Evidence of meeting #187 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendments.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Reilly-King, you mentioned during your presentation some amendments to the concessionary sovereign loans. Can you elaborate a little more on what kinds of changes you would like to see?
4:45 p.m.
Research and Policy Manager, Canadian Council for International Co-operation
I think the idea is that if you're setting up these new tools to leverage the amount of impact we can have internationally, if you're going to count some of those tools as ODA, then you should be using the same standards by which you define ODA for that, so that you count international assistance in.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB
One of the concerns expressed by some members is the potential of some of the sections right now and how they would work, in that they may cover, basically, the losses that a private sector participant might experience during an ODA project, and that there's great latitude being given to the Government of Canada here, through the minister, to cover up to 100% of the potential losses. Do you think that's all right to leave as is, or do you have concerns about those sections in the bill?
4:45 p.m.
Research and Policy Manager, Canadian Council for International Co-operation
I think our position with respect to that and with respect to FinDev, the new Development Finance Institute, is that the government needs to put in place very strong measures to ensure that any funding provided to private sector companies is additional, both from a financial perspective.... We don't want to just subsidize companies to do things that they may already be doing. We need to make sure that any finance that's provided is outside of what they might be able to get in the market. It needs to be financially additional and also developmentally additional so that it's going to have a positive impact on development as well.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB
Right, so there's a component of moral hazard there, in that the government might take on a project with a private sector participant in it, and the moral hazard comes from how the participant was going to do it either way, but now it gets to write it off or could potentially experience zero loss if the project goes sideways.
You talked about perhaps having tougher rules around how those types of projects are agreed upon by the Government of Canada. Do you think those rules should be legislated rules, or can they be done through the regulatory process or just a guidance document? Do you have any preference between statutory or regulatory?
4:45 p.m.
Research and Policy Manager, Canadian Council for International Co-operation
I'm not sure if Gavin has comments, but I think you would need strong public guidance. I don't know that they necessarily need to be regulatory.
In addition to any legislation that's developed, I think you'll need very strong guidance, very good disclosure both pre- and post-project approval, so that you can assure the public that the guidance that the government has put in place is being followed and implemented and that you're seeing the impacts that you're expecting. You'd be able to measure that financial and development additionality both before, so that you can ascertain this isn't going to be a subsidy, and after, so that you can see that the investments are having a positive developmental impact.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
4:45 p.m.
Policy Officer, Canadian Council for International Co-operation
The only thing I would add is that there are many different ways in which the government can provide international assistance. The Official Development Assistance Accountability Act provides a legislative framework for defining and implementing one element of international assistance, which is official development assistance. Insofar as the new financial mechanisms being introduced are going to be considered official development assistance, it's important that the strong definition and legislative framework of the ODA Accountability Act be maintained.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Okay. Thank you.
I have a question to Mr. Yussuff about your exchange with Mr. Sorbara.
In your submission, you talk about not being satisfied with the provisions to end contract flipping in airports and federal workplaces. Do I take you to mean that this could be dealt with by regulation, or does it need a serious amendment?
4:45 p.m.
President, Canadian Labour Congress
Yes, the section that would need to be amended is in the Canada Labour Code, part I. Certainly, our communication with the minister would mean that she would have to table a regulatory change to plug that hole that we have identified.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
November 7th, 2018 / 4:45 p.m.
Peter Fragiskatos London North Centre, Lib.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to all witnesses for appearing today.
I want to focus on pay equity. That was the focus of my questions yesterday during our sessions. I have a number of constituents who are highly interested in this—at least half of my constituency, for obvious reasons—but beyond that it's everyone's issue, quite frankly.
I'll start with Ms. Sultana.
You're an organization that has reached out throughout your history to many women and continues to do so. The changes that have been put forward now on pay equity obviously are applicable to federally regulated sectors. Can we begin a dialogue—and I think we can, now—about how to expand that vision of pay equity beyond and bring in the private sector? Do you have any ideas on how the Government of Canada could work with organizations such as yours, and even beyond that, to really begin a substantive dialogue about pay equity beyond federally regulated sectors?
4:50 p.m.
Manager, Policy & Strategic Communications, YWCA Canada
First off, I'd like to congratulate and applaud your colleague, Minister Maryam Monsef, for her leadership on advancing gender equality and women's issues in cabinet and beyond. In our comments with her and other parliamentarians last week, we talked about the importance of advancing economic equality for women and gender diverse communities, because not only is it good and important for society in creating a more inclusive society, but it also has an impact on the economy.
A report by the McKinsey Global Institute predicts that if there were economic equality for women and gender diverse communities, it would result in a positive gain of $150 billion for the country of Canada. This is something that we cannot ignore. If there are barriers to women's economic participation, they have an impact not only on them and their families but also on our collective future. The topic of conversation for the pre-budget consultations was Canada's economic competitiveness. If we do not invest in women and their economic future, there will be implications for our economic competitiveness on a world stage.
In terms of how to partner with organizations such as YWCA Canada, I would say the fact that we are in nine provinces and two territories means that we are ready partners for hosting those conversations, because many of the people we serve, many of our constituents, might not know the full details of what pay equity legislation looks like, but it's critical that the public be fully aware of the way in which this will be implemented and rolled out. I think it would be incumbent on all of us to ensure that there is broad awareness and education of the broader public when it comes to this issue.
I would encourage again that our understanding of the legislation before us is that there are some stipulations that exempt people who work in non-standard employment—folks who are working in contract, part-time, seasonal and other non-standard employment—from this legislation and the merits that it has, and we would encourage that this be looked at, because disproportionately women make up the workers in those spaces.
4:50 p.m.
London North Centre, Lib.
I'm going to have to interrupt you there, because I see that I have about a minute and a half left.
4:50 p.m.
London North Centre, Lib.
I do want to ask Mr. Yussuff something.
I told you at the outset today that my grandmother is a former labour leader, and I want to put that to you. With regard to organized labour, what are the plans going forward that you and colleagues have to continue this fight for pay equity beyond the federally regulated sectors and have it within the wider society?
4:50 p.m.
President, Canadian Labour Congress
As you know, there are three jurisdictions now that will have proactive pay equity legislation—Ontario, Quebec and now the federal jurisdiction. In the federal jurisdiction, a little over a million workers will be covered by the code, because the federal government is also going to broaden the coverage to ensure that the federal contractors' program will also have to comply with proactive pay equity legislation. If you're seeking to do business with the federal government, you're going to have to meet that requirement.
I think all of this will have an extremely positive impact on women, but more importantly, this is about not just women's pay equality but also their economic equality.
Statistics have pointed time and time again to the fact that women live in poverty much more than men do comparatively. A large part of that is because we have been discriminating for generations and not paying them adequately. This is certainly going to raise the standard significantly. I think now we have to figure out a way in which we will continue to do it in our federations and our affiliates at the provincial level. How do we get other provinces to bring forth proactive pay equality legislation?
The other thing I would also say is that proactive pay equity legislation, as you know, deals with only one aspect of women's overall equality. I think a national child care system whereby women will be able to have their children in child care will be a tremendous boost to them really engaging, as we've seen with Quebec's history. Where they have the ability, they will be giving back to the economy far more than they take out with child care, but child care is an essential part of bringing women's equality in our society to a higher level.
I can't say enough about what this will do for the challenges. In one case we have noted consistently in our presentation, it took 28 years for women to achieve pay equity in one federal workplace, because that's how the litigation went on and on and on before we were able to kind of resolve this situation.
This legislation will end that history, but more importantly, I think the commission's role will be a tremendous part of this, because the commission can encourage the parties as to how to find solutions to their pay equity problem. I think some of the areas we identified that can be addressed would be a tremendous boost.
A lot of people are misqualified in the federal and provincial jurisdictions. It's critical that those loopholes will be now plugged in part III of the code, but equally we want to ensure that while employers may have diverse interests, they cannot evade their responsibility with regard to how they pay women who work within their jurisdiction.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Michael McLeod Liberal Northwest Territories, NT
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to all the presenters.
I want to ask the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives what the price tag would be on the plan that was mentioned and the different categories. What are we expecting?
4:55 p.m.
Senior Researcher, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
Sorry, which plan?
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
