Evidence of meeting #30 for Finance in the 43rd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was businesses.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Simon Kennedy  Deputy Minister, Department of Industry
Mark Farrant  Founder and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Juries Commission
Keith Sullivan  President, Fish, Food and Allied Workers
Paul-Émile Cloutier  President and Chief Executive Officer, HealthCareCAN
Amanjit Lidder  Senior Vice-President, Taxation Services, MNP LLP
Carol Stephenson  Chair of the Board of Governors, Stratford Festival
Phillip Crawley  Publisher, President and Chief Executive Officer, Toronto, The Globe and Mail
Jerry Dias  President, Unifor
Jennifer Robson  Associate Professor, Carleton University, As an Individual
Anita Gaffney  Executive Director, Stratford Festival
Kim Drever  Regional Tax Leader, Edmonton, MNP LLP
Bradly Wouters  Executive Vice-President for Science and Research, University Health Network, and Representative, HealthCareCAN
Jeremy Rudin  Superintendent of Financial Institutions, Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions
Ben Gully  Assistant Superintendent, Regulation Sector, Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thank you very much.

I am turning then to MNP, Ms. Lidder and Ms. Drever.

Go ahead.

4:30 p.m.

Amanjit Lidder Senior Vice-President, Taxation Services, MNP LLP

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It's an honour for Kim and me to address you in the House of Commons finance committee on the government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic. We appreciate the opportunity to be back and to see familiar faces despite the circumstances that we find ourselves in.

Thank you for your continued leadership. The quick response by the government has been welcomed. The steps that lie ahead are just as important as those already taken. MNP is the leading national accounting, tax and business consulting firm. As the largest professional services firm headquartered in Canada, we have a unique vantage point from which to see the challenges facing Canadians and Canadian businesses.

In our capacity as trusted advisers to 180,000 private enterprises and small business clients, and 19,000 farms from coast to coast to coast, we have seen first-hand how challenging the last two and a half months have been and the difficult road that still lies ahead of all of us.

Inspired by the concept in disaster recovery of “build back better”, we are here today to discuss tangible measures to kick-start Canada's economic recovery and get people back to work. While build back better is technically referenced in the context of critical infrastructure like bridges and dams, there is little more critical than the economic well-being and confidence of every Canadian.

Every aspect of Canadian life has been impacted by COVID-19. As Canadians begin venturing out from the last 60 days spent under public health orders, everyday actions as simple as turning a doorknob are looked at with suspicion and nervousness. According to a recent poll, over 50% of Canadians find it stressful to even leave the house.

In our submission, we outline an action plan for today and for the future. The first phase includes steps that will tackle the crisis of confidence facing Canadian businesses, while ensuring that Canadians can return to work safely and that the economic environment is one that they can trust and believe in.

Many businesses will have to retrofit their spaces to adapt to the evolving circumstances. As well, families will have to modify their homes to care for aging parents and adapt to working from home. Introducing a refundable tax credit for costs associated with commercial, industrial and residential modifications will help create safer, more efficient building infrastructure and will also stimulate consumer spending.

Families that are already saddled with significant personal debt and the reduction of available jobs have students and their parents wondering whether they can still afford post-secondary studies. We recommend that the annual tuition transfer cap be eliminated, allowing supporting parents to claim full tuition costs. This will increase access to post-secondary studies for cash-strapped families.

As our economy stabilizes, we recommend creating a temporary system modelled after the homebuyers' plan, where Canadians can access some of the funds in their RRSPs like a rainy-day fund without facing immediate and punitive tax consequences.

Governments across Canada acted quickly to help Canadians, and for that we are all grateful. From St. Patrick's Day to May long weekend we saw 300 programs, grants, deferrals, subsidies, loans and other measures announced by the federal, provincial and territorial governments with the express purpose of stabilizing the economy in the face of the public health crisis.

There are still some items to clarify with respect to the Canada emergency wage subsidy program. Take, for example, a flower shop in Ottawa that has decided to purchase a second location in Cornwall. If the Ottawa location had bought the shares of that second location, that business would be eligible for the CEWS and could retain its employees. If instead the Ottawa location decided to buy the assets of the second location, the business would not be eligible for the CEWS program.

It's important to remember that these are emergency programs. They were not designed as long-term economic recovery programs. If done in a gradual way, phasing out current emergency programs such as the CEWS and the Canada emergency response benefit will ensure Canadians can build back a robust and growing economy.

The CEWS phase-out could target businesses that are still under public health orders to remain closed or that were most severely impacted by the pandemic, or decrease the subsidy percentage from 75% over time.

We know businesses with a rainy-day fund were less reliant on the emergency programs and were able to maintain their employees with limited support. The current tax rules penalize small to medium-sized Canadian businesses for maintaining cash and investments over a certain amount. It is imperative that this limit be increased to ensure businesses can weather future challenges.

Last, there has been much written about Canadian debt loads. We are taking on more debt at the household level and across all orders of government. At MNP, we've completed a quarterly consumer debt index. Our March, 2020 study indicated that nearly half of Canadians are concerned about being close to insolvency.

It is our recommendation that future economic recovery programs consider the concerns of impending deferred debt obligations, and incentivize real economic growth and job creation. We need a strong foundation and framework for recovery.

Thank you for your important work.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thank you very much, Ms. Lidder.

I'll turn to the Stratford Festival, and to Ms. Stephenson and Ms. Gaffney.

The floor is open to whoever is taking it.

4:40 p.m.

Carol Stephenson Chair of the Board of Governors, Stratford Festival

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the committee for inviting us here today.

The Stratford Festival's executive director, Anita Gaffney, is with me today and is also available to answer any questions.

We would both ask that you think of the Stratford Festival as a business, because it's the way we see ourselves. Ours is a $65-million company that sells its product to the world. This product—unparalleled in North America, with featured artists like Colm Feore, Martha Henry, Maggie Smith and Christopher Plummer—has attracted almost 29 million visitors to southwestern Ontario over the past 67 years.

The Stratford Festival attracts a diverse audience. While it comes from around the world, it is significant that 25% come annually from the United States. These are people who return to Stratford, to Canada, year after year, generation after generation, boosting our tourism economy and proving that when you do something of value it has a lasting impact. In the Stratford Festival's case, that impact is $130 million a year in economic activity, verified by the Conference Board of Canada.

The Stratford Festival was founded in 1952 to save the town from economic disaster when it lost its major industry. It worked, and it continues to work. The festival has grown to become the marquee tourism event in the multi-million dollar tourism industry of southwestern Ontario. It's the largest not-for-profit theatre in North America. It presents 700 performances of 15 productions on four stages. It attracts 500,000 people a year. It employs 1,000 people, creates 2,400 more full-time-equivalent jobs and supports hundreds of small businesses in the region. It drives $55 million in taxes to the three levels of government annually, and has the highest level of earned revenues, at 94%, and the lowest level of government support, at 6%, in the not-for-profit performing arts industry.

Not only is the festival a major attraction, it really does operate as a business. It's also good for business. It is a key attractor used for medical and corporate recruitment, and by regional economic development departments.

When I was the dean at Ivey, I touted the festival quite a bit in my efforts to recruit top talent. I know I was certainly not alone in that. I can attest to the fact that the Stratford Festival is extremely fiscally responsible. I say this as a business leader. It pains all of us to be in this position. It is not our usual manner, and one we will not become accustomed to. However, because of this pandemic, a business model that has worked for decades has been turned on its head. Without ticket sales, the festival's unique ability to be 94% self-funding becomes a unique vulnerability, forcing us to turn to government for its very survival.

The festival's survival is vital. It would not simply be a profound cultural blow to lose the festival. Stratford mayor Dan Mathieson has said it would have a catastrophic impact on the community, causing the loss of more than 3,400 jobs and decimating the downtown core. It is essential to save the festival, and we have taken a number of immediate steps to help stabilize the organization.

We have launched a ticket donation campaign. We have reduced overhead expenses. We have instituted a 50% salary reduction for the executive director and artistic director. We have drawn from our endowment. We have accessed the CEWS. We have accessed a $6-million line of credit from our bank, and we have launched a fundraising campaign to support our recovery.

Even with all of these efforts, there is a shortfall of $20 million. We need the help of government to close this gap. We are committed to raising $12 million in private sector donations, and we ask government to contribute $8 million through a combination of a grant and a loan.

With the support of the government, we can continue to generate jobs, economic activity and tax revenues well into the future. In exchange, we promise a tremendous return on investment, both culturally and economically, and $8 million is after all just 15% of the $55 million in taxes we generate annually.

Granting this urgent request will protect 3,400 jobs, stimulate the regional economy by at least $135 million annually and preserve the international prestige of this world-renowned Canadian theatre.

Thank you very much. We look forward to your questions.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thank you very much, Ms. Stephenson.

We will turn to The Globe and Mail. Appearing is Mr. Crawley, publisher and CEO.

May 21st, 2020 / 4:45 p.m.

Phillip Crawley Publisher, President and Chief Executive Officer, Toronto, The Globe and Mail

Hello. Thank you for asking me to speak today.

I've been publisher and CEO of the Globe for the last 21 years. I'm also co-chair of The Canadian Press, so I'm wearing two hats today.

The Globe is privately held by Woodbridge, which is the holding company for the Thomson family. They've owned media since the early days of Roy Thomson in the 1930s. I worked for him and his son Ken in the U.K. when they owned some of the leading titles there. Now the third generation, in the shape of David Thomson as chairman, is in charge.

One common factor across all those decades is that the principle of editorial independence is respected. Our proprietor doesn't dictate what we publish or what causes we support, and the Thomsons have an enduring belief in the value of journalism that makes a difference. They own the Globe because they think it can make a contribution to Canada.

The cornerstone of our business is not advertising, which is a revenue stream that shrinks each year. No, the present and the future of the Globe is founded on readers and users paying for our content. More than 60% of our revenue comes from subscriptions, print and digital, and advertising revenue is now only 33%.

To keep on growing our subscriptions, we invest in editorial talent. The best reporters, columnists, designers and data scientists support that business goal. At a time like this, when expert comment and analysis on the pandemic is in high demand, we rely on the wisdom of journalists like André Picard. We have the best team of health and science writers in the country.

Normally we would put that reporting behind the paywall to drive subscriptions, but at the start of the pandemic crisis we made a decision to open up our paywall. We felt it was important for all Canadians to be able to access that content for free. Our audience doubled in April as a result, and we had our highest-ever traffic levels on our websites. That means we sacrificed revenue, but we built trust with our audience. In the current climate, being able to rely on accurate information is a key priority for many Canadians.

We are one of a small number of publishers around the world that have transitioned successfully to a business model that's based on premium content. The majority of our revenue comes from the 120,000 digital subscribers and the 110,000 print subscribers who currently pay to consume our journalism. Because only a third of our revenue comes from advertising, the consequence is that we did not qualify in March for the government's new wage subsidy scheme. April revenue went down further, and May will be about the same on the advertising front, so it remains to be seen if we become eligible.

In their latest results announced last week, Postmedia stated that they expect to receive $20 million to $22 million in wage subsidy from March 15 through to June 6. Torstar, the second-largest group, expects to collect $18 million in the same period. For many in our industry, this is welcome and substantial assistance from the government.

Let's be clear. The long-term outlook for the Globe and many others has darkened because of the pandemic. Print advertising revenue, once the backbone of newspapers, will go into accelerated decline. Some companies have been reporting a 20% annual drop in print advertising revenue, and that was pre-pandemic. For our new fiscal year starting in September, the Globe is forecasting a drop of 32% year on year in print advertising. That's many millions of dollars of high-margin revenue, and we won't be the biggest victims in Canada.

We have been cutting costs over the last few months to minimize layoffs, and I have suggested schemes to Canadian Heritage like a rebate on our printing costs or a subsidy on the fees that all the leading media companies pay each month to The Canadian Press. The broadcasting industry has received additional support, and I argue that targeted support measures for the news publishing industry are likewise needed to help publishers weather the storm.

The newspaper industry is disappointed by the small amount of money spent so far by the federal government from its $30-million COVID-19 awareness campaign. So far the Globe has received only $81,000 out of that $30 million. By contrast, the Ontario government has spent nearly $1.5 million with The Globe and Mail in the last two months on its health awareness campaign. That was a deal done within 24 hours and implemented immediately.

You are no doubt aware that all of Canada's major publishers signed an open letter earlier this month calling on Ottawa to address the inherent unfairness of the system whereby the global platforms enjoy exemption from sales tax in Canada, while paying nothing for the journalism content that they use. The lack of protection for the copyright of our most valuable asset, our content, is a well-known problem. Tax and trade treaties with Washington are no small barriers to solving these issues, but even in the U.S.A the publishing industry association is asking Congress to enable newspapers to bargain with Google and Facebook on a level playing field.

If you value the contribution that newspapers like The Globe and Mail make to the democratic debate and you want to see them survive the current crisis and be healthy, I suggest it's time you pay urgent attention to these inequities.

Thank you for listening. I'm happy to answer questions later.

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thanks very much, Mr. Crawley.

Jerry Dias, I have you down here twice. I have you once with the Fish, Food and Allied Workers and once with Unifor. I'm not sure if you have anything you want to add or not, but I will give you the floor for a couple minutes.

4:50 p.m.

Jerry Dias President, Unifor

Thank you.

My name is Jerry Dias, and I'm here on behalf of Unifor, Canada's largest labour union in the private sector. I appreciate having the opportunity to speak with you today.

Look, we're living in extraordinary times. A public health crisis that has already claimed the lives of 6,000 people in Canada has spiralled into a deep and painful economic slowdown. Millions today are unemployed. Many are afraid to go back to work. Not a day passes that I am not grateful for our front-line workers. I am grateful for those in health and long-term care, in retail and in our transport and logistics industries who are risking their lives for our well-being despite low pay and a continuing lack of needed PPE.

As our country stared down economic catastrophe earlier on, Unifor called on the federal government to act boldly and quickly. Despite some early missteps, the government acted on and adjusted key policy programs appropriately. There have been many, including the Canadian emergency wage subsidy. Federal transfers to incentivize premium pay for low-wage workers also filled a major need. The Canadian emergency response benefit, for instance, picked up the slack for our employment insurance system, which is evidently broken and in desperate need of repair. I am glad the CERB moved money into people's pockets so quickly. It will serve as a case study for better income assistance.

However, the CERB has flaws that need fixing. At the top of that list is for ministers Morneau and Qualtrough to allow employer-paid and Service-Canada-registered supplemental unemployment benefits, or SUB, alongside CERB. It is ludicrous that the ministers are denying hundreds of thousands of workers additional income supports, some as much as $500 and $600 per week, that employers are ready, willing and able to pay.

Our union has been beating this drum for workers in major sectors like auto, aerospace, steel, rail, health care and public services, among others. Employers, if you can imagine, are themselves lobbying the government, asking to pay these funds, all to no avail.

Fixing this will cost our public purse precisely nothing, yet the answer has consistently been no. This does not make a stitch of sense. Affected workers are outraged. This committee should be as well. It's a no-brainer. It takes a simple regulatory fix that we proposed more than a month ago.

I'm asking this committee today to get this matter resolved.

Thank you.

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thank you, Jerry. Can you send the clerk that regulatory fix you've proposed? I don't think we've seen it.

4:55 p.m.

President, Unifor

Jerry Dias

Absolutely.

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Before I turn to Dr. Robson, I'll give a heads-up to committee members. I will go to four and a half minute rounds for the whole series in order to get as many members on as we can today.

We'll start with Mr. Cooper. Then we'll go to Mr. Fragiskatos, Mr. Ste-Marie and Mr. Julian in the first round.

With that, we have Dr. Jennifer Robson, associate professor at Carleton University, as an individual.

Dr. Robson, the floor is yours.

4:55 p.m.

Professor Jennifer Robson Associate Professor, Carleton University, As an Individual

Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee, for the opportunity to join you today.

COVID-19 has not hit all Canadians equally, whether in terms of health or economic effects. My remarks today will focus on two such forms of inequalities that I think are particularly relevant to the work of this committee: those in information and those in household financial resources. These have mattered during the crisis and they will continue to matter during the economic reopening and eventual rebuilding.

Too many Canadians find government programs confusing, and they are confusing. Online FAQs and call centres are no substitute for personalized information and guidance. I don’t have to tell you, as MPs, how important it is that Canadians have access to local, accessible and accurate help to use government programs. You and your constituency teams have been playing a vital role in connecting people to the help they need, but you can’t do it all—no one network can. We need to build a properly resourced web of non-profit services to answer questions, problem-solve and advocate for clients who can’t do it themselves. As I said to your colleagues at the standing committee on human resources, I would encourage the committee to look at the Citizens Advice bureaus in the United Kingdom or the Financial Empowerment Centers in the United States for ideas of the kinds of networks that could be possible.

One-third of Canadians came into this crisis without enough liquid financial savings to pay for even a poverty-line standard of living, let alone their usual level of consumption, for even a month. A bit of additional liquidity in the form of mortgage and tax deferrals will have helped some, but part of the rebuilding phase is going to have to be rebuilding household finances. I hope members of this committee will work with colleagues to find better tools to help households reduce debt and build emergency savings. Passive tax incentives alone will not work, nor will austerity. In fact, austerity will only further reduce consumer confidence and demand among households with the greatest marginal propensity to consume.

Let me close with some observations on the temporary income support measures as we enter a new transition phase. This committee will have heard from senior officials in government that there is much we can’t do as quickly as we should be able to do, or even at all, because our government IT systems cannot handle rapid changes or fine-grained exceptions to general rules. Many Canadians are going to continue to need income support for the next while because reopening is gradual and is going to be uneven by region, by sector, and frankly, by gender. We have to hope that the emergency wage subsidy will mean that some share of layoffs won’t become permanent. I am concerned by the lower than projected uptake of the subsidy so far, but I am pleased that the government has extended the eligible period for this program. That is the right thing to do. We want to incentivize work but only if that work is safe to do.

The CERB will have to be wound down gradually and adjusted for differences in labour market opportunities. The same challenges of coverage and speed in processing that plagued EI at the start of this crisis have not been magically resolved in the intervening time. When thinking about this next phase of financial support, I worry that we will again be faced with trade-offs between making speedy payments with minimal variations and making payments more slowly but adjusting for individual differences in labour market earnings.

We can, however, try to reconcile speed and variation in individual payments if we trust Canadians and accept declarations and attestations, with strong backstops in file review and recovery of funds, instead of holding payments until records of employment and other traditional forms of third party verification are received. Going forward, investments in systems such as e-payroll or better access to real-time economic and financial data would reduce the reporting burden on Canadians, address fears of fraud and allow public programs to be far more nimble and responsive.

Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.

5 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thank you very much, Professor Robson.

Thank you to all the witnesses. When we have a panel such as this, which is a mixture, I think, even for you, we see the complexity of the Canadian economy. Witnesses sometimes tell me when we do things this way it is interesting. We all tend to operate in silos, so it's interesting to see some of the problems of others in their areas of responsibility.

With that, we will go to four and a half minute questions. Let's try to keep it very tight if we can so we can get as many questions in as possible.

Mr. Cooper, we'll start with you, followed by Mr. Fragiskatos.

Michael.

5 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses. This is a very interesting panel.

I'm going to direct my questions to Mr. Farrant.

Mr. Farrant, first of all, thank you for your advocacy for juror supports. As you note, jury service is the last mandatory form of civic duty, and jurors play a fundamental role in the administration of justice across Canada. It was a unanimous recommendation of this committee during pre-budget consultations to provide the Canadian Juries Commission with $20 million over 10 years, which, in the context of the federal budget, is at best a rounding error.

Can you speak to the need for the urgency of that funding in the face of COVID?

5 p.m.

Founder and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Juries Commission

Mark Farrant

Thank you for the question.

We have written to all of the attorneys general in the provinces and territories across the country and have heard back from a number of them about their deep concerns for jury duty when the courthouses reopen. There will be an enormous groundswell of cases coming to courthouses, deeply concerning cases, and Canadians are not in a position to accept a jury summons. The last thing on Canadians' minds during economic fragmentation, unemployment and job insecurity is responding to a summons.

We have heard from those provinces and territories. I received a letter just the other day from the Attorney General of the Northwest Territories, who is looking forward to working with us and is recognizing the need to ensure that due process can continue and that jurors can return to the courthouse with appropriate health and safety measures in place, but really, there [Technical difficulty—Editor] a certain need for a program such as ours to ensure that mental health is maintained.

The foundational issues that we raised at committee haven't gone away. In fact, as I said, they are going to be compounded and deepened by this crisis. Canadians will be coming out of this crisis with post-pandemic shock most likely and deepening levels of depression and anxiety, so our mental health platform is desperately needed.

5 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB

Thank you for that.

You noted in your answer that you have been engaging with attorneys general across Canada and did receive responses from several, including the Attorney General of the Northwest Territories. I guess one of the inhibitors in terms of the commission's ability to work with some of the provincial and territorial governments is a lack of funding. Isn't that right?

5 p.m.

Founder and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Juries Commission

Mark Farrant

That's correct. There are scant resources available to jurors right across the country. There hasn't been a national organization until now—the organization that I founded—that speaks on behalf of jurors and represents them at the table in justice discussions and within the justice community.

There is a need for this service. There is a need for a voice. There is a need for an organization that can work on behalf of Canadians serving jury duty, which is an enormous responsibility, and can work with them as they transition out of that service back into the community and return to their lives.

Working with Canadian workplaces is one of our core pillars. We know that workplaces have had, at best, very passive support for jury duty in the pre-times, I guess we can call it. Post-COVID-19 they're going to be extremely unwilling to support jury duty, because of the revitalization efforts for their own businesses.

5:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

There's time for a quick question, Michael, and a quick answer.

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB

Okay.

Maybe just to sum up, can you identify some of the key gaps that the Canadian Juries Commission seeks to fill in terms of jury support, gaps that are important to fill?

5:05 p.m.

Founder and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Juries Commission

Mark Farrant

There are inconsistencies in mental health services available to jurors across the country. There are still provinces that have no services at all available to jurors following their jury duty service.

Also, there is inconsistent workplace support. Jury pay is not sufficient to balance unemployment and job insecurity across the country. We know that jury pay has not kept pace with the modern world. In some provinces, Ontario, for example, you're not even paid for the first 10 days of your jury duty service. Employers are obligated to maintain your job during jury duty, but they're not obligated to pay you, to continue your [Technical difficulty—Editor]

5:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Okay. Thanks, both of you.

We're turning to Mr. Fragiskatos, who will be followed by Mr. Ste-Marie.

Peter.

5:05 p.m.

Liberal

Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This question is for the Stratford Festival, and I want to start with Ms. Stephenson, if I could.

Carol, thank you very much for appearing today. What an insightful presentation. I think you put your finger on a number of different issues. It's striking to me that as someone who, in your case, has served as dean at the Ivey Business School, as vice-president of Bell Canada, as president of BCE Media and was on the board of directors of GM Canada, among other things, you come at this from a business perspective. Here's someone making the case to the federal government to get behind an arts organization. As you yourself said in your opening remarks, the festival sees itself as a business.

Can you make the case once again in terms of why the federal government ought to get behind the festival, not because of the obvious intrinsic importance of the arts in our lives, but from a very straightforward business perspective? I know you outlined it, but tell us again your view on this, because I think you've touched on a number of issues. On the economic importance of getting behind the arts, you're underlining it, and it has become very clear that it's an important thing to do.

5:05 p.m.

Chair of the Board of Governors, Stratford Festival

Carol Stephenson

If I take it from an economic impact perspective, that's probably the best business case.

I mentioned about $135 million in southwestern Ontario. I mentioned a number of businesses that are supported. Think of the B and Bs, the hotels, the restaurants, small businesses. There are so many ancillary businesses that really thrive because of the festival's presence and the 500,000 people who come to this area and Canada from outside of Canada. The economic impact is huge.

The second thing I think is important as a business person is to have good cultural amenities to attract top talent. As a country, we're always working hard to attract the top talent. From my experience, if you look at the technology sector or any other sector, this is one important critical piece in the attraction tool.

It's a multi-faceted business impact as well as it is a business unto itself. I think Canada, and certainly southwestern Ontario, is well served by the business impact and the economic impact of the festival.

5:05 p.m.

Liberal

Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON

Thank you very much.

How would $8 million in the form of a grant and a loan be used by the festival?

5:10 p.m.

Chair of the Board of Governors, Stratford Festival

Carol Stephenson

On the grant side, we would like to use that as a matching stimulus to the private sector. My experience in fundraising is that the private sector responds very well to incentives. I know they think it's important that government support us in this important time, so it would be an incentive to get more private fundraising. It's also a good leverage of the government money, because you get more investment from the private sector. It works two ways.

The loan side is really to get us through this urgent period. It's a cash situation. I outlined at the very beginning the number of things we did very quickly off the mark to save cash. It's a liquidity issue. That would be the use of it.