Evidence of meeting #174 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was students.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Ronald Smith  As an Individual
Eden Hildebrand  As an Individual
Tyson Brown  As an Individual
Samantha Carson  As an Individual
Vanessa Vittoria  As an Individual
Matthew Lahey  As an Individual
Afraa Mustafa  As an Individual
Lawrence Yeh  As an Individual
Irena Smith  As an Individual
Peter Fragiskatos  London North Centre, Lib.
Leona Alleslev  Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, CPC
Brian Kingston  Vice-President, Policy, International and Fiscal Issues, Business Council of Canada
Laura Tamblyn Watts  Chief Public Policy Officer, Canadian Association of Retired Persons
Ann Decter  Director, Community Initiatives, Canadian Women's Foundation
Karen Campbell  Program Manager, Community Initiatives, Canadian Women's Foundation
Mary Marrone  Director, Advocacy and Legal Services, Income Security Advocacy Centre
Steven Liss  Vice-President, Research and Innovation, Ryerson University
Rhonda Lenton  President and Vice-Chancellor, York University
Jennefer Laidley  Research and Policy Analyst, Income Security Advocacy Centre
Chris Summerville  Co-Chair, Canadian Alliance on Mental Illness and Mental Health
Martha Friendly  Executive Director, Childcare Resource and Research Unit (CRRU)
David Agnew  President, Seneca College, Colleges Ontario
Michael Smith  National Mergers and Acquisitions Leader, Tax, Deloitte Canada
Roberta Jamieson  President and Chief Executive Officer, Indspire
Katie Walmsley  President, Portfolio Management Association of Canada
Theo Heldman  Chair, Tax Committee, Portfolio Management Association of Canada
Maya Roy  Chief Executive Officer, YWCA Canada
Craig Alexander  Partner and Chief Economist, Financial Advisory, Deloitte Canada
James O'Hara  President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadians for Fair Access to Medical Marijuana
Mark Nantais  President, Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers' Association
Allan Rewak  Executive Director, Cannabis Council of Canada
Jonathan Lund  Vice-Chair, Hotel Association of Canada
Keith Currie  President, Ontario Federation of Agriculture
Tim Hudak  Chief Executive Officer, Ontario Real Estate Association
Philippe Lucas  Vice-Chair, Cannabis Council of Canada
Alana Baker  Director of Government Relations, Hotel Association of Canada
Rishi Jain  University of Windsor
Adam Hopkins  First Nations Technical Institute at Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory
Matt Smith  ONE Campaign
Laura Seguin  ONE Campaign
Sarah Fairweather  ONE Campaign
Sasha Caldera  Canadians for Tax Fairness

8:55 a.m.

Leona Alleslev Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, CPC

I'm Leona Alleslev. I'm the member of Parliament for Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill.

8:55 a.m.

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB

I'm Pat Kelly, member of Parliament for Calgary Rocky Ridge, and a member of the opposition Conservative caucus.

8:55 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thank you, members, and welcome.

We'll start with Brian Kingston from the Business Council of Canada.

Welcome, Brian.

8:55 a.m.

Brian Kingston Vice-President, Policy, International and Fiscal Issues, Business Council of Canada

Good morning, Mr. Chair and committee members. Thanks for the invitation to take part in your pre-budget consultation.

The Business Council of Canada represents chief executives and entrepreneurs of 150 leading Canadian companies in all sectors of the Canadian economy. Our member companies employ about 1.7 million Canadians and account for roughly half of the value of the Toronto Stock Exchange.

First, let me begin by congratulating the Prime Minister, his cabinet, and chief negotiator Steve Verheul, as well as the team at Global Affairs Canada for achieving a successful outcome in the North American trade negotiations. I'm hesitant to call it the USMCA. I'm going to stick with NAFTA. This is a really good outcome. It provides much needed certainty and clarity for investors in all three countries. This will enable companies to move forward with job-creating projects and expansion plans that we know from conversations with our members were on hold until there was more clarity regarding the North American relationship.

We hope and expect that the Government of Canada and the U.S. administration can continue talks and work towards lifting the illegitimate tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum exports to the benefit of our industry here.

With that, I'll get into the council's pre-budget submission. In this submission, we ask the government to introduce a comprehensive strategy to improve competitiveness, diversify trade and attract private sector investment. According to a recent survey of our members, only one in seven CEOs expressed confidence in the competitiveness of Canada's business climate. According to that survey, the tax and regulatory burden combined with concerns around the availability of talent were the most important factors affecting company investment plans in Canada.

Among other recommendations, we've called on the government to undertake a comprehensive review of Canada's tax system with the goal of strengthening incentives for investment and growth. We believe the need for this review has only been intensified by the implementation of the U.S. Tax Cuts and Jobs Act earlier this year.

Canada's tax competitiveness has slipped over the last decade as other countries have moved to reform their tax system. Our average combined federal and provincial corporate tax right now sits at three percentage points higher than the OECD average. The OECD average is 23.7% and we're now at 26.8%.

Effective January 1, 2018, the U.S. reduced its federal corporate income tax rate from 35% to 21% and allowed for full expensing of investments in machinery and equipment. This tax reform package also introduced new international tax rules. They encouraged multinationals to shift capital back into the U.S.

These changes have given the U.S. a significant tax advantage over many advanced economies but in particular Canada, given our very close proximity and dependence on that market. According to a recently released study that we commissioned by PwC Canada on the implications of U.S. reform, failing to respond to these changes threatens 635,000 jobs and $85 billion in GDP. The PwC study finds that the tax reform measures in the U.S. have made that location substantially more attractive to locate capital-intensive businesses specifically.

The sectors that we find at most risk as a result of U.S. reform are chemicals, machinery manufacturing, plastics and rubber manufacturing, transportation manufacturing, mining, and food manufacturing. All else being equal, these sectors as a whole will likely face a significant shift in investments from Canada to the U.S. over the next 10 years.

Ontario, unfortunately, will face the most significant impact of this, with 43% of that GDP impact attributed to Ontario, given that Ontario is the home to many of these capital-intensive sectors.

To counteract those effects, PwC identified a number of policy options for your consideration. The first is gradually reducing the combined corporate tax rate to 20%. The second is introducing a temporary 100% depreciation allowance for business spending on equipment structures and acquired intangibles. This is patents, trademarks and copyrights. The third is increasing federal personal income tax brackets to more closely align with the U.S. tax brackets. The fourth is enhancing the system of tax credits for business spending on research and development. This is SR and ED primarily. The fifth is considering the introduction of a tax incentive known as a “patent box” in Canada. This would incent companies to locate research and development operations here.

With that, I look forward to any questions you have and I thank you for the opportunity.

9 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thanks very much, Brian.

Turning to the Canadian Association for Retired Persons, we have Ms. Tamblyn Watts.

9 a.m.

Laura Tamblyn Watts Chief Public Policy Officer, Canadian Association of Retired Persons

Good morning, everyone.

My name is Laura Tamblyn Watts, and I'm the chief public policy officer for the Canadian Association of Retired Persons, which I'll call CARP throughout my submission.

Thank you for the honour of addressing you today.

CARP is a national, non-partisan association that advocates for older Canadians. CARP's more than 300,000 members play an active role in developing our advocacy agenda. Our members are committed to real change and appreciate the opportunity to make our submission to you today.

Older Canadians, and CARP members in particular, are very active voters, with 98% of all CARP members having voted in the last federal election. In a very recent poll, 98% of them committed to voting in the upcoming election as well.

We are challenging the government to focus on five key areas, and I'll spend a bit of time drawing out individual recommendations without going through our entire platform. We are challenging the government to look at the questions of financial security, elder abuse prevention, caregiving and housing supports, exceptional health care, and social inclusion for all older Canadians.

As Canada is home to more than six million seniors, with 1,000 Canadians turning 65 every day, we already know that older adults outweigh children, and it's important that the Government of Canada invest accordingly to protect their needs.

With some key recommendations, I'll start with our recommendation that we protect pensioners by granting unfunded pension liabilities super-priority status. Right now, 1.3 million Canadians with corporate defined benefit pensions are potentially at risk of having their pensions slashed. We all know about the recent concerns with regard to the Sears issue, but this is not the first time it has happened. Without real change to include super-priority of pensioners, we will see this happening time and time again. We encourage all our older adults, and indeed all adults across their life course, to save and to protect pensioners and the contributions of those pensioners, but when it comes down to it, without the opportunity to have the super-priority, it is the pensioners who lose out.

Our recommendation is that the Government of Canada protect pensioners by granting unfunded pension liabilities the super-priority status under the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act and the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act.

To better protect the middle class, we also recommend that the Government of Canada eliminate mandatory RRIF withdrawals. With RRIF rules last updated in 2015, it was important to recognize the longevity, but right now we already know that older adults are at significant risk of outliving their retirement incomes. When we are trying to ask people to save more and work longer, it makes no sense whatsoever to make them de-accumulate at age 71. We know that the 71 years of today is not the 71 years when we originally set up the scheme. We need to get rid of the obligation for RRIF withdrawals.

We call upon this government to improve investor protections for all Canadians, with the focus of making the Ombudsman for Banking Services and Investments the single, unified and binding dispute resolution policy body for all banking and investment services. It is right now on the investor side. Older adults and all adults are very challenged, because when they have a problem with their financial institution, the system is in a competitive market and what ends up happening is, with many of the financial institutions, indeed 75% now of all Canadians will have to go to a dispute resolution body that the bank has paid for. We are calling on the government to change the rules with the Bank Act to ensure that all people have equal access to a single, unified and binding dispute resolution process, which is the OBSI.

We call on the government to significantly invest in education, awareness and research around questions of elder abuse, ageism and how we can more fruitfully include older adults in aspects of the world in which we live today.

We call for caregiving and housing supports. In particular, we want to support caregivers by aligning provincial employment standards with federal EI benefits, and increasing the family caregiver benefit from 15 weeks to 27 weeks of unpaid job-protected caregiving leave.

We would like to change the requirement that a family member must be facing significant risk of death, to include in the compassionate care benefits people who are critically ill. We don't know necessarily if they're going to die, but we know if they're very ill, and that should be good enough.

Last, we'd like to make the Canada caregiver tax credit a refundable tax credit to ensure that all caregivers, who are overwhelmingly women, are treated equally.

Thank you.

9:05 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thank you very much, Laura.

From the Canadian Women's Foundation, we have Ann Decter and Karen Campbell.

Welcome.

9:10 a.m.

Ann Decter Director, Community Initiatives, Canadian Women's Foundation

Thank you.

Good morning. I am Ann Decter from the Canadian Women's Foundation, and I'm here with my colleague, Karen Campbell.

On behalf of the Canadian Women's Foundation, the only public foundation dedicated to women and girls, thank you for the opportunity to speak today. Our foundation provides funding to women's organizations across the country and builds the women's sector through knowledge mobilization, networking, collaboration and advocacy.

Canada's competitiveness is significantly compromised if half the population is left behind. Gender equity is fundamental to our social, political and economic progress and our prosperity. As the government recognized in budget 2018, public policy requires a robust intersectional gender-based analysis. We welcome the 2018 gender results framework and look forward to seeing the reporting on it.

To ensure that the government's approach to improving Canada's competitiveness is gender responsive and inclusive, we recommend the following measures:

Sexual assault is a public health issue requiring a stable public health response. Expanded public attention has reduced victims' stigmatization and brought survivors' voices to the public sphere. Demands on sexual assault services have spiralled. To begin to meet demand, we recommend initiating a dedicated fund to support sexual assault centres of $20 million annually jointly administered by Status of Women Canada and the Public Health Agency of Canada.

The 2018 federal budget's support for legal aid clinics working on sexual harassment and sexual assault should be dedicated to survivors and doubled to $10 million annually. Budget 2018's outreach program to increase workplace awareness of sexual harassment and assault should expand to include workplace training, delivered with community partners and with an emphasis on sectors with low retention of women, such as STEM and the trades. We recommend an additional $5 million annually for training.

Yesterday was Sisters in Spirit day, honouring indigenous women and girls lost to violence. The National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls needs full support and ongoing funding to meet the needs highlighted in the inquiry process. The federal government should implement all Truth and Reconciliation calls to action to reduce disappearances and murders of indigenous women and girls.

Safe intercity transportation is essential to violence prevention in rural and remote areas. For indigenous women this can be a matter of life and death. Innovative funding is needed, with a focus on restoring access and dedicated funds for women entrepreneurs and women-run services.

9:10 a.m.

Karen Campbell Program Manager, Community Initiatives, Canadian Women's Foundation

To end gender-based violence, education on healthy and equal relationships is essential. We recommend an annual investment of $4 million to support organizations providing healthy relationships and consent education programs for teens. The Canadian Women's Foundation is uniquely positioned to support organizations doing this work.

Ontario is questioning the place of consent education in schools. The federal government has an important opportunity to support strong action on sexual education and to make women and girls in Canada safer.

To alleviate women's poverty, closing the gender pay gap is a necessary step that is vital to Canada's economic competitiveness. We anticipate the introduction of proactive federal pay equity and pay transparency legislation in some form this fall and look forward to the details. With women's organizations across the country, we recommend an investment of $80 million annually allocated to a new pay equity commission, with additional resources to hire at least 50 dedicated pay equity enforcement officers.

Access to affordable child care is also vital to Canada's competitiveness. Lack of affordable child care restricts women's workforce participation. Child care is a gender equity and income security issue for families of all income levels. We recommend that the federal government continue building toward universal access to affordable quality child care by increasing investments to a minimum of $2 billion annually. A well-funded women's sector is most effective in ensuring that legacy gains in gender equity are maintained and strengthened and that women's poverty is alleviated. The women's program at Status of Women Canada which previously offered long-term funding to address gender inequality should be restarted.

We are encouraged by the government's feminist international assistance policy and recommend a similar commitment of funding to women's organizations in Canada and the creation of a matching fund for national feminist philanthropy. The Canadian Women's Foundation would be pleased to work with Status of Women Canada on the development of a matching fund and offers to act as a convenor of national feminist organizations for the process.

We welcome the government's first voluntary national review and commitment to the collaborative development of a strategy for the 2030 sustainable development agenda. To ensure this strategy is gender responsive, we recommend allocating funds to support the participation of women's organizations in its development, implementation, and monitoring. We also recommend increased funding to community organizations that are contributing to the realization of the SDGs through programs and services that are gender responsive and intersectional.

Thank you again for the opportunity to address the committee today. Further details are included in our brief, and we're happy to answer any questions.

9:15 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thank you, Karen and Ann.

From the Income Security Advocacy Centre, we have Ms. Laidley and Ms. Marrone.

9:15 a.m.

Mary Marrone Director, Advocacy and Legal Services, Income Security Advocacy Centre

Good morning. My colleague and I are with the Income Security Advocacy Centre. It's a specialty legal clinic with a mandate to improve the income security of low-income Ontarians. Thank you for this opportunity.

Canada's income benefit programs need to be modernized to be responsive to today's economy and meet the needs of Canada's most vulnerable communities. Precarious employment is on the rise across the country. Part-time or short-term contract jobs rarely include benefits. Those jobs are disproportionately held by women, people from racialized and immigrant communities, and indigenous persons. Canada is relying on a growing number of temporary foreign workers to meet demand for labour. Because many of Canada's benefit programs are based on work-related contributions, they do not respond well to today's labour market and today's economy.

Today I'll focus on two programs: employment insurance and the Canada child benefit.

First, working Canadians need a better employment insurance program. As a result of both program rules and the rise in precarious employment, EI is playing a shrinking role in Canada's economic safety net. Across Canada, only 41% of unemployed people receive EI. In Ontario that number is 29%. Women fare even worse at 26%. Because on average they earn less than men, their benefit levels are lower.

We propose a number of solutions. Reduce qualifying hours to 360 across Canada. Introduce a minimum benefit level for all Canadians. Make extended parental benefits a real option for low-income parents by applying that minimum rate for the full benefit period. Increase the number of weeks of EI sick benefits. Restore migrant workers' access to parental benefits, which was ended by the previous government. Finally, make regular benefits available to temporary foreign workers by using an open work permit system for all migrant workers so they can meet the program requirements.

The Canada child benefit, on the other hand, has been a public policy success story. It's a tax-delivered benefit that reaches families across the country, and benefit levels are based on income, not contributions. The federal government has said that it has lifted tens of thousands of children out of poverty and is a driver for economic growth. However, unequal access to the child benefit means that some of the poorest children in Canada are not receiving it. The program needs some enhancements in order for it to fully meet its policy objectives.

The first issue is an eligibility requirement that's based on the immigration status of the child's parents. Some parents without permanent residence status are not eligible, while these same parents are deemed to be residents of Canada for income tax purposes. Despite the fact that many of their children are born in Canada, these families will not receive benefits for those critical early years, leaving these children with lifelong barriers to opportunity and success.

We've provided your staff with a report that details these issues and the negative impact on Canada's most vulnerable families. I can give the example of when a mother is sponsored by the father and he becomes abusive. If she leaves with the children, the children will no longer receive the benefit because the immigration status of the mother is in jeopardy. This policy drives women to stay in abusive relationships, or else they simply give up custody of their children. A simple solution to this problem is to amend the Income Tax Act. All parents who are considered residents for tax purposes should also be eligible for the tax-delivered benefit.

Other barriers to accessing the CCB exist even for those who are technically eligible. Many first nations families living on reserve do not file taxes and therefore are not accessing this benefit. Some progress has been made on this front, but more work needs to be done. The federal government should work with first nations to find a solution to this problem.

Serious problems can arise where eligibility is disputed by the Canada Revenue Agency. Benefits are suspended by the CRA while parents try to prove and reprove their eligibility. CRA appeal processes are neither accessible nor transparent. Families can go for months without benefits, often putting their housing at risk. The better the benefit gets, the bigger part of the budget it is for a low-income family. There's a serious impact when those benefits are suspended. A better and more accessible process needs to be devised.

Finally, our colleagues in legal clinics in northern Ontario have also reported that CRA audits seem to disproportionately impact first nation families. Those audits lead to suspension of benefits while eligibility is confirmed. The audit process needs to be reviewed to ensure that it does not inadvertently target first nation families.

Thank you. My colleague and I welcome any questions you might have.

9:20 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thank you very much.

Turning now to Ryerson University, we have Mr. Craney and Mr. Liss.

9:20 a.m.

Dr. Steven Liss Vice-President, Research and Innovation, Ryerson University

Good morning, and thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. I'm Dr. Steven Liss. I'm vice-president, research and innovation, at Ryerson University. I'm joined by my colleague, Ryerson's deputy provost and vice-provost, university planning, Glenn Craney.

For universities, investments in tri-agency funding, the Canada Foundation for Innovation, and the research support fund are key to creating knowledge, advancing innovation, and fostering the next generation of talent in building a more innovative Canadian economy. We support Universities Canada's recommendations, including investments in the development of future skills for students. To quote budget 2018, “better is possible”.

Ryerson has considerable experience with career-oriented and experiential learning. We have built a reputation for equipping students with the power skills needed for the 21st century: entrepreneurship, communication, innovation and leadership.

The government's commitment to creating the conditions for all Canadians to succeed in the future economy is crucial. Universities, community groups, government and private sector partners can work together to develop technological, physical and social infrastructure that ensure pathways to opportunities for everyone.

I'd like to focus on three specific initiatives where our experience and vision can be leveraged for national impact.

The first is cybersecurity. It's a matter of urgent national importance, which this government acknowledged in the recently released national cybersecurity strategy. The stability of our national economy and the continued operation of our country's critical digital infrastructure is central to our economic future. Cybersecurity will have a trillion-dollar impact on the world economy, driving an unprecedented demand for global talent.

To position Canada to take advantage of these opportunities, Ryerson University recently announced the establishment of a national centre for cybersecurity, the Cybersecure Catalyst. It will contribute to filling the talent gap through training and certification for cybersecurity professionals, advancing Canadian cybersecurity innovation by undertaking applied research in partnership with industry, supporting cybersecurity ecosystems by accelerating Canadian cybersecurity start-ups and scale-ups, and importantly, contributing to public education and policy development in this field.

The Cybersecure Catalyst is perfectly positioned to collaborate closely with the recently announced Canadian centre for cybersecurity and the national cybercrime coordination unit in fulfilling their mandates. The Cybersecure Catalyst operations will cost approximately $50 million over five years and these funds will be raised from industry, partners, and government. We recommend that this government invest $25 million over five years in the Cybersecure Catalyst to strengthen Canada's position as a global cybersecurity leader in the scalable, collaborative platforms that engage government, post-secondary institutions and industry.

Second, in line with the government's science agenda, Ryerson is expanding its research and education in STEM disciplines and is taking science to the public to create a culture of science for Canada. To realize our vision, to make science accessible and to ensure that we develop an inclusive pool of STEM talent, we will do so in a new home for science innovation in the heart of downtown Toronto, closely integrated with initiatives like the Cybersecure Catalyst and our national innovation network. This new facility will be a platform connecting our research and talent development with industry, the local community and Canadian society.

We've identified $100 million in internal funding to support this project and we're seeking an additional $100 million towards the total costs of this 300,000 square foot state-of-the-art facility.

Third, Ryerson is home to DMZ, the university incubator ranked number one in the world. Building on our record of achievement, Ryerson is a founding member of the Incubate Innovate Network of Canada, I-INC. I-INC began as a network of campus-based incubators and accelerators and has expanded to be a globally connected, pan-Canadian platform for leading entrepreneurial and innovative universities as it's focused on bridging the gap between a lab and the global marketplace.

Drawing from international best practices and leveraging the expertise in its innovation space and program delivery, I-INC will accelerate access to entrepreneurial skills, development and talent, and support for scaling companies that can be leveraged by regional superclusters, our own research capacity, innovative solutions Canada, and other priority innovation initiatives. The I-INC partners will be looking to the federal government for $60 million in funding that will be matched by an additional $28 million for a total estimated program cost of $88 million over five years to be spread across the entire national network.

Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to this important consultation process. I am happy to answer any questions you may have.

9:25 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thank you, Steven.

Next is Ms. Lenton from York University.

9:25 a.m.

Dr. Rhonda Lenton President and Vice-Chancellor, York University

Good morning, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. I'm Rhonda Lenton, the president and vice-chancellor of York University. Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak on behalf of the university

We are Canada's third-largest university, with one of the largest graduate cohorts in the country. York is progressive and inclusive, providing a diverse socio-demographic of students with access to a high-quality, research-intensive university committed to the public good.

There are 45% of our students who are the first in their family to attend university, and 75% are working part time to support their studies. Our graduates understand the value of a university degree and the positive impact it will have on their upward mobility in today's economy. Two-thirds of all new jobs require higher education, yet it's important to note that Canada ranks only seventh in terms of university enrolment according to the OECD.

If we want to increase our international competitiveness, we must ensure that all qualified students have the opportunity to attend university if they wish to do so. Experiential education opportunities enhance the quality of student learning, provide career-relevant work and better prepare them for a changing global knowledge economy, and that is expanding, putting a premium on experiential education in all of its forms. At York, 26% of students participate in experiential learning opportunities. Universities need the government's assistance to increase that number, not just by investing in experiential learning, but also by leveraging government relationships with the private and public sectors and incentivizing organizations to increase those opportunities.

This requires ongoing investment in university research infrastructure, which allows us to continue attracting and retaining top researchers and graduate students from across the world, modernize our aging facilities and provide research activities for all our students.

A 2018 report by the Expert Panel on the State of Science and Technology and Industrial Research and Development in Canada found that countries that strategically support research and development and cultivate an extensive base of research talent and expertise will benefit the most from coming research advantages and discoveries. An increased investment in university infrastructure and the research support fund is an investment in our students and our country, as universities provide 40% of all R and D in Canada, making a positive impact on the social, economic, cultural and environmental well-being of Canada.

This investment creates jobs and stimulates the economy. For example, the recent SIF investments at York have led to economic output equivalent to creating more than 1,200 high-quality jobs for one year. Investing in the next generation of research talent through increased scholarships and fellowships for graduate students will further intensify our upward research trajectory.

We appreciate government investment in tri-council funding. We know that Canada, however, has struggled with innovation and productivity when compared to international peers, as noted by the 2018 expert panel.

One way to address this shortcoming is by expanding the breadth and increasing the volume of research undertaken by researchers at Canada's universities, by providing additional individual awards to match the rise in graduate enrolment and harmonized funding across all granting councils.

Finally, international study opportunities will increase Canada's competitive edge in the global knowledge economy. However, only 11% of Canadian students take part in an international study experience. This has remained stagnant for decades. To forge relationships that attract foreign direct investment and to give our labour force the knowledge and cultural skills they need to thrive, we ask that the federal government establish a dedicated fund for supporting student international learning experiences and eliminating the restriction on international portability of scholarships and fellowships to support faculty research collaborations.

Thank you for your leadership in the fundamentally important task of using higher education to improve the lives of all Canadians.

I'm happy to answer your questions. Thank you.

9:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thank you very much to all of you.

We will start with seven-minute rounds.

Mr. Fragiskatos.

9:30 a.m.

London North Centre, Lib.

Peter Fragiskatos

Thank you, Mr. Chair; and thank you to the witnesses.

I want to begin with the Business Council of Canada.

We are the committee studying competitiveness and what that means for the Canadian economy, where we currently are, and what we can do as a country, particularly what the government can do, to boost our competitiveness.

Mr. Kingston, you talked about the need to introduce incentives to stimulate economic growth. I want to ask you a very direct question about accelerated capital cost allowance. Does the Business Council of Canada have a view on this issue?

9:30 a.m.

Vice-President, Policy, International and Fiscal Issues, Business Council of Canada

Brian Kingston

Yes, we do. Our overarching recommendation is that the government introduce immediate expensing for capital investment similar to what the U.S. has done.

9:30 a.m.

London North Centre, Lib.

Peter Fragiskatos

Are you saying similar or mirror it exactly?

9:30 a.m.

Vice-President, Policy, International and Fiscal Issues, Business Council of Canada

Brian Kingston

We recommend not mirroring it exactly, simply because the definition of investments covered by the U.S. measure is very broad. It includes, for example, structures, and it doesn't include intangibles, where we think there is opportunity to do that here in Canada. The key is that it is immediately a 100% deduction, but there can be some discussion around what should be qualifying in that deduction.

9:30 a.m.

London North Centre, Lib.

Peter Fragiskatos

I know this issue has generated a great deal of interest, particularly among economists and the folks in the business community. However, there are those who are skeptical.

The economist at the University of Calgary, Jack Mintz, who, as you know, has done a great deal of work on taxation, has said there is very little evidence, if any at all, that introducing an ACCA would boost the Canadian economy. He has pointed to efforts to introduce it under Mulroney in the 1980s for manufacturing. This continued in the mid-2000s under Mr. Harper. He says it basically didn't work.

Can you point to other evidence that suggests it does work?

9:30 a.m.

Vice-President, Policy, International and Fiscal Issues, Business Council of Canada

Brian Kingston

I'm very familiar with Jack's perspective on this. The thing that I don't think he's necessarily accounting for is the fact that, yes, there is evidence that if you introduce it in a vacuum it may not stimulate additional investment, but what a PwC study showed is that we don't operate in a vacuum. We sit beside our largest trading partner, the biggest economy in the world, that has introduced this measure. If you are a capital-intense sector here in Canada, there is a significant incentive now for new investments to be in the United States.

I don't think you can necessarily look at historical evidence around ACCA and then conclude, therefore, that this won't make a difference. We're seeing businesses make decisions in real time around where they want to invest capital. It's simply about levelling the playing field.

One other point on what Jack has been saying, where we agree, is that this type of tax expenditure is basically another hole in the tax system, and he has argued for a comprehensive review. We generally align on that viewpoint. We've been calling for a comprehensive review, with the objective of a broad tax base and a low rate. That's the ultimate outcome.

I just think that, unfortunately, given the situation we're in and what the U.S. has done, it leaves us no choice but to respond immediately.

9:35 a.m.

London North Centre, Lib.

Peter Fragiskatos

It's a reasonable view. I read his comments in the Financial Post and then looked at his testimony to the Senate committee on banking, I think. I come from academia. I have respect for anyone who has studied this. Jack Mintz has studied taxation his whole life and hasn't found a tax cut he didn't like, and I think he himself would admit that. I was quite struck by his comments and I wanted to get the view of the council on that issue.

I have only about two and a half minutes left. Very quickly, because I want to go to Ms. Watts, do you say yes or no to free trade with China?

9:35 a.m.

Vice-President, Policy, International and Fiscal Issues, Business Council of Canada

9:35 a.m.

London North Centre, Lib.

Peter Fragiskatos

Okay. That's very clear.

Ms. Watts, you recommend that the government take action on the issue of elder abuse in Canada. The scale of the problem is striking indeed. According to Statistics Canada, one out of eight Canadian seniors experiences elder abuse each and every year.

By 2063, seniors will comprise 25% of the Canadian population. I don't have to tell you these numbers, but it's important to get it on the record and to show you that I genuinely care about these matters. Is there not existing programming or is there not sufficient programming right now to deal with this issue?

You recommend something quite specific, a 1-800 number to report it, and funding to research elder abuse. What are we doing now and why do we need to pivot in a different direction to combat this problem?