to do a joint submission with a colleague from the same association.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

That's not a problem. Just try to keep it as tight as you can.

If you could too, sir, state your name.

[Roy Goodall, As an Individual]

Committee members, I am Roy Goodall, the vice-president of the National Association of Federal Retirees.

With 180,000 members, the National Association of Federal Retirees is the largest national advocacy organization representing active and retired members as well as their partners and survivors of the federal public service, the Canadian Armed Forces, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and retired federally appointed judges.

One of our recommendations is that the federal government lead the implementation of a comprehensive national seniors strategy with our provinces and territories that addresses the social determinants of health, including access to affordable and appropriate housing, retirement income security, and robust and sustainable social services.

This must include action on improving seniors-focused home and community care, developing and promoting age-friendly community principles, increased support for caregivers, and combatting isolation and ageism.

Thank you.