Finance Committee on May 12th, 2016

[Céline Bak]

Absolutely, thank you for the question.

I mentioned the idea of public backstopping through institutional mechanisms like CMHC for the recovering economy. That's a domain called blended finance. Blended finance is like what the World Bank does when it stands to take up the part of the risk the private sector will not take. In developing countries, the World Bank provides that mechanism, and there are countries that have for years done an excellent job at mitigating the part of the financing the private sector will not take up.

Examples of countries that do that really well are Germany, Japan, and to some extent the Netherlands. These are all countries that have institutional mechanisms. In Germany, there is the KFW, which is like a combination of CIDA, EDC, BDC, and what some people call a development finance institute. It brings all those things together, and it's one of the reasons why Germany is so successful as a major exporter of solar panels and other forms of clean technology.

Denmark is a country that has also realized that one of the specific characteristics of clean technologies is very high capital. Denmark has developed a program within its export credit agency, our equivalent of EDC, whereby it will backstop what the private sector will not be able to backstop.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

I'll follow up with Mr. Battle, as my colleague, Mr. Grewal, was trying to get to this question, and I'm very interested in your response. It's in regard to the submission you wrote regarding private pension plans that have not actually grown as significantly as in the past, and I think it's contrary testimony in terms of what we've heard and in terms of the security of people retiring with enough income.

Do you feel there is a need for an expansion of CPP, or is there some other coverage that you think should be looked at if you feel the coverage of employer-sponsored pensions is falling?

[Ken Battle]

That's a lot. I have just a couple of points.

One comes from my colleague, Professor Lee. Pension reform goes in waves. About every 10 years there is a push for pension reform, and then something moderate is usually done.

One of the proposals we made some years ago was for a seniors benefit. The idea here was that we would integrate existing seniors benefits into a single income-tested program, so it would be old age security, guaranteed income supplement, the age credit, and pension income credit. They would all be put together based on a measure of net income. Then you would have a very strong program that could adjust to changes in the economy. It's also a very fair program. Compared with the current one, it's simpler to operate.

Anyway, it didn't go anywhere, and that was the last big push for reform.

The other one we've called for at Caledon is a 50% increase in the CPP so that it would better meet the needs of seniors, especially middle-income seniors.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

I think Mr. Liepert has one question, and then we'll go to business.

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have a fairly brief question predicated by a very brief comment to Professor Lee. I'd like to ask you some questions, but I'd be doing that for sheer political purposes only, because everything you said today is exactly what I said in my budget speech, including the real retirement and the fact that the old age security was not science based as this government....

My question is actually for Ms. Bak.

We've had several green outfits come before this committee that have made a statement that I want to pursue just very briefly. It's a blanket statement—sort of like “the sun comes up in the east”—that there's a $3-billion annual subsidy provided to the fossil fuel industry. I see here in my favourite Google website that it says a subsidy is a sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive.

Can you give me three or four examples of something that would fit that description that is in that statement you made today? Because if you can't give me examples, I'd like to know if that's something that is fair to continue to say. I'm not talking about tax incentives. I'm talking about exactly what Google says a subsidy is, a handout of government money to the oil industry.

So give me two or three examples.

[Céline Bak]

Well, sir, I have to say that the definition that is being used in this reference is a definition from the OECD. It's not from Google.

I have to take the OECD's as being perhaps the one that I would refer to. I can come back to you with other examples—

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

No, you made the statement that the fossil fuel—

[Céline Bak]

It's the OECD's reference figure.

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

No, but if I'm going to make a statement, I think it's incumbent on me to be specific, if I'm asked the question on how I came up with it, and to give some examples. I can never get examples from organizations like yours that come here.

[Céline Bak]

The OECD agreed to a definition that I think did include fiscal measures, so those measures are the ones that are included, and I regret to say that they are not consistent with Google's definition.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

We will call it there and thank the witnesses for their presentations and information. Thank you very much.

We will immediately go to committee business, if we could.

I will first explain where we are at on committee business, if we could get everyone's attention. The clerk indicates whether we are going to fill all the time frames we agreed to on the witness list that we have provided. Given the rate of decline—people who can't come due to not enough time or other things—we would need about 20 additional witnesses, on the law of averages.

Do parties want to come up with more witnesses, or do we want to cancel one of those meetings, or do we want to bring in officials at one of those meetings?

Mr. MacKinnon, go ahead.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

This is a point of clarification. When we broke the other day, there were officials here for a technical briefing, and we were left with four or five divisions of the act.

When was it envisaged that those officials would come?

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

What we were planning on doing with officials.... Now we know the minister is doing committee of the whole on the 30th, so we can't start the bill until after he is done. We were planning on meeting with the minister on the 30th from 3:30 to 4:30, and then we were going to come back to those officials.

If we so decided, due to the availability and the witness list, we could have those officials in another time slot and start clause-by-clause for an hour. I think we have to adjourn at 5:30 because people need some time to prepare for the session with the minister that night.

That would take an hour or an hour and a half in terms of a time slot.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

I have one more question. I think we had envisaged meeting next week on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Yes. I think the 17th and the 18th.... On Thursday is the Minister of National Revenue.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

If everyone is agreeable, could we not bring those officials back, if it is convenient for them and all of us, to conclude the technical aspects of the bill, and as such dispense with that part of our examination, instead of doing it during or adjacent to the clause-by-clause examination?

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Go ahead, Mr. Liepert.

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Have we actually confirmed more witnesses for any specific session yet?

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Yes, we have.

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Can you tell us when those are?

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

At the session on May 17 that is from 11:00 to 12:30, we have confirmed two and invited three others.

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

If we decided that this would be the extent of the witnesses, then we would have an hour and a half after that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Yes. Then, from 12:30 to 2:00 on the 17th, we have two invited in that time slot and have space for four more.

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

The 17th is effectively taken up with witnesses.