Finance Committee on Sept. 28th, 2016

[Chris Roberts, National Director, Social and Economic Policy, Canadian Labour Congress]

Committee and Chair, good afternoon. Thank you for the opportunity to appear in front of you today. I bring you greetings from CLC president Hassan Yussuff, who wanted to attend but was unable to.

The CLC, as you may know, is Canada's largest labour central. It's the voice on national issues for 3.3 million working people in Canada.

In July, the CLC made a detailed, written submission to the committee's pre-budget consultation. I'm not going to attempt to speak to the full range of issues in that brief but rather restrict my remarks to three areas in the time I have available.

The first is green jobs. As you've heard from other witnesses, undoubtedly, the end of the global commodity boom continues to weigh heavily on business investment and hiring in Canada, and Canada's job market has evidently stalled over the past year. At the same time, Canada is not on track to meet its greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets of 30% below 2005 levels by 2030.

In the view of the congress, the Government of Canada has an opportunity to undertake strategic investments to stimulate private investment and employment growth, while advancing Canada's effort to meet its GHG reduction targets.

Along with its partners in the green economy network, the CLC has proposed a plan to create one million climate jobs through strategic investments in public transit, renewable energy, and green building retrofits, ensuring a fair and just transition for workers affected by climate change, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions by one third over 10 years. An ambitious strategy promoting investment in home and building retrofits, energy efficiency, and conservation will generate good jobs.

The federal government should work with the provinces and territories to reach agreement on national energy efficiency standards. In our view, the Government of Canada should coordinate an ambitious program of targeted investments over the next five years for renewable energy development and infrastructure, with job creation and GHG reduction targets, in order to boost electricity generated from solar, wind, and geothermal energy sources.

The federal government should also work with indigenous, rural, and remote communities to increase access to renewable energy.

The CLC calls on the government to collaborate with provincial and municipal governments to form a national commuter and intercity public transportation strategy with predictable long-term funding. We hope the federal government will soon develop a national framework for pricing carbon and coordinating provincial approaches for reducing emissions.

Finally, the government must establish a framework for a fair and just transition for workers and their communities affected by climate change and industrial restructuring accompanying the transition to a low-carbon economy.

I will turn to the employment insurance program. The CLC welcomed the fact that budget 2016 eliminated the higher entrance requirement for new and returning workers, but far too many Canadians continue to be unable to access regular and special benefits when they need them. The CLC has consistently supported a single lower national eligibility standard for EI regular benefits, with a 360-hour threshold, and it supports the reduction in the 600-hour threshold for access to special benefits. We recommend that the federal government look at the Quebec parental leave benefit program in this respect.

In the last election the Liberal Party committed to improved access to compassionate care benefits and an additional $500 million annually in funding under the labour market development agreements with the provinces. Instead of allowing the EI premium rate to fall, we believe the surplus in the EI account should be directed toward these measures and to support badly needed improvements in access to benefits and in the level of benefits.

In my last point I want to turn to child care. The CLC supports expanded public investment in affordable, universal, and quality child care as a way of stimulating economic growth and raising private sector labour productivity growth while improving child development and labour market outcomes for mothers. High quality, universal, affordable child care delivered and managed by public authorities or not-for-profit programs requires stable, predictable funding, and solid long-term planning.

The federal government should provide long-term, stable federal financing in order to establish a common policy framework. Predictable operational funding provided directly to services will allow provinces to move off parental-fee-based systems and ensure that professional, qualified staff are hired and retained.

With that, I'll end my remarks and welcome any questions the committee might have.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Ron Liepert]

Thank you.

Mr. Ross.

[Scott Ross, Director of Business Risk Management and Farm Policy, Canadian Federation of Agriculture]

Thank you.

Good afternoon, committee members.

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you and speak about CFA's recommendations for the 2017 federal budget.

The Canadian Federation of Agriculture and its members greatly appreciate the opportunity to highlight how budget 2017 can help government and industry achieve agriculture's considerable potential.

For those who aren't familiar with the CFA, we are an umbrella organization representing more than 200 farm families who operate small businesses and work hard to benefit all Canadians by contributing significantly to the Canadian economy, and providing safe and affordable food and a clean and sustainable environment.

Canada's agrifood sector employs one in eight Canadians, with more than 275,000 jobs in primary agriculture alone. Agriculture has proven itself to be a resilient source of growth, contributing over $108 billion to Canada's GDP in 2014. With Canada's small population, vast natural resources and highly competitive producers, the industry is uniquely positioned to meet the opportunities presented by a global population of nine billion in 2050 and a domestic consumer base looking for increasingly diverse agrifood products.

Canadian farmers are eager to seize the opportunities through an ongoing industry-wide commitment to continuous improvement. In working toward these goals, CFA has identified a series of proposals for the 2017 budget in its written brief, but I'll just touch upon a few key areas today.

First, I'll outline the need to modernize provisions within the Income Tax Act to address new pressures facing family farm transfers.

Canadian agriculture is in the midst of a major transition, with the average farmer now over 54 years old and an estimated $50 billion in increasingly capital-intensive farms likely to change hands over the next decade. This poses new challenges to the continuation of family farming in Canada, a model recognized for sustainable growth, environmental stewardship, and spending within local communities.

Effective tax planning is essential to the viability of the next generation of farms, as well as to those retiring. As part of this planning, family farms continue to incorporate, while changing demographics mean farmers are unable to necessarily rely on their children to stay on the farm. These pressures also reduce the efficacy of existing provisions within the Income Tax Act that were established to enable family farm transfers.

To ensure the industry is well positioned to continue its growth, CFA recommends that the rollover provisions be amended to recognize the full breadth of family relations relied upon to maintain family farms across Canada and that family farm corporations be provided with a level playing field when transferring their businesses to the next generation, including access to the capital gains exemption, and ensuring that siblings can access the same provisions as other farm family members.

Second, I'll touch on the significant opportunities that clean technologies and innovation present for Canadian agriculture, and the support that industry requires to capitalize on them.

Canadian agriculture is already focused on building resiliency and adapting to climate change. At the same time, Canadian farms are focused on sustainability, and farmers are busy building the reporting systems to show it. As a result, Canadian producers are a target market for clean technology. Producers continue to make investments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve water quality, and reduce the use of inputs through precision agriculture. However, further investment in beneficial management practices and tools to illustrate their benefits is needed, such as through environmental farm plans.

At the same time, many proven technologies are capital-intensive, and without government-backed incentives they often struggle to be seen as a profitable investment. Investments in clean technology, including tax or rebate-based incentives, are needed to make technology more accessible to farmers, capture greenhouse gases, feed the energy back into the grid, and improve other environmental outcomes.

Canadian farmers are similarly motivated to advance the national bio-economy using farm waste in order to produce renewable high-quality products. Canada has the potential to be an innovator and global leader in this area, but a national strategy, coupled with federal investments in research, commercialization, and incentives, is needed.

Finally, I'd like to discuss the considerable opportunities agriculture sees in improved international and domestic market development.

To leverage these opportunities, industry and government must invest in the development of a strategic market access vision for the sector. This would include a review of emerging market opportunities and regulatory and non-regulatory barriers to trade, and a comprehensive look at infrastructure and broader industry capacity.

One example would be labour. CFA believes that long-term plans such those as laid out in the “Agriculture and Agri-food Workforce Action Plan” are essential to addressing significant labour shortages that constrain our ability to meet long-term trade objectives. By strategically identifying how we can meet these opportunities, we can align efforts through clearly defined roles and timelines for all involved. The investments required to develop such a vision pale in comparison to the long-term benefits that would accrue from the increases in tangible market access. On that note, I'd like highlight CFA's support for the modernization of Canada's internal trade system, and to emphasize the need for continued investment and federal leadership in continuing its momentum.

Once again, I'd like to thank the chair and the committee members for your time and I look forward to answering any questions you might have.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Ron Liepert]

Thank you.

Mr. Bellegarde, we'll conclude with your presentation.

[National Chief Perry Bellegarde, National Chief, Assembly of First Nations]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[Witness speaks in Cree]

I'm very happy to be here. I acknowledge the creator for this beautiful day. I acknowledge the Algonquin peoples, the Anishinaabeg peoples for hosting us here, and all the men and women here.

My name is Perry Bellegarde, National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations. I greet you all in a humble, respectful way.

Much of Canada's wealth comes from the resources of this land, wealth that has not been equitably shared despite the sacred promises of treaty and our inherent rights, title, and jurisdiction. Resource development alone is expected to pump $650 billion into Canada's economy over this decade. It's time to rebuild trust with first nations and foster partnerships with this country, including new fiscal transfer and revenue-sharing arrangements.

Each federal budget must signal Canada's commitment to a new relationship and to closing the socio-economic gap that exists between indigenous peoples and the rest of Canada. The significant investments made in budget 2016 for first nations people are important commitments. They represent the first instalment towards closing the gap after decades of underfunding and neglect over 20 years.

We all know there's much work to do, and closing that gap will not be done in one fiscal year. It won't be done in two fiscal years. You need 5-, 10-, and 15-year strategies in order to close this socio-economic gap that exists. You know the gap that I use, 6th versus 63rd, and if you don't know, I'll explain it. Canada is rated sixth according to the United Nations human development index. If you apply the index to indigenous peoples, we're at 63rd.

This gap represents everything we talk about: the overcrowded housing, the cap on education, the 1,200 missing and murdered indigenous women and girls, high youth suicide rates, disproportionate number of our people in jails, 132 boil water advisories, all the lists. That has to be closed. Maintaining the status quo is not in the best interest of this country at all.

Having said that, investing in Canada's fastest-growing demographic, young first nations, indigenous men and women, the message and theme we continually put out is to start investing in human capital. You're going to reap huge returns on investment if that happens.

In fact, studies have shown that if investments were to have been made back in 2001, by 2026, $400 billion in positive growth in GDP would have been added to Canada's economy, and $115 billion of cost savings would have happened. That is, if investments would have been made back in 2001. That's from 2001 up until 2026. Studies have shown that. Investing the wealth that has come from our lands back into our first nations benefits everyone in Canada. The numbers in the submission should be seen as basements, not ceilings on investment.

There are regions, such as north of 60, those in the northern regions of the provinces, that require particular attention because of the unique challenges they face. Costs of doing business in the north are huge. They're different than in the south. You always have to keep that in mind.

There are priorities in this budget coming up, 2017-18. There has to be housing and water, no question. Post-secondary education has to be there. First nations policing has to be there. What Cindy spoke about, ending discrimination, has to be in there. With the child welfare issue, funding still falls short. There is still discrimination. That has to end.

New fiscal arrangements and budget decisions must reflect the needs-based approach to closing the gap. We're going to continue to review and revise numbers in light of our growing understanding of the needs, and we'll keep this committee and the finance minister informed as well. We call him [Witness speaks in Cree], the big money chief, so we have to talk to him.

At the AFN, we're going to continue to assist first nations in working together on common areas of concern to advance common priorities. We also expect that the important work under the MOU, the memorandum of understanding, working towards a new fiscal relationship with the crown that was signed this summer between myself and Minister Bennett is going to breathe life.

We're going to advance what the Prime Minister said: long-term, sustainable, predictable funding. We have a long road to go. We're going to close the gap and achieve rights, implementation, and reconciliation, and we trust great progress can be made in budget 2017.

Ekosi.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Ron Liepert]

Thank you.

Unfortunately, we only have about 20 minutes for questions and answers. Again, I would ask everyone to try and be as succinct as you can, including witnesses for your answers.

We're going to start with Mr. Falcon Ouellette.

[Robert-Falcon Ouellette, Liberal, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I really appreciate each and every one of you for coming here today to give your testimony in this hearing.

My comments and questions are going to be directed towards Perry, as well as Cindy. I'm very proud that the government did not continue to fight the Human Rights Tribunal and the First Nations Child and Caring Society. It's fun to see that when you advocate behind the scenes, sometimes governments can take a step back. Sometimes we'd like the road to be very short, though sometimes it's still long.

I often think about our children. How our indigenous children have become a form of a natural resource in the child and families services systems in this country. There are 11,000 kids in care in Manitoba and some not for the right reasons. Some 87% are not there because of abuse, but negligence, the inability of parents to provide food and housing for their children. I think these are telling statistics.

Sometimes we think it's easier to take the children from the families and give them to someone else to raise, while we provide funds and monies to those children, either off-reserve or on-reserve. This is still the present, but it's also the past. I hope it can become the past.

I was wondering, Cindy, if you had solutions. What should the federal government be doing with the money that we're spending? Do you have programs that we could be implementing in order to make this something really in the past?

[Dr. Cindy Blackstock]

We're very proactive with the minister. We identified the flaws in each of the funding formulas and recommendations from prior reports that would have remediated the most egregious effects of the discrimination. We also provided the minister and the departmental staff with examples of programs that have been used with indigenous peoples, in Canada and around the world, that have resulted in real safety for families and a decrease in children in care.

We don't have time to articulate those now, but I can provide the committee with examples of those information sheets. I certainly would welcome any offline conversations.

In terms of the work there, I would just say that it's important. I appreciate that the government didn't appeal those decisions, but they haven't complied with them either. I'm looking forward to that happening very quickly.

[National Chief Perry Bellegarde]

Just quickly Chair, as well, on what Cindy said.

There are two processes going on. There is the FPTI process, the federal, provincial, territorial and indigenous forum. Carolyn Bennett chairs that forum with the other chair from Ontario, trying to find ways to fix the on-reserve child and family service system. You're going to need fiscal resources. That one that is on-reserve.

The other one is the Council of the Federation, where we meet the premiers. We got them to agree because there's 40,000 first nations children in foster care in the provincial systems. That has to be fixed as well, on-reserve, off-reserve, so now we have processes going on. You have to look at the fiscal resource piece on-reserve, but as well, you have to look at the jurisdictional pieces and look at how you extend first nations jurisdiction into the provincial systems.

It's almost supporting 10 or 13 provincial-federal-first nations systems going right across Canada. You can't just deal with the on-reserve system. You've got to look at the provincial systems. We got buy-in last year in July at the Council of the Federation and we've got to keep getting those systems working. It's not just on-reserve, but off-reserve too.

[Robert-Falcon Ouellette, Liberal, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

From what I hear, and having talked to Minister Bennett, I think it would be appropriate for her not to just simply go to the indigenous and northern affairs standing committee, but I think because we are dealing with such an important issue—Cindy was here last year talking about this—she should come at some point to testify and answer questions here. I think she would be amenable to that.

I hope my fellow committee members would be willing to eventually call the Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs to answer for the amounts of money and the future programming that's going on because I think it's such an important issue. It's worthy of greater insight for people who perhaps don't have that expertise, but who, I'm sure, are very interested in this as well.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Ron Liepert]

Thanks, Robert.

We move to Mr. McColeman.

[Phil McColeman, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Thank you, witnesses, for being here.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Ron Liepert]

Excuse me, I'm sorry, Phil. Before we continue, the bells are going, so I need unanimous consent from the committee to carry on. Do I have that?

Thank you.

[An hon. member]

What time are we sitting to?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Ron Liepert]

Roughly, 5:45.

[Phil McColeman, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Okay, I'll try to be brief and give some time to my colleague to my left here, Mr. Angus.

[Charlie Angus, Timmins—James Bay, NDP]

Far left.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Phil McColeman, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

You and I know that, Charles.

Education is transformative. There's no question. I happen to represent the largest first nation in Canada, Six Nations of the Grand River, and I've watched the growth of Six Nations Polytechnic and the work that they've been doing to take their youth and build strong individuals through education. I want to concentrate on that focus.

Ms. Robinson, I think your proposals to the government have a lot of merit, for both indigenous communities and non-native communities. There's one question I have, and you have it in your bullet points. You never did get to your recommendations, but it says, “To fund a centre of excellence for vocational training”. Do you have any conceptual work done on that, on what the cost is, and where that might be located?

[Nobina Robinson]

I'm sort of agnostic as to who is doing the learning. We all need to be learning. The part that I'm passionate about is that we need applied learning. Polytechnics deliver that. When you think of the word “apprenticeship”, which is work-based learning, it has so much more promise. It is funded at one-fifth of what we support a post-secondary student with. In Canada, with our terrible jurisdictional challenges that we've had for 150 years, apprenticeship is delivered in disparate ways by trade across the provinces. It is an old system.

What we're proposing is to consolidate a lot of the learnings, as well as the best practices, and bring employers closer to apprentices through a centre of excellence that is focused on apprenticeship and vocational training. We have a brief, which I would happily submit. The idea is one from the Canadian Apprenticeship Forum. It's their idea, but we are a patron member of that institution, and we think the federal government can scale up, consolidate, and show across jurisdictions improvement in the delivery of skills training.

[Phil McColeman, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

I will pass this question along to Chief Bellegarde. When you weigh the generational change that needs to happen with all of the things for indigenous people, how important is that education transformation for you?

[National Chief Perry Bellegarde]

It's huge. What's the best way out of poverty? Good education. We say, as indigenous peoples, that we walk in both worlds. We need to be strong on literacy and numeracy, and science and math, and all the above, but equally important on the other hand are our languages, our ceremonies, our traditions, and our customs. We're balancing by walking in both worlds. We need investments from K-12, but we also need investments in post-secondary education. We have 10,000 students on the wait list, and that has to be addressed in this upcoming budget. We need to find that balance by walking in both worlds. That's why we support the Six Nations Polytechnic and the First Nations University of Canada, because again it's indigenous learning and indigenous knowledge. It's walking both worlds, so it's key. It's a way out of poverty.

[Phil McColeman, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Ron Liepert]

We're going to move, then, to the far left with Mr. Angus.

[Charlie Angus]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for being here, and the National Chief.

We've lost three young people in Pikangikum this week, the youngest being 13. We've lost a lot of young people falling through the cracks. We had Health Canada at our committee, and I asked them about the denial rates of children needing mental health services. I asked them if they tracked how many times they deny children, and they said, of course they do. Then when we went and tried to find that data, they admitted that they don't track how many times they deny children or young people needing mental health services.

I raise that, Ms. Blackstock, because we have a government that's ignored two compliance orders and is refusing to turn over data to the tribunal. How can a government make a financial claim that it's responding to indigenous children in need, if they don't track the data or they're refusing to turn it over?