Finance Committee on May 20th, 2021

[Alla Drigola]

You bring up a great point, in that there are different realities across Canada. We are a very large geographic country, and there are different scenarios on the ground, depending on where you are.

What we're trying to avoid when we call for a national reopening plan is to have 13 different reopening plans for the country. What we saw during the pandemic with the lockdowns is that there were different lockdown criteria depending on where you were. The same health metrics, the same indicators in one part of the country yielded different lockdown criteria or results than somewhere else. If you are a business and you are operating in different jurisdictions—you have several locations—it makes it very difficult. It also makes it very difficult for Canadians to look forward and plan and to have that hopeful guidance.

There's also that piece with the travel reopening. We really want to make sure we're working with our international counterparts to be able to safely and gradually reopen the border. It's not either a case of it's closed or it's open, because there are steps we can take.

Again, what we want to avoid is having piecemeal or a patchwork of rules, where if you're flying into the country there's one set of rules with the hotel quarantine, versus if you're driving in, there's a different set of rules, there are loopholes that can be used. We're just trying to avoid that kind of piecemeal approach.

At the start of the pandemic, there was a really great team Canada approach. Everybody was working together. That's what we're trying to have happen again right now. We've seen three different reopening plans released in the last week by three different provinces. Each one uses the same health metrics to have different opening criteria. It makes it very challenging for businesses to plan and move forward. That's what we're really trying to avoid.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Thank you. We were a little over time there.

We have a hard stop at 5:30 Ottawa time. I will take one question from Mr. Ste-Marie, one from Mr. Julian, and then we'll go to Ms. Jansen and Mr. McLeod.

I would remind people that Ms. Lloyd is sitting there just waiting to answer a question, and not many have gone her way.

Mr. Ste-Marie.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My question is for Ms. Lamonde.

Can you provide a few examples of start-ups that have thrived, that are performing well, that have been successful? Can you talk about how the start-up cluster is affecting the economy and describe how the scale-up platform is enabling start-up development?

[Liette Lamonde]

Thank you for your question, Mr. Ste-Marie.

I have a great example for you. The first unicorn in Quebec is Lightspeed, a company that makes us all very proud.

The founder of Lightspeed is from British Columbia. He moved to Quebec and decided to expand his company there. He had a hard time finding the necessary talent in his scale-up phase. He even had to recruit people from abroad to complete his management team. That's where the issue lies. When you don't have a scale-up platform, you don't have the talent at home, and you must go abroad to find it.

Through the scale-up platform, we want to help our start-up founders go abroad to find the missing talent, until we can create that talent at home.

As companies such as Lightspeed are created, this expertise is also created. Suddenly, we have people who can help other start-ups become scale-up companies and perhaps, who knows, unicorns.

This is a perfect example of the trickle-down effect of all the expertise and economic benefits that stem from a success story such as Lightspeed.

There are many other examples, and we're here to create even more.

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

Clearly.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Thank you both.

We will have Mr. Julian followed by Ms. Jansen.

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

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to say to all of the witnesses that we've certainly heard your calls. The government's move to slash all of these support programs when we're in the middle of the third wave is not an appropriate approach, and I think all members will be reflecting on that when we consider amendments to this bill next week.

I would like to ask my question of Madam Lloyd.

The other crisis, of course, is the climate crisis, as you said so eloquently. You talked about insufficient funding. In my part of the country, the federal government is spending nearly $20 billion to ram through the Trans Mountain pipeline project over the objections of indigenous peoples, the local cities, the province.

Do you not feel, given that insufficient amount of funding for the green economy and to deal with the climate crisis, that $18.5 billion so far would be much better spent in ensuring we have the clean energy jobs of tomorrow and the green economy transition?

[Priyanka Lloyd]

Absolutely, I feel that there needs to be more investment in the green economy. The perspective that I'm here to share today is that I think too often the discussion focuses on big business and on technology, and doesn't really address the value of engaging the vast majority of businesses in Canada, which are small businesses.

The conversation that we've had today is incredibly important when we think about the survival of businesses in Canada. If you can't keep your lights on and your doors open, are you really going to be thinking about reducing your carbon emissions? I think what I'm encouraged by in the budget is that we're trying to take both short and longer-term measures, and the reality is that we have a climate crisis that we need to address by 2030 and our emissions are going up. We're on the wrong side of this trajectory.

What are the kinds of initiatives that we're investing in? The purpose of my testimony today is to try to encourage all parliamentarians to think more broadly of the way that we're approaching climate action. This issue is not going to be solved by just a handful of people who are working on this. It's not going to be solved by miracle technologies. They're incredibly important and a critical part of the plan, but the Canadian Institute for Climate Choices, which is a federally funded independent think tank, put out a report that said the solutions already exist for the 66% to 90% emissions reductions that we need to achieve on the pathway to net-zero emissions by 2030. What we need is for people to adopt them. Small businesses are a critical component of making sure that we can do that, and at this critical juncture when they are rebuilding, the important part is that we're not building back to business as usual, but building in a way that's going to make them more competitive and resilient for the future.

Small business on their own right now, even start-ups.... Wouldn't it be wonderful if start-ups, as they're thinking about growth and building the businesses of tomorrow, have inherently built in considerations of how they're going to do that in a way that is a low-emissions strategy. It's not just about building green products and services but about operating everything the way that we do with low emissions. That's what I'm advocating for here.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Okay.

We will have about three minutes each for Ms. Jansen and Ms. Dzerowicz, who is going to wrap it up now.

Ms. Jansen.

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

Thank you.

Mr. Kelly, you've begged us as parliamentarians to urge the ministers to consider those who have fallen through the cracks, small businesses, start-ups as you mentioned, and obviously the hospitality sector and restaurants and so forth.

I had that opportunity last week with Minister Freeland. She came and I asked her a question on behalf of a constituent here who's a restaurant owner in lockdown right now. He wanted to know why the programs made no differentiation between those who were seriously impacted and those who were not. He wanted to know why small business owners like him who had shut down completely were treated the same as those who were open. Unfortunately, her response was, as you can already imagine, that compensation has been very focused on where the need is greatest. We just keep hearing this refrain over and over again, that the compensation is covering everybody and nobody's falling through the cracks.

How do I get through that? I tried. I did my best. What else can I do?

[Daniel Kelly]

It's the same for me, and that is to just keep saying it over and over again.

Look, everyone's attention is on vaccines and ending some of the restrictions that have started across the country, as it should be, but just as there are horror stories from a health perspective, there are so many horror stories from an economic perspective for small business owners. Every single day I talk to a business owner who is right now in the process of losing their home because it was mortgaged to start the business. Every day I talk to a business owner who has bled their retirement savings to try to keep their business going.

Our initial evidence shows that government support programs, as positive as some of them are, are still covering less than half of the overall losses that most businesses are experiencing, and we're giving them a legacy of debt, removing their wealth.

We've just got to keep pushing to try to fix some of these gaps. There are lots of businesses that are getting help and I'm pleased with that, but so many others have not and the economic consequences are going to be with us for months and really decades to come.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

One quick question, Tamara.

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

Thank you very much for banging that drum. I will continue to bang that drum. I know that Mr. Bourbeau has spoken to the fact that these restaurants can no longer take on more debt. My constituent was very clear: He cannot afford more debt. Yet, this is where he's at and so I don't know if Mr. Bourbeau has any suggestions.

Again, how can I get the news out that the programs are not helping those who are most impacted?

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Mr. Bourbeau.

[Olivier Bourbeau]

You highlighted an important point when you talked about loans over loans over loans.

We know that the federal government has tried to help. HASCAP is an example where the government wants to provide support, but there is no forgivable part and there's 4% interest, so this program does not apply to the hardest-hit sector and to small and medium-sized businesses.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Thank you.

The final three minutes go to Ms. Dzerowicz.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Thank you so much, Mr. Chair.

I thank everyone for their excellent presentations. I wish I had more time, but I'm going to direct my question to Ms. Lloyd, who has been patiently waiting.

Ms. Lloyd, I think I understand and appreciate more than most the amazing work that Green Economy Canada does. In my youth, I co-founded an environmental group called Project Neutral. We were trying to ensure that neighbourhoods, including small businesses, actually moved themselves towards carbon neutrality, so I have a huge appreciation for the work you do and very much appreciate some of the recommendations you made.

In budget 2021, there are a couple of elements that I wouldn't mind reading out to you and I would like to get your response to them.

The first is:

Budget 2021 proposes to reduce—by 50 per cent—the general corporate and small business income tax rates for businesses that manufacture zero-emission technologies.

I wouldn't mind if you could talk about whether you think that would be helpful as part of your work in trying to engage small business owners to reduce emissions.

The second part is:

[T]he government will undertake an analysis to ensure that Canada keeps pace with the U.S. and other jurisdictions in providing the appropriate tax structures and incentives to encourage clean economy businesses to invest, grow, and deploy solutions here in Canada.

On that one, I wouldn't mind if you could say whether there is another jurisdiction that you think is doing a fairly good job at this and whether there are specific elements that you would suggest we should consider as part of this analysis.

[Priyanka Lloyd]

Thank you for the question. I'll be brief, because I know we're at 5:30.

By the way, Project Neutral is a great partner of ours, so it's neat to see the connection.

As to your first piece about 50% tax break, I think that is a really good element. It will help to keep businesses here. One thing we hear is that the incentive to go abroad and start businesses in Europe, for example, is pretty high, so that's a good measure.

The challenge I see with it is that the vast majority of businesses in Canada are not clean-tech businesses, so while it is an important part of seizing a new economic opportunity that's going to come with the transition to a net-zero future, it just leaves out a whole bunch of businesses that could be reducing their own operating costs and getting many of the business benefits from greening their operations if there were other incentives that were available, should businesses that are not clean tech take on certain measures.

As for your piece about the jurisdiction, I am actually not the best person on my team to answer that, but I can definitely follow that up and get you some information. There are some resources that I can point you to on that for sure.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Anything that would be helpful to us, any advice or elements that you could provide, would be great, because ultimately we want to help small businesses reduce emissions. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Thank you.

Ms. Lloyd, if you have anything to say in that regard, just send it through to the clerk, and he will get it to committee members. We always run out of time.

This is our fourth panel today. I try to keep track of the comments that I think are good and note down the time they happen, and then I'll go back to the transcript. Thank goodness for transcripts. My note paper fills up about every five minutes all day from having over the four panels.

Look, we've had a great series of witnesses. We've had constructive criticism. We've had some praise. It goes all over the map, with good ideas for the future—and not all on Bill C-30, for sure.

I thank members for their endurance during the day.

I thank all the panellists for their great presentations and for taking the time to answer our questions.

With that, we will see committee members again tomorrow.

Thank you very much.

The meeting is adjourned.