Finance Committee on May 18th, 2021

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Thank you very much.

From my perspective, the hospitality and tourism industry was left behind from the very beginning of this pandemic. Too many programs have successfully failed your industry. Based on what officials said last week at committee, every program is designed very simply, or they can't manage the complexity, which leads to this one-size-fits-all approach that we've seen over and over.

As I understand from you, if we continue on the course we're taking in this budget, 70% of hotels will be forced to close, and 300,000 jobs will be lost. That's an absolute crime in my view, especially since slow vaccine procurement means we will only have one dose this summer, keeping us locked down tight longer than our neighbours to the south. Honestly, I don't know how I can vote in favour of this budget knowing that so many entrepreneurs and job creators will be losing the shirts off their backs if this passes as is.

Were you not included in any discussions with the government prior to the budget? Did they understand how desperate your situation is and what you need for survival?

[Susie Grynol]

Yes, we had many discussions with government leading up to this point. I will say that our industry has been one of the largest recipients of the funding to date because of the way the programs have been built. They are scaled so that the hardest-hit businesses do get the lion's share of the funding. We've been involved in the discussion and the design, and certainly there's been responsiveness from the government to extend those programs now multiple times. The 25% top-up I think was designed to support us.

I don't have any answers for you about why there's a wind-down for everyone. It was not what we asked for, and we are certainly hoping that there will be room to adjust that approach and continue with the supports for the hardest hit because the one-size-fits-all approach, I think, has worked up until this point, but it will fail distressed sectors in the fall.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Do you think that your industry would be in the same dire straits if we could have had a two-dose summer like the Americans, rather than just the one dose our Prime Minister has promised?

[Susie Grynol]

Because we're a seasonal industry, the majority of the revenue that we would make comes from this season, and it supports the businesses through the back half. The back half of the year will be incredibly difficult because we will have missed this revenue opportunity. Certainly the summer is incredibly important, yes.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Would it help your industry if the government could give you a defined target for reopening the border at this time?

[Susie Grynol]

Yes.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Can you tell me a bit more? How would it help?

[Susie Grynol]

It gives certainty. Right now we have all of these cancellations sitting on the books—all of these international conferences or local domestic conferences, or weddings. They all want to know whether they can book their wedding in the fall or plan an international event—is that going to be allowed?—with some degree of certainty.

Of course, everybody appreciates that there has to be flexibility built into the system if we have a fourth wave and things are not safe. We are looking, though, to see metrics that would say that if we get to this particular point in time, we will reopen the border.

Of course, if we don't reach those metrics and it's not safe to do so, then naturally we wouldn't reopen the border, but this would allow us to plan and to start to get business back on the books. Right now, everything is essentially on hold.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Would it save your industry if the government were to finally design a program that targeted your unique challenges?

[Susie Grynol]

Yes, because a program designed for our sector would give us the predictability we need to plan, and it would also give us flexibility around when the support programs end.

I would also just say that we're not recommending that everybody get support if they don't need it. Built into these programs is already a sliding scale, so if we see, let's say, that resort properties do well this summer, they wouldn't get support.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Right.

[Susie Grynol]

It's only for the businesses that are sitting in the downtown cores—there are many of them—who will not see anybody through their doors this summer and who are going to be facing a fall, and frankly another really difficult eight-month period of time, with absolutely no government support at that point and no ability to make any significant revenue, because the business events that would need to be planned need to start being organized now if we're going to have any of them in the fall. There will not be any sizable business events in the fall.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Pat Kelly]

All right.

With that, we move to Mr. Fragiskatos for five minutes.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I'll have to go back to the record afterwards. I think I heard Ms. Jansen say that she may not be voting in favour of the budget, which stunned me a great deal. I think we're all very surprised by that.

I would also point Ms. Jansen and Conservative colleagues, if they wish to take a look, to the most recent data, which has regularly for the past several weeks put Canada in the very top tier—either first some days, second other days, third other days, but no worse than third—in the G20 for vaccinations per day being administered.

It's really something that I think needs to be corrected here. Yes, we can do better, of course, but we're doing extremely well right now. The effect of that rhetoric, Chair, is that it generates a sense of concern and I would say even fear that is not well placed. If we're going to be seized with issues at this committee, let's focus on the facts rather than contribute to these myths that opposition colleagues have been peddling recently.

It's a different issue altogether, but we've seen what has happened with Bill C-10, concerning which Facebook has been alive and well with conspiracy theories about censorship in recent weeks, and we all know they're not true.

I will, however, focus on the issue at hand here, Chair. I just wanted to put those points of view on the record.

Mr. Telles, thank you very much for representing youth here today. Thank you very much for being an advocate.

Ms. Dzerowicz took my question, unfortunately, which was to ask you about student debt. It was great to see that there were a number of measures put in place in budget 2021 to help students with debt. That matters a lot for me, because prior to taking on the role of a member of Parliament, I taught at Western for a number of years, where I saw students really impacted in such negative ways by student debt.

What I also saw was the mental health challenges that young people faced. I think we all know—we've heard the stories in our own communities—about the way the pandemic has exacerbated that challenge for young people. Could you speak to that? I know the budget provides a very sizable investment for mental health in this country and for improved services.

[Simon Telles]

Thank you so much for the question.

I would like to clarify that the assistance given to students was very welcome. However, the young people in the workforce, fresh out of college, seem to have been forgotten. In our view, this is the blind spot in the budget.

With respect to mental health, there is already a lot of awareness and taboos are being broken more and more, which is very positive. However, when young people ask for help, they are told that the waiting lists are long and access to professionals is difficult. I'm talking about the public system, of course. When they finally get help, their therapy is terminated after a few sessions, even though they still have needs, because the number of sessions is limited. Public access to psychotherapy is truly deficient. Additional support to improve funding for the public system would be more than welcome.

The other concern we have is that access to the private network is limited to young people who have insurance that covers psychotherapy, through their education or employment. We need to find a way to make that care available to all young people, whether they have insurance or not, and that's where provincial and federal governments can play an important role in increasing accessibility to care.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

I also saw that for my community in London—and I know we're at a distance, Mr. Telles—there is an investment that will secure placements and workplace opportunities for young people. I know university associations and other youth advocacy groups have been calling for this for a long time.

I have just 30 seconds with you, but could you put on the record your thoughts on that?

[Simon Telles]

Certainly.

We're very pleased with this investment. In the past, this sector has sometimes been forgotten. It's true that we need to create employment opportunities for young people. This isn't only about regaining opportunities lost during the pandemic, but also about creating new ones. We welcome this measure in the budget. We hope that there will be more of these measures in the future.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Thank you very much.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Pat Kelly]

Thank you.

Mr. Ste-Marie now has the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Telles, in relation to the bill under consideration, you addressed the issue of intergenerational equity in your presentation by focusing on four main areas. We've briefly touched on mental health and housing. I would now like to turn to the other two areas, which are health care funding and the environment and climate change.

The government is telling its provincial counterparts that it's ready to discuss health care funding, but after the pandemic. My party believes that now is the time to address the situation, while we're in the middle of a health crisis.

I want to hear your comments on this.

Also, I'll ask you a second question right away. What more could the federal government do to fight climate change and protect the environment?

[Simon Telles]

Thank you.

We share your concerns. It's difficult to understand why the government doesn't want to discuss health transfers at this time.

This issue has been around since before the pandemic. There's an imbalance between the federal and provincial governments in terms of health care funding. Health care spending is increasing more and more, even in Quebec. Officially, we've spent more than half the amount planned for health care programs. Several studies show that, by 2030, and even afterwards, this spending will increase more and more. If nothing is done, other government obligations such as education or the environment will need to be sacrificed.

We should have had this discussion yesterday, not today. Let's take the opportunity to have this discussion. All provinces and territories have this concern. We don't understand why the situation prevents us from talking about it. We have the figures to back this up and the reality has been well established. We too are looking for answers to this question.

When it comes to the environment, we welcome the investments made. This is a change from past policies. The idea was to show the importance of the environment and the need to do more.

However, we believe that more should be done to encourage changes in individual behaviour. Efforts could be made to implement green tax measures such as a carbon tax. I know that this is another hot topic right now. In Quebec, this measure has already been in place for several years and it's effective. We need to stop burying our heads in the sand. If we want to reach our targets, we need to change individual behaviour. Financial incentives to encourage people not to pollute have been proven effective. We think that the government should show even more political courage and take this route. Of course, it will shake people up and require behavioural changes, but I think that we've reached this point.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Pat Kelly]

Thank you.

Before we go to Mr. Julian, in the following round we will have Mr. Fast and Ms. Koutrakis for five minutes each, and Mr. Ste-Marie and Mr. Julian for another two and a half.

With that, we have two and a half minutes for Peter Julian.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My questions are for Mr. Telles.

Thank you for your very eloquent testimony.

For the first time in our history, in the middle of a crisis, the government is encouraging excessive profits. Billionaires have made over $80 billion during this crisis. The banking system and the major Canadian banks received $750 billion in liquidity support measures, while the banks made over $40 billion in profits. These are huge amounts of money.

You're talking about extremely important issues that should be considered emergencies, such as housing and mental health. We should put youth first. Unfortunately, our government is doing the opposite. It's putting billionaires and banks ahead of youth.

Given the needs that should be met, do you find that young people are receiving crumbs?

Would you like to see a shift in the government's approach to helping young people thrive in our society?