Finance Committee on Oct. 17th, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Before we end, I have two questions.

Mr. Watson, you talked a fair bit about the 50% capital cost allowance. What about investment tax credits? Do they work?

[Robert Watson]

Do you mean the SR and ED tax credits?

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Yes.

[Robert Watson]

Yes, they are working pretty well. We don't want to criticize them, because they're very good. However, they haven't been looked at lately. They need a review, because you do have lots of interest, more than ever before, from companies, Canadian-owned companies and internationally owned companies, wanting to do R and D, more R and D in Canada. I think it needs a review but just building on what's there, because it's good.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

To the NFU, on farm safety nets, specifically AgriStability, there have been substantial changes in recent years. Is it adequate to do the job?

[Ted Wiggans]

I think it's becoming more limited to the farmers who make use of it, and it does encourage farms that are not diversified. It encourages farms that have most of their eggs in one basket, so to speak. I think to a certain degree we should be encouraging farmers to be somewhat diversified, because that's also an insurance policy, but we have to have a safety net that's going to take into account that kind of farm, in terms of lost income, and so on.

I don't know whether that answers your question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Amanda, you were going to comment, as well.

[Amanda Wildeman]

That is one of our recommendations, to reduce demand for safety net payments by championing orderly marketing institutions. The hog sector is mentioned specifically in our longer submission as to how the removal of the single desk selling boards affected hog farmers. Those who did manage to not lose their businesses are now subject to huge price volatility, and they are more and more likely to be tapping into the safety net programs. I imagine it came up earlier in the conversation with representatives from the dairy board on CETA and others that are going to be threatening other international trade agreements that would be threatening supply management. If we look to some of the examples, particularly in the U.K., where supply management for dairy was taken out of a few years ago, we see the huge costs to their government up to now to keep their farmers afloat. Orderly marketing is a safety net program that should be looked at not just for the sectors where it currently still is, but for others. We did make recommendations before the Calgary meeting with the ministers of agriculture, particularly around the safety net programs. They could definitely be improved.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

For your own information, with the public service paying off of debt you talked about earlier, the analyst checked it out, and it's called the young farmers success act. It's not passed as yet. It was referred to the subcommittee on higher education and workforce training last November.

Any last comments anybody wants to raise? I want to thank each and every one of you for your presentations. Sorry for holding you 20 minutes late, and thanks for answering the questions. We will suspend and go to the open mike in about five minutes for those who are here and who want to make a statement.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

We'll reconvene.

We'll have all the open mike participants come up to the table and we'll go from there.

Paul Gerard Bourque.

Go ahead, Paul, the floor is yours. We try to keep it to a couple of minutes but it gives the opportunity to put your points on the record and they will be noted.

[Paul Bourque, As an Individual]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee.

My name is Paul Bourque. I am from Moncton, New Brunswick. I just moved back to Moncton, New Brunswick after spending 34 years in Ottawa working at the House of Commons, so I'm well aware of what happens at these committees.

I'm here to talk to you a little bit about the RRSP program. It started in 1957 and in the early eighties the government put on a big push to promote the program.

I entered the program and I am now at a stage where, if I want to remove money from the program, I'm being taxed at a much higher rate. Although when the program started most people were convinced that when you retire you have a lower income it's interesting how by removing money from the RRSP program you end of actually taxed at a higher rate than a lower rate.

The reason for my presentation today is to see if we can come out with a tax-free approach of withdrawing money from the RRSP program that would help seniors and homeowners to renovate their homes because we all know that seniors want to stay in their homes rather than going to the seniors residences, etc. Creating a tax-free withdrawal would allow people to improve their homes, improve their quality of life, and would make it a lot easier for the individuals to create some spur in the economy for construction workers and people who are in renovation programs.

I hope the committee takes this under consideration because I understand, and my memory tells me, that once upon a time the government did relax some of the rules and regulations around RRSP withdrawals. I don't know if that's something this committee would consider at this time. I'm sure there is enough data that the Department of Finance can provide in terms of the cost and how successful the program was in past years.

Now that I am a retired citizen I think the government has to do a better job about promoting this program because I don't hear people talking about it the way we used to talk about it in the eighties. If they could talk about it a little bit more and make it more important I think the government could always increase the money homeowners can have if they go ahead with this tax-free withdrawal.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Thank you very much, Mr. Bourque.

I think it was a program for first-time home buyers that was under that at one point in time.

Ms. Goodwin, the floor is yours. Welcome.

[Emilynn Goodwin, As an Individual]

Thank you.

My name is Emilynn Goodwin. I'm a student at the University of New Brunswick, and I'm one of the co-presidents of the University of New Brunswick Chapter of Engineers Without Borders . Engineers Without Borders Canada is a non-governmental organization that invests in people and ventures to create sustainable development. We have a community of 40 university and professional chapters and that includes 2,500 active members who provide seed funding, talent, and mentorship to social enterprises in sub-Saharan Africa. I'm here to speak to you today because the Government of Canada has committed to restoring and renewing international assistance and to refocusing on the poorest and most vulnerable, specifically women and girls. Canada has already taken steps toward re-engaging on the world stage in this way.

However, Engineers Without Borders Canada has noticed that Canada's development assistance is not quite up where some of the other G7 countries are, and we believe that's impairing our ability to implement the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the sustainable development goals.

For the budget, we ask that Canada commit to predictable increases to the international assistance envelope of 10% annually to the end of the 42nd Parliament and to also have a publicly available timetable doubling the envelope by 2023. We would also ask that Canada aim to meet the UN funding target of 0.7% of our GNI around 2030. We feel that making a strong official development assistance commitment aligns with the ministerial mandate and is a good stepping stone toward making progress on those sustainable development goals.

Thank you for your time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Thank you very much, Emilynn.

This is your first time before a committee, right? Welcome. Hopefully, you'll be before more.

Thank you, both.

The meeting is adjourned.