Evidence of meeting #173 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.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:40 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Thank you.
We have time for three quick questions. We'll start with Leona and Peter, and then have somebody on this side. Queen's hasn't been asked any questions, just for your information.
Leona, go ahead.
11:40 a.m.
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, CPC
Thank you very much.
My question is for Land Over Landings. Pearson is the second-busiest airport for international traffic in North America. It's the fastest-growing airport in North America, and it has almost 50 million passengers a year, twice as many as the next-largest airport, which is Vancouver. It's not only an airport for Toronto; it's for Ontario and for Canada. Airports contribute to Ontario's and to Canada's competitiveness, and we're looking at a loss of $17 billion in Ontario's GDP if we don't get new infrastructure for airport systems. We're short on business cargo, and aerospace organizations and manufacturing don't have access to flight line.
We're looking at Pickering, being almost at the corner of the 404 and the 407. Pickering lands are two and a half times the size of Pearson, while the other airports in southern Ontario don't have that capacity. Also, the Pickering chair, the Durham chair, the mayor of Pickering and the electorate they represent have all said that Pickering airport is critical to the infrastructure and the economic growth and development of this region.
Could you comment on that, and make a case for why keeping it as farmland would generate the same impact and power economically that Pickering airport would for that critical piece of land?
11:45 a.m.
Head of Research, Land Over Landings Inc.
I'll take the last comment first. There's no way a major international airport and agricultural future are on the same economic impact stage. A major international airport would generate far more jobs and economic impact.
The question is, would a Pickering project be successful? Pearson's latest master plan, released to the transport minister on December 1, 2017, says no. They are planning on accommodating all the aviation needs at Pearson before they have to add the sixth runway in the next 20 years. They say they have plenty of capacity, and they're working in the southern Ontario airports network of 10 other small airports, including Oshawa, to accommodate the aviation growth they forecast in the foreseeable future. That network right now is planning to handle Ontario's aviation capacity for the next 30 years.
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
Thanks, Mr. Chair.
I'm going to go to Mr. Miller and Ms. Reesor.
We should have learned a lesson from the Mirabel debacle. The idea of taking farmland and just keeping it in reserve does a profound disservice to the goals of food sovereignty. Increasingly, people are concerned about shipping food produce around the world with that huge carbon footprint and the climate change that it entails, rather than actually producing local food for the local economy. In my neck of the woods, in British Columbia, we talk about the 50-mile diet. We try to consume food from within 50 miles of our location in the Lower Mainland because that's what's healthy for the environment and also healthy for our future as a country, to have food sovereignty.
Can you comment on the environmental impact of putting all that land aside, rather than having it engaged with a clear mandate for farmers to actually produce the food that we need in southern Ontario? In British Columbia, we have the agricultural land reserve. We've made a conscious attempt to preserve the agricultural land, not only to have long-term agricultural land, but to protect it for future generations as well.
11:45 a.m.
Head of Research, Land Over Landings Inc.
The local food supply into the greater Toronto area is vital. We see a tremendous opportunity for young farmers to lease land, get started in their careers and produce food for the greater Toronto area. That's important. Alongside the agricultural reserves, it's part of the Rouge National Urban Park, so it's very important for the growing population of the greater Toronto area.
11:45 a.m.
London North Centre, Lib.
Thank you very much.
I was, and am, so interested in rural connectivity that I didn't get to you, Mr. Fraser. I promise you're my second choice. I'm a Queen's alumnus, so I'm coming your way for sure.
We hear so often that, when governments invest in basic research, the investment is important, but ultimately one has to be careful because it might not yield an economic impact, so the economic footprint might not be realized. Therefore, focusing on applied research and supporting colleges is the way to go if you're trying to generate economic growth. As you know, this government has made historic investments in science and supporting scientific research.
I think it's important to continue to make it clear that there is great economic utility in investing in basic or fundamental research. You can call it what you will. I know that Western and Queen's are big rivals, but you'll forgive me for saying that I've seen this happen at Western. Governments have invested in basic research that the university has taken on, which yields economic results and certainly helps to generate jobs at the university and beyond.
In the end, you end up with an idea that then turns into a business, big or small. Where would we be without the funding of basic research when it comes to companies like Apple or Microsoft? All of those tech companies that are thriving now come from that support of basic research.
I wonder if you can speak to this. I think it continues to be an important issue to make clear, not just for our committee, but for the government as a whole.
11:50 a.m.
Vice-Principal, University Relations, Queen's University
Yes, I completely agree. It is important to understand that applied research is important. Universities across the country, including Queen's University and Western University, are partnering more and more with our community college partners for applied research. That's a fairly downstream activity, but the reality is that to move upstream, as you said, you never know where the next eureka moment will come from. There are the SNOLAB experiments, Queen's University's work with its partners in Ontario and federal government funding, with Dr. Art McDonald and the discovery of what a neutrino is, and what that's leading to in terms of exciting new discoveries and the Nobel Prize for Dr. McDonald.
With regard to the neutrino, hold your thumb up and billions come from the sun and flow through it every second. It's the smallest known piece of matter you can measure. While scientists theorized for decades about this, it was Dr. Arthur McDonald who, seven floors below the ground in the mine in Sudbury—the reason this is in Sudbury is that it's the deepest mine in the world—built a neutrino catcher, a giant basin the size of this room, filled with heavy water that slowed down the neutrinos. He could then measure and prove them.
The spinoffs and the excitement that come from that are tremendous, and it gave training to young people working on it. It's now having effects in industry and finance, so applied work comes from that. It took Art McDonald proving something that no one could see 30 years ago, and it took funding—in this case from INCO at that time, and from the Ontario and federal governments working together—to basically fund someone like Dr. McDonald as the expert. They let him go and do what he knows how to do best.
It's investment in people, experts and Ph.D.s in that field, but you don't know what you don't know, so it's extremely important to give them the room to do their work and to back them through that.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
I just have one last question, for Mr. Greenley. I met with some people from NASA a while ago in the U.S., in Los Angeles. It's not well known, but the U.S. is going to start sending men and women into space from U.S. territory again, and I gather they're looking at putting a community on the moon sometime in 2020 or 2021, basically as a training ground for later going to Mars.
This is one of the difficulties. You're saying that for our space strategy we need to be providing $1 billion to $2 billion over the next 20 years. I don't know whether you'd call it crisis management or what, but one of the problems with budgets is that you have the immediate issues of the day—infrastructure, Internet, health care, etc.—and some of the bigger, very important pictures aren't seen in the immediate term.
Could you lay out how you would see that expenditure of money over time to get to where you want to go? There doesn't have to be $1 billion spent next year, but I think you are saying there needs to be a sincere commitment so your community can see that the federal government is there and is going to be there with money and put the meat on the bones over time.
Can you respond to that? We need to hear, “All right, here's what we need for our participation in space,” which gives your companies opportunities A, B, C and D, if you follow what I mean.
11:55 a.m.
President, MDA Space Missions Group
Yes, I do.
The first thing is that the international community will need to see Canada make a full commitment to something like lunar gateway. I'm talking about the AI-based robotics on the new space station lunar gateway. That is one element of what you were talking about—the return to the moon. That space station will be orbiting the moon while the astronauts are living on the surface, and it will provide support to them. They want to see that full commitment for Canada to stay in the club, and then, as you said, for the industrial base to be able to continue to do the work it's been doing for 30 years.
If you take that $1-billion program over 20 years, the profile of that spending can be looked at in a couple of different ways. One would be the development money to build the technology that would go up to lunar gateway, which would fluctuate between $100 million and $125 million a year, probably for the first five or six years. Then it would go down to $50 million to $70 million a year for operations and maintenance support for the 15 years that follow. It's not like it's one big cheque on one day. It's activity happening every year during that 15- to 20-year period.
In addition, there is an opportunity for Canada to own and operate the robotics on the space station. That opens up a different financial management conversation, such as when we own and operate a ship or a tank or an aircraft in our government, which is a large capital asset that is treated differently financially in terms of how you capitalize it. Owning and operating robotics on lunar gateway could also be treated in that way, which dramatically changes how it would be accounted for in terms of its spending profile.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Okay. Thank you for that.
Thank you, all, for your presentations and your time, and for answering questions.
With that, committee members, we'll suspend until 12:45. Lunch will be in the room here.
Again, thank you very much.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
We'll call the meeting back to order. As everyone knows, we're doing pre-budget consultations in advance of budget 2019.
Welcome to all the witnesses, and thank you for taking the time to come and give us your views. Before we start, I'll go around the room and members can introduce themselves so you folks know the kind of cross-section we represent.
I'm Wayne Easter, a member of Parliament from Prince Edward Island.
Peter, go ahead.
12:45 p.m.
London North Centre, Lib.
Good afternoon, everyone. I'm Peter Fragiskatos, a member of Parliament from London, Ontario. It's great to be in Oshawa today. Thank you very much for participating and putting together presentations. I'm very much looking forward to them.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome. Thank you for being here today. I'm very much looking forward to your presentations. My name is Francesco Sorbara. I'm the member of Parliament for Vaughan—Woodbridge, about an hour away from here by car. It's great to be in the GTA and not in the Ottawa area today.
12:45 p.m.
Whitby, Lib.
Good afternoon. I'm Celina Caesar-Chavannes. I'm the member of Parliament for Whitby, and I'm happy to be subbing in today for Greg Fergus, who couldn't make it to today's meeting.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB
I'm Pat Kelly. I'm the member of Parliament for Calgary Rocky Ridge, and I'm happy to be here.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
12:45 p.m.
Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, CPC
I'm Leona Alleslev. I'm the member of Parliament for Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, which is just north of Toronto, right beside Francesco's riding.
12:50 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
I'm Peter Julian, the NDP vice-chair and the member of Parliament for New Westminster—Burnaby, on the other side of the country. So I'm not an hour from here by car; I'm about a week from here by car.