Evidence of meeting #37 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was federal.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Hendrik Brakel  Senior Director, Economic, Financial and Tax Policy, Canadian Chamber of Commerce
Bob Finnigan  President, Canadian Home Builders' Association
Kevin Lee  Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Home Builders' Association
Craig Alexander  Senior Vice-President and Chief Economist, The Conference Board of Canada
Robert Blakely  Canadian Operating Officer, Canada's Building Trades Unions
Aaron Wudrick  Federal Director, Canadian Taxpayers Federation
Carolyn Pullen  Director, Policy, Advocacy and Strategy, Canadian Nurses Association
Martha Friendly  Executive Director, Childcare Resource and Research Unit (CRRU)
Nobina Robinson  Chief Executive Officer, Polytechnics Canada
Patrick Leclerc  President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Urban Transit Association
Cindy Blackstock  Executive Director, First Nations Child and Family Caring Society of Canada
Chris Roberts  National Director, Social and Economic Policy, Canadian Labour Congress
Scott Ross  Director of Business Risk Management and Farm Policy, Canadian Federation of Agriculture
Chief Perry Bellegarde  National Chief, Assembly of First Nations
Charlie Angus  Timmins—James Bay, NDP

4:20 p.m.

Liberal

Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you all for your presentations.

Mr. Blakely, apprenticeships are important to me. I've toured different trades in terms of their training facilities, and that's all well and good, but then they really can't complete their licences until they have that on-the-job experience.

I appreciate your comments about the federal government showing leadership and leading by example, but what are you hearing from employers in the trades? What incentives do they need to actually start hiring? It's one thing for them to see the government acting in a certain way, but I suspect they would want more than that, because if it were really about doing the right thing and bringing up the next generation, I'm sure many of them would do it, knowing their own experiences.

4:25 p.m.

Canadian Operating Officer, Canada's Building Trades Unions

Robert Blakely

Given the crass nature of humanity, things like the apprenticeship incentive grant, brought in by the prior government, the apprenticeship completion grant, those sorts of things go a long way to making people understand that apprenticeship is actually a valuable commodity.

The other part of it is the Government of Canada could easily role-model the advantages to consumers and the advantages to employers in having apprentices. There have been a number of studies done by groups like the Canadian Apprenticeship Forum, which say that for every dollar spent on an apprentice, the return to an employer is $1.67.

We shouldn't be limited by what we perceive to be the facts. We should actually have a chance to look at what the facts really are for apprenticeship. The fact is, it's older than universities. It is a 1,200-year training system that has continued with the contract of indenture being roughly the same as it was in the year 800. We must be doing something right.

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON

Thank you very much.

Mr. Lee, Mr. Finnigan, of course I'm going to ask a question of the Home Builders' Association, given my former background. On my colleague's questions about affordability, it's somewhat interesting and ironic that you talk about municipal levies. Ontario, for example, is the only province where municipalities actually pay for housing. Levies are collected for building applications, as part of the municipal tax roll...and then have to go and pay when the Harris government downloaded social programs like housing.

We actually have to pay for social housing through property taxes as well as things like municipal levies. It's the same with transit, the same with child care. It would be my assumption that you can't do one without the other. You can't reduce levies for home builders without providing funding for the services that are needed. I would think the home builders' associations would see the investments that the federal government has announced in terms of transit and sanitary waste water facilities as a major plus. If you have these services to land, that's only going to increase value and help take the burden off so the levies don't continue to increase.

4:25 p.m.

Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Home Builders' Association

Kevin Lee

We've certainly have been hugely supportive of investments by government in core infrastructure to address affordability and alleviate the need for development charges and taxes. Our concern with development taxes is when they start funding things in the rest of the community that go far beyond the needs of those immediate units, which would typically be something that ought to be paid for by the more broad tax base so that everybody benefits from it.

The same would hold true for social housing units. You really don't want to just force new homebuyers, buyers of new homes, to be the ones who are financing social housing units. Ideally, society is financing social housing units and you're not still saddling homebuyers, particularly those who are first-time buyers, with having to pay for social housing. That's where we would look for a different approach to things.

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thank you.

Mr. Liepert.

4:25 p.m.

Conservative

Ron Liepert Conservative Calgary Signal Hill, AB

Mr. Alexander, I don't think there would be a lot of arguing around the table relative to the Conference Board and your ability and history, in terms of recognizing where the country is headed and being non-partisan.

There's a lot of concern being expressed today about the debt load, not only of individuals in Canada, but also of the provincial and federal governments. There's some speculation that after the federal election in the United States there could very well be an increase in the federal interest rate.

Where do you see all of this coming to a head? Among our presenters, we probably get 10 people asking for more expenditures and none who say how we could actually reduce expenditures. I'd be interested in your summary of what kind of a mess we really are in.

4:30 p.m.

Senior Vice-President and Chief Economist, The Conference Board of Canada

Craig Alexander

And you want it very succinctly.

4:30 p.m.

Voices

Oh, oh!

4:30 p.m.

Conservative

Ron Liepert Conservative Calgary Signal Hill, AB

Yes.

4:30 p.m.

Senior Vice-President and Chief Economist, The Conference Board of Canada

Craig Alexander

The outlook for the Canadian economy is one of very weak economic growth at a time where there is slack in the economy. I think you can make a case that when private sector demand is weak, some targeted fiscal stimulus can have a beneficial impact. At the same time, you have to be fiscally responsible. In my mind, fiscal responsibility in this context means charting a path as to how you will eventually return to balance.

When I think about Canada in the longer term and I look at long-term projections, I am concerned about where Canada is headed fiscally. Primarily, my concern is at the provincial level. When I look at projections of economic growth and income growth in the economy, what I can see is that health care expenditures are going to far outstrip fiscal capacity. While some provinces today have fiscal challenges and others have fewer, any long-term projection of the provincial fiscal situation basically leads you to a conclusion that you're going to see very large deficits at the provincial level for quite a long period of time.

This raises the question of how we are going to deliver health, education, and other social programs at the provincial level and have them be affordable. Obviously, one approach would be to look at the fiscal capacity of the federal government in terms of the ability to transfer tax points to the provinces.

When the question comes up about education and health care being provincial responsibilities, one of the observations would be that perhaps the federal government should be looking for ways to transfer fiscal capacity to the provinces or, alternatively, looking for ways of channelling fiscal room. At the same time, as I said, these are long-term pressures, so if we run up a lot of debt now, we are going to lose scope and the room to manoeuvre to meet the fiscal pressures that are going to come down the road.

4:30 p.m.

Conservative

Ron Liepert Conservative Calgary Signal Hill, AB

Then I'm sure your colleague to the left would say that there's only one taxpayer.

4:30 p.m.

Federal Director, Canadian Taxpayers Federation

Aaron Wudrick

Yes, I echo some of his comments. I would disagree with some of them. I think that when we talk about stimulus, we do have to be conscious of the fact that the impact of fiscal stimulus is greatly mitigated in small, open economies with a flexible exchange rate.

The other thing to bear in mind is that we have seen this movie before, and it's usually in instances, as with the previous government, where there is, in fact, a recession. We were not fans of the last plunge into deficit, and we're not fans of this one, but at least last time you could argue that there was in fact a recession.

4:30 p.m.

Conservative

Ron Liepert Conservative Calgary Signal Hill, AB

And there was stimulus versus a significant increase in expenditures on social programs versus stimulus infrastructure spending, which happened in this last budget.

4:30 p.m.

Federal Director, Canadian Taxpayers Federation

Aaron Wudrick

Yes, whether it is temporary or not is obviously going to have an impact. As hard as we were on the last government for going into deficit, we gave them credit for getting out. That is our concern with the new government: they have signalled they're going into deficit, but we have yet to see a plan to get out.

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

I have to cut you off there.

I do have one question I want to ask the home builders', and anybody else for that matter, on something that was mentioned in somebody's presentation, the renovation black market. There are lost revenues for government, there's the undermining of the construction industry itself, and there's a loss of guarantee for those people who use payment in cash to those people doing their renovations. How do you kill that black market?

4:30 p.m.

Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Home Builders' Association

Kevin Lee

We're doing a lot of work in this area, actually, on information for Canadians. We have a “get it in writing” campaign right now, which we're collaborating on with Revenue Canada. It's been on for many years, but it's been reinvigorated over the past couple. It's to educate Canadians about making a smart choice when it comes to renovation, because, as you've said, everybody loses, frankly, including the homeowners who are choosing to go this route in many instances.

It's one reason why, when we look to activities like what you're trying to achieve from a public policy perspective—for example, climate change, aging in place, helping first-time homebuyers through a renovation tax credit—it doesn't take much. As long as you have a program that requires a homeowner to get a receipt, you in turn then attack the underground economy. We saw it through the home renovation tax credit in 2009. We saw it through the ecoENERGY retrofit program for energy efficiency. When you get a homeowner to take a receipt—and it doesn't have to be a receipt for much—as soon as you get the receipt, the underground economy dries up. Tying social or other policy to things like the renovation side of things to achieve those dual benefits is a great way, and as we've calculated, this can practically be cash-neutral for the government. Tax credits, grant programs, are often looked at as a straight expense. That's not the case when you are bringing underground economy activity above board in the process.

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thanks very much.

Mr. Grewal.

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

Raj Grewal Liberal Brampton East, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair. You took my question on the cash-only deals, so thank you for that.

Thank you, Mr. Lee, for going into more depth on that.

My question is going to focus on Hendrik's testimony. You mentioned the importance of the express entry program and immigration. Can you please give us a real-life example, of somebody, a business you're dealing with, is struggling because of this program, because Immigration is holding up their workers?

4:35 p.m.

Senior Director, Economic, Financial and Tax Policy, Canadian Chamber of Commerce

Hendrik Brakel

Frankly, it's the biggest issue for our members. It's a little bit difficult to cite specific ones.

In the video game industry in Montreal, where they're trying to bring in highly skilled workers, they have to prove a labour market impact assessment to say there is nobody in Canada who has the specific skills and programming to do this thing. At Ubisoft, for some of the higher level stuff that they're doing, there are only even 15 or 20 people in the world who are really good at this stuff, so they have to bring in that specific person and then they hire a team around them. The biggest challenge, I think, is the LMIA, the labour market impact assessment, proving that you can't find any other Canadian who could do the specific job.

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

Raj Grewal Liberal Brampton East, ON

I couldn't agree with you more. I think the Minister of Immigration now understands this. A lot of it has been because of the feedback that MPs have been getting on the ground. Immigration is a big issue in my riding, and the labour market impact assessment is something that all employers, permanent residents, and people here on work permits and student visas who are trying to get jobs are complaining about. The process is very flawed and very bureaucratic. We've passed that information along to the minister. We're very hopeful to get some positive results on that, to ensure that we can get these talented people into Canada, helping Canadian businesses grow the economy. Thank you for your testimony on that. I really appreciate it.

Going to housing and home building, one of your recommendations was to support increased access for the home buyers' plan. Housing's a big concern, whether you're in Vancouver, whether you're in Toronto, or whether you're in Montreal. I come from Brampton East, which is a high-growth area right now. The price of houses in my riding, from last year to this year, has gone up by 25%. That is just putting them out of reach. I'm 31 years old. All my friends are now getting into good jobs. They're finished their master's degrees, and they have upper middle-class incomes, in my opinion, but they can't afford a house where they grew up. This is a massive challenge, I believe, not only for the federal government, but the provincial government and the municipal governments.

Do you have some further insight on one thing you would like to see in this budget that would help address that problem?

4:35 p.m.

Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Home Builders' Association

Kevin Lee

The first thing to understand, especially in the GTA and in Vancouver, is the number one thing driving the problem right now is lack of supply. Just before coming over here, Bob and I were looking at the latest stats, and there are 70% fewer low-rise houses on the market in the GTA at this time this year than there were last year.

4:35 p.m.

President, Canadian Home Builders' Association

4:35 p.m.

Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Home Builders' Association

Kevin Lee

When you want to talk about simple economics and supply and demand, the reason why low-rise houses, in particular in the GTA and Vancouver, are so expensive is supply and demand. There is the federal, provincial, and municipal action right now to study housing markets. I'm really glad for that because there's been a lot of misinterpretation of what the problem is. So some really collaborative effort on addressing that is required.

Bob has also talked about the level of taxation and development charges in the GTA. When you're talking about $150,000 of tax on $500,000 home, that's an exorbitant level of tax. Therefore, some collaboration between all three levels of government to deal with supply issues is required. This would make sure taxation is appropriate and the investments in infrastructure that can help offset that...and create transit corridors that will enable people to move more efficiently. It's about productivity, it's about quality of life, all these things. Those are some areas that could make a big difference.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

Raj Grewal Liberal Brampton East, ON

Thank you, Mr. Lee. I totally agree with you.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thank you, Raj.

Go ahead, Mr. Aboultaif.