I think I know what you mean, but....
Evidence of meeting #2 for Finance in the 43rd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was billion.
A video is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #2 for Finance in the 43rd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was billion.
A video is available from Parliament.
7:55 p.m.
Liberal
7:55 p.m.
President, Canadian Steel Producers Association
We're seeing the investment community as well ask questions about the carbon performance of our industries. By the way, I don't think this is limited to any one industry.
7:55 p.m.
President, Canadian Steel Producers Association
I think this is a shift that's been taking place.
7:55 p.m.
Liberal
7:55 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
I think Mark Carney's name has been referenced at the meeting as well.
In terms of the innovations this sector is looking at moving forward with, what are some of the most important ones that you or the sector has seen, writ large, over the past few years? How can we as a federal government help to spur that further?
7:55 p.m.
President, Canadian Steel Producers Association
Can I just clarify? Are you asking for innovation related to climate or—
7:55 p.m.
Liberal
7:55 p.m.
President, Canadian Steel Producers Association
Oh, you meant to climate specifically.
We have some very interesting beginnings of collaborations going on, whether it's to look at long-term transformation of the steel production process to get rid of the use of carbon entirely....
By the way, we're working with the coal industry on that. We really believe in working collaboratively to find these solutions. They're long-term solutions; they're not going to happen overnight. We have some interesting opportunity with the forest sector as well, where instead of inputting carbon in its fossil form, we use it in our process in its biological form, which has a carbon benefit, etc.
So there are some very intriguing starts, if I might say, but the point I want to make is that we need to accelerate this work. The steel sector can't do that on its own. The scale of the investment and the partnerships required are simply too large.
7:55 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
Mr. Chair, with a final question, I'll turn to Dr. Bechard.
Dr. Bechard, I'm a member of Parliament from London, Ontario, which is home to the Bethanys Hope Foundation, focusing on a rare disease called metachromatic leukodystrophy. I wonder if your organization has any particular thoughts on rare diseases, particularly within the framework of how we might approach pharmacare. I know that in last year's budget there was a move in this direction, to support individuals struggling with rare diseases in their families. But have you or your organization any thoughts that you could offer in that regard?
7:55 p.m.
Executive Board Member, Canadian Doctors for Medicare
Definitely. Thank you for raising the question.
With rare diseases, it is something that would be wonderful to include within pharmacare. I think that is everyone's vision going forward, recognizing, of course, that we might need to have a bit of a separate strategy in terms of how to identify the most efficacious medications and how to also purchase the medications themselves, given that oftentimes because they're for a smaller population they can be extremely costly and expensive. That being said, a lot of these very expensive medications can make a tremendous impact on somebody's life and ability to function and have a quality of life and also contribute to society and participate.
Absolutely, I really was thrilled to see that. The Hoskins report specifically mentioned that the area of rare diseases needs its individual, separate strategy, and I was also really happy to see the funding toward it. I don't know if I or Canadian Doctors for Medicare have any ideal solutions, other than saying that we do absolutely need to look at these medications and to fund them. But we might need a bit of a different process given the very long-term ability to see that medications are safe. Sometimes we don't always have that luxury with rare diseases. So I'm glad to see that it's treated separately.
7:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Thank you all.
We'll come back to Mr. McLean for three minutes, and if there's a question on the Liberal side, we'll go with it for a couple of minutes.
Mr. McLean.
7:55 p.m.
Conservative
Greg McLean Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. Sanger, I picked up on one thing that you talked about with regard to the $2.4 billion subsidizing the oil and gas industry. You cited the $2.4 billion as being a subsidy for the oil and gas industry, and the mining industry. I presume you meant the actual flow-through benefit that primarily goes to the mining industry now, as opposed to the oil and gas industry.
I'll give you a chance to correct that after I ask my question.
In your report, you talk about government increasing royalty rates on the oil and gas sector, and tax rates, etc.
Are you aware of how much net benefit and tax are provided by the oil and gas industry to Canadian taxpayers currently? Is it tens of billions of dollars? Can you give me a number?
7:55 p.m.
Executive Director, Canadians for Tax Fairness
Are you talking about the amount that the industry pays directly or indirectly, or what?
8 p.m.
Conservative
Greg McLean Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
We'd be talking about tax revenue provided to different levels of government, both for corporate taxes and royalties, of course—things that fund hospitals and education.
All the programs that you would like to see in your agenda here have to come from somewhere. Are you aware of what that number is from the oil and gas sector?
8 p.m.
Executive Director, Canadians for Tax Fairness
Well there are different estimates.
First of all—
8 p.m.
Conservative
8 p.m.
Executive Director, Canadians for Tax Fairness
—people do different calculations of that.
The figure that I cited wasn't the flow-through. That's a Canadian development expense.
8 p.m.
Conservative
8 p.m.
Executive Director, Canadians for Tax Fairness
There are flow-through shares as well.
I thought that you were referring to—
8 p.m.
Conservative
Greg McLean Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Canadian development expenses are flow-through shares by another name.