Finance Committee on May 18th, 2021

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

We will call the meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 45 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the committee's motion adopted on Tuesday, April 27, the committee is meeting to study the subject matter of Bill C-30, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 19, 2021 and other measures.

Today's meeting is taking place in the hybrid format pursuant to the House Order of January 25. On your screen you will see everyone, but the system only shows the person who is speaking. That's the system we're operating under.

With that, we'll go immediately to witnesses. I want to thank everyone for coming, some of whom I know on short notice, as we're trying to pile a lot of witnesses in this week. I would ask if you could keep your remarks to about five minutes. That will give us more time for rounds of questions.

We will start with the Association of Day Care Operators of Ontario and Ms. Hannen, executive director.

Andrea, go ahead.

[Andrea Hannen, Executive Director, Association of Day Care Operators of Ontario]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and good morning to everybody.

Thanks for inviting the Association of Day Care Operators of Ontario to make a presentation to the committee. We appreciate the work you are doing to study this bill.

ADCO was founded in 1981 and is the industry association for Ontario’s independent licensed child care centres, both commercial and not for profit. Roughly a third of the Ontario families who use licensed child care rely on the services of an independent, licensed child care centre. Typically, these are small businesses owned and operated by women. Many of them are also registered early childhood educators.

ADCO envisions a thriving and diverse independent licensed child care sector. We provide our members with a forum to work together to continually enhance child care quality, affordability and choice for parents. Our goal is to help every family find the right child care fit—for both their child’s unique temperament and their family’s lifestyle, beliefs, budget and work arrangements. This goal is most achievable when governments prioritize parental choice.

Parental choice has four key elements: one, a diversity of providers, including commercial, not-for-profit and public programs; two, a diversity of settings, including centre-based, home-based, and workplace-based care; three, a diversity of hours, including full-time, part-time, occasional and 24-7 care; and four, a diversity of teaching methods so parents can choose the kinds of learning experiences they want their children to have.

Previous government efforts to introduce child care programs have not prioritized parental choice. Instead, they’ve funded large, public sector institutions versus smaller private and not-for-profit child care centres. Ontario families have seen this first-hand.

In 2010, when the province launched its full-day kindergarten program, forcing the closure of some 1,200 independent, licensed child care centres—both commercial and not for profit—not only were the kindergarten spaces in these centres lost, so were all of the spaces they provided for preschoolers, toddlers and infants. Since then, licensed child care has been far more expensive and far more difficult for parents to find.

ADCO is concerned that the proposed federal child care plan could have a similar impact across the country. If it follows a similar path—replacing existing child care infrastructure with new, public-sector institutions—it’s predictable that similar challenges will occur. These challenges may be even more pronounced because of the diversity of systems we see from province to province. Other organizations across the country share these concerns. Among them are the Canadian Council of Montessori Administrators, the Alberta Association of Child Care Operators and the Child Care Professionals of BC.

Canada’s child care sector is already fragile because of last year’s extended pandemic closures. Taking a national, one-size-fits-all approach is risky. It could close thousands of woman-owned small businesses, destabilize existing provincial child care systems, and cause chaos for families. This would leave taxpayers having to pay not just to create any new licensed spaces but also to replace all of the spaces that are lost.

Support for all licensed child care centres, regardless of their corporate structure or ownership, is hugely important in mitigating this risk. The most efficient way to do this is to fund families directly, so parents can make the child care choices that work best for them. Not only is this the fastest way to help families who are grappling with child care issues right now; it also helps ensure they’ll have access to the broadest range of child care choices for years to come.

In closing, ADCO offers this committee the following recommendations. One, prioritize parental choice by funding families directly through measures such as the Canada child benefit program. Two, respect provincial diversity; don't make funding contingent on changes in the provincial program and don't discriminate against small entrepreneurs who run child care centres. Three, support all child care spaces equally, regardless of whether they are in publicly owned, privately owned or not-for-profit centres.

ADCO looks forward to working with you to help all families find the right child care fit, however they define it. Again, it is about trusting parents and empowering families for the greater good of children and generations to come.

Thanks very much for your time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Thank you very much, Andrea.

We'll turn to Toby Sanger, executive director of Canadians for Tax Fairness, who is not a new witness here.

Go ahead, Mr. Sanger.

[Toby Sanger, Executive Director, Canadians for Tax Fairness]

Thank you very much, Chair, and good morning members.

There are a lot of positive measures in Bill C-30, and I'd like to commend the government for introducing them. These include the $15-an-hour minimum wage, extension of COVID and EI benefits, funding for child care, funding for infrastructure, funding for health care and much more. We're glad the federal government will finally apply the GST, starting July 1, to imports of digital services, short-term rentals through digital platforms and goods supplied through fulfillment warehouses like Amazon. This is long overdue but still appreciated, and it is one step towards levelling the digital playing field.

For far too long, Canada has given foreign digital giants—some of the largest companies in the world—generous tax preferences at the expense of Canadian companies and producers. This has contributed to hundreds of business closures, thousands of jobs lost and billions in revenue foregone. Since the pandemic began, it has only gotten worse, as sales by companies like Amazon have exploded while main street businesses across Canada have suffered enormously. The government should eliminate the tax deduction for advertising on foreign Internet platforms. This has contributed to billions in advertising flowing to Google and Facebook, and loss to Canadian media outlets.

We're glad to see the government commit to introducing a digital services tax on the revenues of foreign e-commerce giants starting next year, but the proposed tax will only apply to a small number of companies in specific sectors. Because a digital economy can't be ring-fenced, the Canadian government must also support fundamental international corporate tax reforms at the OECD negotiations now taking place, including support for a global minimum corporate tax at 21% or higher, as U.S. President Joe Biden has proposed; treating multinational enterprises as unitary enterprises for tax purposes; and allocating the profit of multinational enterprises among countries using real economic factors, just as we do among provinces in Canada.

We're glad the government has also finally taken some action on restricting a number of corporate tax loopholes and the stock-option deduction loophole. However, we believe the stock-option deduction loophole should be completely closed instead of just partially closed.

This government should also take inspiration from U.S. President Joe Biden, who is planning to eliminate lower tax rates on capital gains for the wealthiest. It's unconscionable that the wealthiest in society pay a lower tax rate on their investment income than ordinary working people pay on their employment income. This is something that wealthy investors, such as Warren Buffett, Bill Gross and Bill Gates agree with eliminating.

Speaking of the wealthy, inequalities of wealth have only gotten worse during the pandemic, with Canada's billionaires increasing their fortunes by about $80 billion over the past year. A mildly progressive wealth tax on fortunes of over $10 million could raise about $20 billion a year. I'm glad that this government has committed to identifying ways to tax extreme wealth in its throne speech, but disappointed that there was nothing about it in the budget. A large majority of Canadians, including Conservative supporters, support having a wealth tax. Even the IMF and OECD both recently called for countries to introduce and expand inheritance and wealth taxes. I hope to see them in a number of different election platforms soon.

Just as Canada's billionaires have become much wealthier during the pandemic, many large corporations have made record profits. The study we released yesterday revealed that 50 of Canada's large corporations made record profits last year, with a number of them also collecting the CEWS wage subsidy and paying low rates of tax. When the CEWS program was first introduced more than a year ago, I was the first to call for much stronger conditions. This would have prevented the type of misuse and wastage of public funds that we've seen with this program. We should now do what we did during the world wars and what the IMF recently suggested and introduce an excess profits tax and pandemic surtaxes on those who have profited excessively during the pandemic, to recover some of those public funds.

We're glad the government is making carbon incentive payments more visible. We've advocated for this for many years. However, the federal carbon pricing framework also needs to be significantly strengthened by ensuring that large emitters pay the full carbon price and by applying carbon tariffs and rebates on imports from and exports to countries without carbon pricing so that Canadian industry and jobs aren't adversely affected. We also need to finally eliminate the federal fossil fuel subsidies. It's long overdue that we end this climate hypocrisy.

Finally, I'd like to commend the finance Minister for committing to introduce a public registry of the real owners of companies. This will help reduce money laundering, tax evasion, and other criminal activities.

The federal government should also increase transparency and accountability in other ways, including strengthening whistle-blower protections, and requiring that large multinational corporations publish country-by-country reports of their sales, profits and taxes paid.

Thanks very much, and I look forward to a further discussion and questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Thank you, Mr. Sanger.

We'll turn to the Maritime Fun Group, and Mr. Matthew Jelley, president.

[Matthew Jelley, President, Maritime Fun Group]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for the opportunity to be here today.

Together with my three brothers, we own and operate a number of tourism attractions in Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick. They are amusement parks and water parks. As you can imagine, COVID-19 has been devastating to our businesses.

About 90% of our revenue occurs in the June to September period. We are very highly seasonal and very highly focused. This will represent my 32nd year in this business. It will be by far the most challenging year we expect to have, even more challenging than last year.

Over the years, we have reinvested and expanded our businesses. We continue to grow and expand them. We've tried to do all of the right things by investing in our facilities and becoming more year-round with our seasonal and administration teams. We went from a business that used to close for six months, and not even open the mail, to one that now has 15 year-round employees in New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island combined.

During the peak season in 2019, our Prince Edward Island operations would have 350 employees, and New Brunswick would have 200. Unfortunately, in 2020, we lost over 70% of our sales due to both capacity constraints and travel restrictions. Despite that, we were very proud to be able to employ 198 people on Prince Edward Island last summer and 115 in New Brunswick. For many, that is a household's primary income, benefits, and good jobs; for many others, it's a tuition payment, living expenses, and an income to set them up for the winter.

We are proud to be an employer that brings many people into the workforce and helps support them during their early years.

Budget 2021 has proposed extending the CEWS and CERS programs, while making drastic changes. Not only will these end in September, but supports for the hardest hit businesses will be decreased from over 75% in June to only 20% in September.

I wish these programs were no longer necessary and we could get back to welcoming thousands of guests everyday to our businesses without any thoughts of government assistance. While I share the government goal in getting to the point where this program is no longer needed, now is not that time.

By way of illustration, I'll give you the case study of our Shining Waters Family Fun Park. In a normal year, we could expect a $250,000 surplus, which would go to paying down debt and expanding our business. Last year, we lost $300,000. Under Budget 2021, and its most generous interpretation, that loss will widen by $70,000.

At our sister company, Sandspit, that loss will widen by a further $160,000 as a result of the decreased percentages in this year's budget. Instead of paying down debt or investing to grow our business, we are borrowing money simply to keep the lights on. It's unreasonable, at this point, to expect us to go further in debt to fund our operations under these conditions. It's simply not an option.

Unfortunately, this situation is going to continue until June of next year. We know now what the situation is for our businesses. We know now that this summer is going to be very challenging.

Mr. Sanger touched on it, and the media have certainly touched on it, that there have been abuses of the CEWS program. I share the concern about companies accessing the program that do not require it, but the answer is not to eliminate the program or to cut it back. The answer is to strengthen it, retarget it, and focus it on its objectives.

My business is among the tens of thousands that need this program. We cannot allow high profile abusers of the program to ruin it for those truly impacted, those truly deserving of assistance.

As it is constructed, the program will disappear on its own. It does not require the government to predict vaccination rollouts, efficacy or public acceptance. The government doesn't have to make predictions about compliance with public health directives or the emergence of additional variants. It does not require the government to predict changes of travel restrictions, border openings or air capacity. In a world full of uncertainty, the CEWS program provides a rare backstop that our businesses can depend on, and on which we can make appropriate decisions.

Last week, the Public Health Agency of Canada released a blueprint for summer stating that, with one dose protection, people will still be encouraged to avoid crowded areas, even outdoors. That leaves no doubt about the fate of our businesses for the upcoming season. There's nothing to be gained by waiting longer to make decisions for our business. We need to know now to make decisions on how to prepare.

Without any hay in the barn from this season, making it through next winter will be more challenging than this past winter. I have a decision to make. Do I close now and protect what capital I do have, or do I try to open under a very large amount of uncertainty?

We have made significant changes to how we manage our attractions, how we manage capacities and how we ticket things. Unfortunately, there's no pivot for a Ferris wheel or a roller coaster. They are good for only one thing. I can't just go and open longer into winter, whenever travel and tourism recover. The season ends for me on Labour Day, when kids are back in school.

The support that CEWS and CERS have offered highly affected businesses has allowed us to survive until now. Since the onset of the pandemic, we've been able to maintain all of our permanent staff. None of our employees have been asked to take reduced pay or furlough pay under the programs that were allowed. No one missed a paycheque even in the darkest days of March and April last year. I'm proud of what we were able to manage. I'm grateful for the assistance we received.

We cannot stop now, as the finish line is in sight. Look at the criteria. Look at how the program is applied. I encourage that, but we cannot wind it back now when things are still so uncertain in our industry. Tourism is going to be in need. It was the first affected. It will be the last to recover. It had the most devastating impact for the most sustained period of time. Even the recovery will not be a magic switch. We have to rebuild customer confidence. We have to restore transportation routes. We have to rebuild our human resource base at our businesses. Please extend the availability at the existing rates. Please allow us to contribute to the recovery for all Canadians.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Thank you very much, Matthew.

We'll turn now to the Ontario Real Estate Association with Mr. Santos, chair of the government relations committee.

Mr. Santos, you're on.

[Brian Santos, Chair, Government Relations Committee, Ontario Real Estate Association]

Thank you, Chair.

Good morning, members of the committee. My name is Brian Santos. I'm a broker with Peak Realty in the Waterloo region, about an hour southwest of Toronto. I'm here as the chair of the government relations committee of the Ontario Real Estate Association.

By way of background, OREA is the trade organization that represents Ontario's 80,000 realtors and 37 local real estate boards across the province.

We are here today to speak in support of Bill C-30, the budget implementation act, and the measures that will help remove dirty money out of the real estate market, encourage more green energy retrofits and connect more Ontarians with broadband Internet. These measures will help hard-working Canadians and our economy bounce back from COVID-19 and set the stage for future economic growth, job creation and recovery.

I'd like to start by outlining our support for specific measures in Bill C-30.

First, it aims to get dirty money out of the real estate sector. It commits to creating a national beneficial ownership registry, something that OREA has advocated for for quite some time. Money laundering is a multi-billion dollar problem in our housing market and contributes to the crowding out of hard-working families looking to achieve their dream of one day owning a home. Ontario realtors do not want to see a single dollar of dirty money competing against hard-working young families in our housing market. That is why OREA commends the government and its commitment to create a national beneficial ownership registry. A registry will help make it harder for illicit funds to enter the country through the purchase of real estate by removing the anonymity of perpetrators of money-laundering crimes. By giving law enforcement and our government an important tool to keep dirty money out of Canada's housing market, those who are pushing home ownership away from hard-working Canadians can be identified and held accountable.

OREA is also pleased to see the government's plans to help make homes more energy efficient through investment in the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation over the next five years. Providing Canadian homeowners with interest-free loans will help them make their homes more energy-efficient by completing home retrofits, such as insulating their home, installing solar panels or replacing old windows and doors. OREA wants to ensure that the housing sector is doing its part in reducing our country's GHG emissions. Encouraging green home renovations will not only reduce the housing sector's contribution to these emissions, but will also help Canadians lower their energy bills, allowing them to put their hard-earned money elsewhere or save for retirement.

The proposed program will also encourage clean growth by establishing an industry for energy-efficient retrofits, generating economic spinoff activity, helping to kick-start the economy and creating new jobs.

Finally, as many Canadians look to move to more rural and smaller communities, having access to reliable high-speed Internet has become more essential than ever. One of the top questions realtors are asked by their clients when looking for a new home is about the quality of the Internet. The commitment to increase broadband investment over six years through the universal broadband fund will support a more rapid rollout of broadband projects in collaboration with the work currently being done in provinces and territories to ensure that every corner of the country is connected. The investment will help Canada reach its goal of having 98% of the country connected through reliable Internet service by 2026. Investing in broadband across the country will help address the infrastructure and competitive gap in our smaller communities. This new investment will ensure that more Canadians will be able to work remotely, creating jobs and reversing outmigration in more rural communities in Canada. In a modern economy where remote work is increasingly more common, especially now with the onset of the pandemic, Canada cannot compete globally if its people and businesses can't access good Internet service.

I would also like to take this opportunity to highlight other measures within Bill C-30 that OREA was pleased to see included.

The proposed GST new housing rebate will allow homebuyers to recover 36% of the GST paid on the purchase of a new home priced up to $350,000, for a maximum rebate of $6,300. Applying this rebate to lower and middle-income Canadians will make home ownership more accessible and affordable for more Canadians.

Additionally, with the pandemic creating a decrease in demand for retail and office space, expanding the rental, construction and financing initiative will support the conversion of vacant commercial property into new housing. This funding will assist in the development and conversion of commercial property space across Canada into hundreds of units of rental housing.

Last, the support of public transit projects across Canada will bring forward new subway lines, LRTs, electric buses, active transportation infrastructure and improved rural transit. The proposed new permanent funding will provide communities with the opportunity to plan for new transportation projects, which will encourage the creation of greater housing supply and make more desirable places to call home.

As Canada continues to look to get our economy back on track, Ontario realtors believe that housing has the potential to lead the recovery. OREA is pleased to see that Bill C-30 proposes support for the housing sector in a number of ways to help the government's efforts in putting Canada on the path to recovery.

Thank you, Chair and members of your committee, for your time. I am happy to answer your questions, should there be any.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Thank you very much, Mr. Santos.

We will turn then to Réseau FADOQ and Ms. Tassé-Goodman, president and provincial secretary.

[Gisèle Tassé-Goodman, President, Provincial Secretariat, Réseau FADOQ]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ladies and gentlemen of Parliament, thank you for inviting me to appear before your committee.

My name is Gisèle Tassé-Goodman. I am the President of the Réseau FADOQ. With me, is Philippe Poirier-Monette, FADOQ's Collective Rights Advisor.

The Réseau FADOQ is a network of people aged 50 and over, with more than 550,000 members. In each of our political activities, we strive to improve the quality of life of seniors. In recent years, the federal government has taken some positive steps on behalf of seniors.

It was essential to keep the age of eligibility for the old age security pension and the guaranteed income supplement at 65. Automatic enrolment for the guaranteed income supplement for those eligible for the program was needed. The increase in the guaranteed income supplement was also well received, and the increase in the earnings exemption for the guaranteed income supplement is appreciated by the many experienced workers with low incomes.

Those were steps that our organization appropriately applauded. However, our concern today is about the federal government's choice to increase old age security pensions by 10% only for those aged 75 and older.

Although the Prime Minister was consistent with his 2019 commitment, thousands of seniors from 65 to 74 were hit hard by the measures announced in the recent federal budget. Our organization recommends that the 10% increase in old age security go to all those eligible for the benefit, so as not to create two categories of seniors.

For the Réseau FADOQ, a precarious financial situation is clearly not a matter of age. At 65, many have as much difficulty making ends meet as those aged 75. Today, a person receiving only the old age security pension and the maximum amount under the guaranteed income supplement would have an annual income of $18,505, which is below Canada's official poverty line.

In the Poverty Reduction Act, passed in 2019, the Government of Canada chose to retain the market basket measure as the metric for the official poverty line in Canada. For 2021, that market basket measure varied between $19,564 and $21,132 for a single person, depending on where they live.

It is unacceptable that a person receiving only the old age security pension and the guaranteed income supplement does not reach those thresholds. We must remember that the market basket measure is intended to reflect the cost of a modest basket of goods and services representing a basic standard of living.

Those with incomes at that level are not living, they are surviving. Furthermore, some items essential for household well-being are not included in the market basket measure. This is the case for some non-reimbursable healthcare, such as dental care, vision care and the cost of medications.

Let us not forget that, as they age, people have regular expenditures that can be greater than those in other age groups. These include the cost of medications and support items.

For the Réseau FADOQ, it is clear that amounts provided for the old age security pension and the guaranteed income supplement must, at a minimum, cover the basic needs in the market basket measure. As a starting point, the federal government must commit to increasing old age security benefits by 10% for all seniors eligible for the program, starting at age 65.

The proposed increase should be in effect for everyone, with no discrimination based on age. The Réseau FADOQ estimates that the federal government must also increase the amount under the guaranteed income supplement by $50 per month. By combining those two increases, a senior receiving only the old age security pension and the guaranteed income supplement would have an annual income slightly above the lower level of the thresholds set by the market basket measure.

This is the very least that seniors in Quebec and Canada must be able to expect from their government.

I would like to thank the committee members for welcoming us. We are ready to answer your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Thank you very much, Ms. Tassé-Goodman.

Before I go to the last witness, the lineup for the first round of questions will be Mr. Fast, Ms. Koutrakis, Mr. Ste-Marie and Mr. Julian.

We'll now turn to the Tourism Industry Association of Prince Edward Island, with CEO Corryn Clemence.

Corryn, the floor is yours.

[Corryn Clemence, Chief Executive Officer, Tourism Industry Association of Prince Edward Island]

Good afternoon to my fellow Islanders, and good morning to those from across the country.

Thank you for the opportunity to present to your committee again, a mere month after my last presentation. As the CEO for the Tourism Industry Association of Prince Edward Island, I have spent this past year reaching out to operators and identifying the ongoing challenges that our industry has faced since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

With the initial shutdown of our industry back in the spring of 2020, tourism on Prince Edward Island faced that challenge with cautious optimism, opening to Atlantic Canada in July. While the season itself was difficult, many operators would not have survived without the full support of the Canada emergency wage subsidy. This program provided the assurance that operators needed to keep staff working and keep the doors open to the limited visitors we did have.

Decisions made last year were done with the optimism and hope that the 2021 season would bring us back to a more normal tourism year with increased capacities, further border restrictions lifted, and the vaccination programs being rolled out across the country. As we are on the brink of kicking off another summer season, operators are now faced with a third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, enhanced border restrictions, and a beleaguered mindset.

In the recent announcement of the 2021 federal budget, the proposed wage subsidy decline would set many operators further behind than last year, and the uncertainties of both subsidy programs and restrictions leave many facing the impossible decision of remaining closed again and the harsh reality of not surviving the year. Some of our small owner-operators are balancing financial struggles, staffing issues and COVID protocols all at once, while navigating through the federal and provincial programs, looking for any type of assistance to help them through. The mental health strain is clearly visible, and we will continue to be concerned for these struggling Canadians. In what is a traditionally seasonal destination, these operators have a six-month window of opportunity to drive sales, pay staff, cover debt load, and plan to retain enough revenue to cover 12 months of expenses from the six months of business.

The Canada emergency wage subsidy and the Canada emergency rent subsidy programs provide a backstop for our businesses to keep those staff employed and keep the doors open during these difficult times of reduced capacity and border restrictions. While numbers for visitation and sales remain low, programs such as these have been a lifeline for tourism and hospitality businesses across the country. It is important to note that as visitation and sales increase, these subsidy programs in their current capacity naturally decline and become obsolete.

Should operators make the decision to shutter their business for the year, I want to highlight the domino effect that these decisions have on communities, other operators and our tourism product overall. For example, as Matthew mentioned earlier, if a main attraction in one of our smaller communities makes the decision to stay closed, this has detrimental implications to local accommodation providers, restaurants and retail businesses. We need to find ways to ensure that these businesses are equipped and able to open to protect the industry in both a rural and urban capacity. Demand-drivers like these are the reason for many to make travel plans, and without them, everyone suffers.

As we move to reopening to the rest of Canada, our industry is faced with the reality of no meaningful tourism on Prince Edward Island until the 2022 year. Even if they survive the 2021 season, without the ability to generate meaningful cash flow, they are looking at a long winter to prepare for what is hopefully an improved 2022. The industry will not see the 2019 levels of visitation and expenditure that we enjoyed only a couple of years ago, but is at the start of a struggle back to the thriving industry we once were. With that, our focus is on ensuring the survival of our operators and recognizing the importance of not only surviving but finding a way to see capital infrastructure investments and upkeep so that these businesses are well-positioned to welcome back visitors to our island.

We are not out of this pandemic yet, and our tourism and hospitality industry faces its biggest challenge to date: surviving a second year of pandemic lockdowns and limited ability to operate. We are asking the Government of Canada to maintain the Canada emergency wage subsidy program and the Canada emergency rent subsidy program at their current rates until the time comes for people to travel and restrictions are eased. Our industry is focused on people interacting, travelling and coming together.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Thank you very much, Ms. Clemence.

We will turn, then, to the first round of questions. We'll start with Mr. Fast, followed by Ms. Koutrakis.

You have six minutes, Ed.

[James Cumming, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Fast has yielded to me, so I'll be taking his spot.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Okay.

Mr. Cumming, go ahead. You're on.

[James Cumming, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

It's good to see you again, Mr. Chair. Thank you to all of the witnesses today.

I want to start off with Mr. Jelley.

Mr. Jelley, I have enormous empathy and respect for you as an entrepreneur and the crisis you're working through with those losses through what has been a very active business.

I want to talk to you about a couple of things. Is it not time that we looked at these supports with more of a risk analysis and a targeting...? Obviously, the government can't carry on these levels of support across the board. It's just not sustainable.

Would you not agree that we should now do a better risk analysis and have actual targeted supports?

[Matthew Jelley]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Cumming, for your question.

I participated in a chamber of commerce video here five years ago promoting entrepreneurship, where I said that it's not realistic for us all to work for the government. I didn't realize that five years later that might come back to hit me.

I do agree. I highlighted in my comments that I think it is an opportunity to retarget and refocus, but what I am saying is that in tourism and hospitality, if we're looking to retarget, we are there. If we're talking about businesses down by more than 50% or more than 70%, those are the places where I feel we should be.

As far as public companies, private equity funds and very large companies are concerned, I think there are lots of policy considerations for you and your committee members. It is not my place to do that. For us, for small businesses and for those most highly affected by the pandemic through no fault of their own from the double whammy of travel restrictions and capacity limits, our businesses have been so devastatingly hit. Certainly, and all biases declared, I think we're in that category that is well deserving.

For a business that's down 11%...is it time to start weaning those off...? Certainly I think that's a very fair consideration.

I'm more than happy to share my financial situation, how it's impacted us and what that means. It's a water park designed to and does hold 3,000 to 4,000 people a day and is limited to less than 500. Expenses don't change. We still need to have lifeguards. We still need to have the water flowing on the waterslides. We still need to pay the insurance company.

[James Cumming, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Thank you for that.

Without question, I know that you would just like to be back in business and not on the support wagon. Unfortunately, we haven't seen the volume of vaccines for that to happen. Hopefully, it will partially happen this summer, but so far I don't think we see indication of that.

Have you looked at other jurisdictions for guidance, in terms of some of the efforts they've taken with opening larger-scale businesses, relating to rapid testing or tracing, and some of the activities they've gone into? I know that to open up in the U.K., they've put some standards in place.

Is that something you see as being important to your industry?

[Matthew Jelley]

Certainly. Our most obvious comparison in the amusement industry, and probably the largest component of it, is next door in the United States where there's been a whole different approach to COVID-19 and how it's been managed. Some of those parks remained open through most of this. Many in the last couple of weeks have ramped up to full capacity with the removal of mask mandates. I'm not really sure how all that is going to work out.

Locally, we have to work with our chief public health office. In Prince Edward Island, we have benefited for the most part and from a public health point of view, but we have an extremely conservative and careful approach. Rapid testing—and that being administered in businesses and that—has not been part of their current arsenal. It's something we would certainly look at and we have been doing a jurisdictional scan.

Ultimately, if travel restrictions and capacity limits aren't going to be lifted in the next 30, 40 or 50.... This season is gone. As for a recovery in August, I can't just open an amusement park full speed on August 1 and run it for 30 days. It takes time to get there. There have to be procedures in place.

We are looking. We would certainly welcome any different approach, less so looking at Europe and more so currently looking at the United States.

[James Cumming, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Jelley.

Ms. Hannen, you caught my ear with your presentation. Thank you for being here today.

It sounds as if your belief, if I were to frame it, is that for child care, the choice is not with levels of government, but it should be with parents and individuals.

[Andrea Hannen]

Yes. That's absolutely right. I think the number one consideration is that we have to preserve parental choice.

[James Cumming, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

In preserving that parental choice by having those funds go directly to parents to make that choice, do you think it will create the spaces needed? Will the market take care of itself by making sure there's adequate funding to try to reduce the cost?

[Andrea Hannen]

Yes. I believe so. Certainly, what we've seen when there's been government intervention, picking winners and losers in terms of what parts of the sector they want to expand to create spaces, is that it has invariably resulted in fewer spaces overall.

If you fund families, and families want licensed child care, licensed child care owner-operators and not-for-profits that provide licensed child care are very quick to respond to community needs. They create the number of spaces that are needed. They tend to create them exactly where they're needed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

This is your last question, James.

[James Cumming, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Do you think there's a jurisdiction, whether it be within the provinces or within Canada or elsewhere, that has really designed a program that works very effectively and that you would suggest we should model after?