Finance Committee on Oct. 13th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Welcome, everybody. I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 107 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance. Pursuant to Standing Order 83.1 and the motion adopted by the committee on Thursday, June 8, 2023, the committee is meeting to discuss the pre-budget consultations in advance of the 2024 budget.

The finance committee is honoured to be starting its cross-country tour for the pre-budget consultations in advance of the 2024 budget right here in Atlantic Canada. We've been to P.E.I., New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, and here we are today in Newfoundland and Labrador, in beautiful St. John's. We had a chance to get up to Signal Hill and see that. It's where Marconi sent the first transatlantic signal. Now we're all the way to smart phones these days. This is just to learn a bit about your history and your culture. It's really a terrific place. We didn't get a lot of time to be able to see all the sights, but the most impactful thing has been the people. The people here are just so down-to-earth. They're the salt of the earth, and we're delighted to be here.

Our finance committee members are members of Parliament. They come from all across Canada, but we have three members with us today who are local to Newfoundland and Labrador.

One member from here is one of our standing committee members. That is MP Joanne Thompson. Welcome, Joanne. You have all of your friends out to be able to share their thoughts on our budget.

We have with us MP Churence Rogers, who is also from Newfoundland. I don't know the exact riding, but you'll be able to share that with all of the members and everybody. Clifford was telling me that you're about an hour's drive from here. We also have MP Clifford Small. Clifford is about three hours from here, so you're the closest, as far as driving distance is concerned.

It's great to have all of this local talent with us here today to ask questions.

Also from our standing committee, we have MP Gabriel Ste-Marie from Joliette, Quebec, and MP Eric Duncan from Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry in Ontario.

All the way from the west coast, we have Richard Cannings, who is from the Okanagan in B.C., but Richard lived in St. John's in the 1970s, I understand, for a number of years. Maybe you will be able to share some of that, Richard, as we get into questions.

I am from Mississauga, Ontario. If you have ever flown into Pearson International, forget the Toronto part because it's actually in Mississauga. My riding is just above the airport.

One thing we do in our committee is that we have what's called an open mike. You'll see a mike behind you.

Today, we have Mr. O’Shea, who is going to have an opportunity to make a statement to our committee before we get to our witnesses and into the panel.

Please, Mr. O’Shea, the mike is yours.

[Kevin O'Shea, Executive Director, Public Legal Information Association of Newfoundland and Labrador]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

My name is Kevin O’Shea. I am the executive director of the Public Legal Information Association of Newfoundland and Labrador and the manager of the Journey Project, which provides supports for survivors of gender-based violence in the legal system.

Since 2019, the Journey Project has operated a Justice Canada-funded initiative focused on workplace sexual harassment. This includes the provision of free legal advice to workers who have experienced sexual harassment in their workplace. To date, the Journey Project has supported over 740 survivors of gender-based violence, including over 100 who have experienced sexual harassment. We've also delivered training on workplace sexual harassment to over 200 employers and employees from a wide range of businesses.

Funding for this initiative ends in March 2024. Unfortunately, so far there has not been a commitment from the government to continue supporting this important work past this date. I urge the government to continue supporting the good work that is happening to address all forms of gender-based violence, and I respectfully ask this committee to prioritize the continuation of our funding in budget 2024 to prevent and address workplace sexual harassment.

Thank you very much for your time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, Mr. O'Shea.

Thank you for your statement and for your advocacy for our most vulnerable citizens. We thank you for that, and we appreciate it.

Members and witnesses, I will just let everybody know who our witnesses are today. Then the witnesses will have an opportunity to make a five-minute opening statement for the members.

With us here today, we have, from the Canadian Association of University Teachers, Dr. Robin Whitaker, vice-president; from Fish, Food and Allied Workers-Unifor, Courtney Glode, director of public affairs; from Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador, Deatra Walsh, director of advocacy and communications; from the Newfoundland and Labrador Public Sector Pensioners' Association, Sharron Callahan, executive director; from Dooley's Trucking, Barry Warren, president, Canadian Courier Ltd.

We are going to start with the Canadian Association of University Teachers and Dr. Robin Whitaker for five minutes, please.

[Dr. Robin Whitaker, Vice-President, Canadian Association of University Teachers]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to welcome the members of the finance committee to St. John's on the island portion of Newfoundland and Labrador, which I acknowledge as the unceded homeland of the Beothuk and Mi'kmaq peoples.

Welcome to Newfoundland and Labrador.

I am vice-president of the Canadian Association of University Teachers, CAUT, which represents over 72,000 teachers, researchers, librarians and general staff at universities, colleges and polytechnics across the country. I'm also a professor here at Memorial University in the department of anthropology.

I want to thank the committee for the opportunity to speak about CAUT's submission to the pre-budget consultations.

Canada is facing significant challenges—economic, social and environmental. To meet these challenges, we need to strengthen our public post-secondary education system, which is the foundation of our knowledge economy. It is also the foundation of our strong democracy and our robust society.

Today, I will highlight two areas that require immediate attention—science and research, and public funding for post-secondary education—and I will offer six recommendations.

The first area is science and research. While countries like the United Kingdom, Japan, the United States and the Netherlands are all increasing their investments in research, in innovation and in fostering talent, Canada has fallen behind its peers. From the discovery of X-rays and nylon to superconductivity, medical imaging, computers and mRNA vaccines, major scientific progress is driven by basic research, i.e., research without specific commercial outcomes or applications in mind at the outset. The Canadian government needs to boost its support for fundamental research to encourage real scientific progress that will produce long-term benefits. The report of the government's advisory panel on the federal research support system, often referred to as the Bouchard report, rightly notes, “Societies that invest in their research enterprise thrive while those that do not falter.”

These are our two recommendations on science and research: one, an increase of at least 10% annually for five years to the federal research councils’ total base budget for core grant programming, and two, an increase in both the number and value of graduate student scholarships and post-doctoral fellowships by $200 million over two years. The value of graduate scholarship awards in Canada has remained unchanged for nearly 20 years, and post-doctoral fellowships have seen only a small increase over the same period. That means that the value of these scholarships and fellowships has declined quite substantially.

The second main area relates to partnering with the provinces to improve the affordability, access and quality of education. In February of this year, MUNFA, the Memorial University of Newfoundland Faculty Association, my own union, was on strike for two weeks over issues related to precarity, equity and affordability, joining colleagues in almost every province who are concerned about the future of public post-secondary education in Canada.

In this area, we have four recommendations. The first is to permanently double the value of the Canada student grant, bringing it to $6,000, and to establish a more equitable fifty-fifty funding model for grants and loans, moving away from the current 2:1 model of repayable loans versus grants.

With regard to our second recommendation, increasing student financial assistance on its own will not address affordability. Tuition alone increased by 3% last year for domestic students. The federal government needs to work with the provinces to restore public funding, which is now below 50% of revenue for Canadian universities, resulting in the exploitation of international students, the loss of research talent, and more. Here it's worth remembering that funding for education is both a powerful economic multiplier and a critical equalizer.

The third recommendation is to improve data on post-secondary education in Canada. There is currently no data available on national tuition for college education, international student fees, student housing, education and workforce equality, the size of our scientific community, and other key issues.

Finally, we need to protect the mission of public post-secondary education by amending the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act, CCAA, and the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act to exclude public post-secondary education institutions. The unprecedented use of federal insolvency legislation at Laurentian University in 2021, as we all know, was inappropriate and set a dangerous precedent.

I hope to elaborate on these points further during the question and answer period.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, Dr. Whitaker.

Now we'll hear from Dooley's Trucking and Mr. Warren, please.

[Barry Warren, President, Canadian Courier Ltd., Dooley's Trucking]

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.

Mine is a small to mid-sized Newfoundland company that has expanded over the past 25-plus years to include five terminals across our province, 100-plus full-time employees and 150-plus pieces of equipment, from tractor-trailers to cars. Three years ago, we started doing speciality services throughout all four Atlantic provinces. By industry standards, we are one of the largest privately owned companies in Newfoundland. I would add to this that our footprint does expand throughout Canada.

What I wanted to talk to you briefly about this morning is the availability of full-time employees wanting to work full time and their expectations from employers. We ourselves have found in the past 10 years—and more so in the past couple of years—that you have to be a psychiatrist and a psychologist, and you have to be a banker. This past winter, because of the price of fuel, we had to advance money to our employees to fill up their fuel tanks. People would say, “Will you pay more money?” There's a little bit more to it. Our average pay per hour is a little over $23. We're not paying minimum wage or that type of thing.

On the cost of operations as it relates to a freight carrier such as Dooley's, statistically, trucking companies run at an operating ratio of 90% to 94%, with big volumes but low margins, yet COVID-19 affirmed how much of an essential service it is. When it's coming to Newfoundland, it moves on a truck or it doesn't move at all. The costs of operations in Atlantic Canada are significantly higher and the margins are thinner.

On threats to profitability and sustainability, there is the cost of equipment. Four years ago, we paid $130,000 to $140,000 for a long-haul tractor. Today, that's a purchase of $246,000 to $295,000. That's in four years, I would add. I just found out from my insurance company yesterday—I didn't read the clause because no equipment was $200,000 or more—that my deductible if we had an accident, which was $5,000, has now gone to $10,000, not talking about the interest rates on financing, which are through the roof.

On parts availability, you could expect inventory in stock or overnight service. Today, you can expect upwards of one or two weeks. The cost of parts has increased significantly. There's downtime, with wheels not turning, and therefore no revenue is being generated.

On government legislation mandated without an understanding of the cost of downloading to the trucking industry, I could speak volumes on that. I know that we've heard so much about the EI insurance. We've heard talk about mandatory paid sick days. That's a discussion that's gone on in the past. I have no problem with that. The problem I have is with somebody who turns around and doesn't understand what's happening in a business like ours or in any other business and says, “You have to pay in 10 days.” That's without an understanding of, number one, where that money is going to come from, and also, if a driver is parked for 10 days, that tractor is generating no revenue, and there are costs associated with that.

You can look at our case, and this case can go right across the country. We have contracts with pharmaceutical companies. We're hauling narcotics and drugs. I can't call up the pharmaceutical company and say, “Look, my driver is sick today. I'm sorry, but we can't make it tonight.” It just doesn't happen. That's reality for us day in, day out.

More important to me right now, and what has had the biggest effect on me in the past 12 months, are the fuel taxes in general and now the carbon tax that's continuing to grow and is added. Basically, it's killing our bottom line. I just did some analysis. In the month of September, I paid out $16,302 in carbon tax. Do the math on that. September is one of our slower months, so when you get into the busier months, that figure is going to go up to $25,000 or $30,000. Just take a 12-month period. My bottom line last year was smaller than that.

Going the route that we're going right now, I'm going to lose money. You turn around and say, “Well, increase prices.” Yes, we're working on that. But some of these contracts were put in place three years ago. They're negotiated every three to five years. You have to work through them and then negotiate them when they come up for renewal.

To bring this closer to home, and I'm going to finish up with this, I don't know if people realize it, but this applies to Newfoundland. If you're bringing a 53-foot trailer load of food into Newfoundland and crossing on the ferry, you're looking at a bill of about $10,000 to $14,000 for that trailer load. That's one way. The reason for that is that there's very little backhaul. In the fishery season there is, but throughout the others there's very little. So you have the Marine Atlantic fees and the fuel surcharges. Now they're going to add on an 80% fuel surcharge on top of that $10,000 bill. When you turn around and have 10,000 dollars' worth of groceries coming in that now costs you $18,000, you have the effect of a ball rolling down the road. It's a snowball that keeps growing.

When I look at this and—

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, Mr. Warren.

You'll have an opportunity to expand on that, I'm sure, with the questions that you'll get from the members. We are way, way over time, but you'll have a lot of opportunity.

Now we'll hear from Fish, Food and Allied Workers-Unifor and the director of public affairs, Courtney Glode.

[Courtney Glode, Director, Public Affairs, Fish, Food and Allied Workers - Unifor]

Thank you.

Thank you to the committee members for taking the time to hear from the Fish, Food and Allied Workers union today as we ask you to make the owner-operator fishery a priority in the 2024 federal budget.

As you may or may not already know, our union is the largest private sector trade union in the province, representing over 14,000 working people here in Newfoundland and Labrador. Over 10,000 of those members are professional fish harvesters, while around 3,000 others are processing plant workers. The long-term sustainability of the fishing industry is therefore of paramount importance to our members’ livelihoods, both now and into the future.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Ms. Glode, can I ask you to slow down? You'll have a lot of time to get there.

[Courtney Glode]

I'm sorry. I know I talk really fast.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

The reason I ask this is so that our interpreters can do their outstanding but difficult job. It would be great if you could just slow it down.

Thanks.

[Courtney Glode]

Yes. I'm sorry.

First, it's important to explain what the fishery means to our province and to our coastal communities. Outside the Avalon region, the fishery is what fuels this province. When people think about Newfoundland and Labrador or consider visiting our province as a world-renowned tourist destination, what is it that comes to mind? They picture a rugged expanse of coastline dotted with vibrant coastal communities, inshore fishing vessels, bustling wharves, children running about and nan out hanging her quilt on the line—but soon, without the proper vision and investment in our fishery, only nan will be left.

The fishery is not just any occupation choice for the people of our province. It's ingrained into our culture. It's a way of life inherited by our children from Conception Bay to Fortune Bay to Green Bay and the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Only by recognizing its value and its significance can we secure a future for our next generations that want to maintain this way of life.

The fishery of today is not the fishery of the past. An enormous amount of work and sacrifice has been undertaken over the last 30 years to modernize the commercial fishery. The objective of this industry is to provide good, meaningful work to the people of our province—jobs in inshore fish harvesting as either owner-operators or crew members, working in processing plants, or contributing to one of the related industries that support the commercial fishery.

Professionalization, diversification, science, safety and quality have all become cornerstones of our world-renowned fishery. Our province was once the king of cod, but in 2023 we have a plethora of high-value seafood exports that all contribute to our reputation as having some of the best seafood in the world. These are species like snow crab, lobster, halibut, tuna, herring, shrimp, capelin, sea cucumber, whelk and, yes, cod.

Over 17,000 people rely directly on the fishery. As an industry valued at over $1.4 billion each year for our province, its economic and social worth cannot be discounted. Protecting the owner-operator fishery goes hand in hand with long-term coastal sustainability. The owner-operator fishery contributes meaningful jobs to our province, and the federal government must enhance its dedication to enforcing fleet separation policies. The new Fisheries Act and federal regulations around the subject acknowledge that the owner-operator fishery brings substantially more value to our economy than corporate-owned fisheries. However, our industry continues to suffer the ill effects of corporate control. It is therefore essential that the federal government ensure that these regulations are vigorously enforced to bring consequences to delinquents and protect the future of our communities.

In addition, we ask you to make important commercial species a priority for science and research. The federal government is responsible for assessing the health of our marine species and determining management plans based on those assessments. When this research is not prioritized and important surveys in science are not undertaken, our coastal communities suffer. Species like mackerel, snow crab, seal, northern shrimp and northern cod are all vital to the economy of our province, and yet the lack of federal prioritization has led to incomplete updates for important species. Fish harvesters and plant workers bear the burden of this failure when quotas are set based on the available science.

Finally, I am here to ask you to make urgent and necessary changes to the federal employment insurance program. Over 30,000 seasonal workers in our province rely on a robust and reliable employment insurance program. These working people are vital to the two important seasonal industries of our province, tourism and the fishing industry, and they must be protected.

These workers are currently living through a financial crisis. An already difficult year has been compounded by inflated employment numbers, leading to a benefit crisis. Many people will now be without income for up to two months before the next fishery begins. Incomes will be reduced by up to $400 a month. People are already choosing between putting food on the table and paying the heat bill. Thousands will be forced to go on social assistance. Others will be forced to leave their communities.

The result is certainly not something for the quintessential tourism commercial. These people were told that help was coming, but in fact they've been left out in the cold with no assistance from the federal government. Seasonal industries are vital to the economy of Canada and the economy of Newfoundland and Labrador. They deserve respect, they deserve dignity and they deserve help. The EI system must be reformed to be more responsive to the needs of working Canadians. The time for change is long overdue.

In summary, I once again respectfully request that your committee consider the importance and value of our province's owner-operator fishery for all that it contributes to the social and economic fabric of Canada as a whole.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, Ms. Glode.

Now we'll go to Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador, with director Deatra Walsh.

Go ahead, please.

[Dr. Deatra Walsh, Director, Advocacy and Communications, Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador]

Before my clock starts, I'm just going to say that I'll make a few opening remarks in French.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, Ms. Walsh.

Members and witnesses, you do have interpretation devices on your desks. You can adjust them to your needs—English or French—and then we'll get started with Ms. Walsh's opening statement.

[Dr. Deatra Walsh]

Members of the committee, good morning.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today on behalf of Municipalities Newfoundland and Labrador and to share messages from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, or FCM.

My name is Deatra Walsh. I am the director of advocacy and communications with MNL, the organization representing the 275 municipalities in this province.

I come to you today with a heartfelt and strong message from the leaders and staff in our communities.

Municipalities are the country's biggest partners in providing, and supporting the delivery of, programs and services to residents, but they can't do more with less.

My opening statement draws upon the themes from FCM's pre-budget consultation submission, namely municipal fiscal stability, infrastructure, climate resilience, housing, and safe, healthy communities. I'm looking at these things through the lens of Newfoundland and Labrador, and I acknowledge that they align with MNL's six strategic priorities.

Newfoundland and Labrador is an outlier, I would argue, on the national municipal stage. We are unique. We have one municipality with more than 100,000 people; 75% of MNL's members are communities with fewer than 1,000 people. We lack a regional governance system. Our municipal legislation is outdated and there are many spaces in which our members have not been long-term active players—such as transit, climate action and housing, for example—because they have not had to be. They simply lack the capacity to do so in a fulsome way.

This sounds like a story of doom and gloom, but it's not. It's a story of opportunity. Learning from and working with the outlier means making real and meaningful change possible for everyone. Most of our members operate on very lean budgets and with rising debt ratios, and over the course of the pandemic municipalities have had to make budget cuts. While the safe restart funding enabled our members to breathe a sigh of relief, the truth is that our municipal reality remains unsustainable. As one mayor once said, you can't cut basic. Our members are stretching themselves as far as they can, but with the rising cost of inflation and the added pressures to fill in gaps where other service providers simply cannot, it is a losing game. Downloading cannot occur without proper resourcing.

I invite the committee to discuss with me the 11 resolutions we are going to put forward at the AGM. They are an interesting comment on the fiscally precarious situations of municipalities here. We echo FCM's call for a new municipal growth framework and a tripartite approach to accessing new revenue tools.

How am I doing on time?

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

You're good.

[Dr. Deatra Walsh]

Great. Thank you.

Infrastructure is a constant concern for our members—I talk a lot about infrastructure—such as how to maintain what they have and how to build new. Our members struggle to apply for and access the funding they need. They are not in a state of readiness, I would argue, to be successful in any federal funding competition. I use the word “competition” to signal an inherent problem in most infrastructure funding calls. The system as it's constructed now sets them up to fail. They lag in asset management planning because they have not received necessary supports. They struggle to access funding, even through the “ruralest” of streams, because our rural is different. I know it's true across the country, but it is particularly true here.

I would like to speak about and comment on an example from Harbour Main-Chapel’s Cove-Lakeview. There's a population of 1,065. They've applied three times for federal and provincial disaster funding to support a breakwater in the community. The breakwater was estimated to cost a million dollars, which is equal to their annual operating budget. They were denied because of restrictive funding parameters and because they lacked the appropriate data to make their case. They were forced to apply through the provincial municipal capital works program, which is usually reserved for essential municipal infrastructure, for a breakwater necessary to mitigate the impacts of climate change.

We have to do better. Funding earmarked for municipalities needs to get directly into their hands without bureaucratic red tape. Our members know what they need. We echo FCM's call for a doubling of the Canada community-building fund with a 3.5% annual indexation. This is the best infrastructure funding tool to ensure that our members can address their priorities directly.

I would be remiss if I didn't talk about waste water. Please give me another minute for that and housing. Here in Newfoundland and Labrador, we're well behind the country in terms of waste-water infrastructure and compliance with the waste-water systems effluent regulations. Our members will need an astronomical funding package to comply, and we really need some dedicated funding for that.

Finally, I want to comment on housing. I'm proud to say that MNL has been leading the charge on municipal housing conversations in this province. We are in a crisis here, not just in St. John’s, but in communities everywhere. The housing accelerator fund was a welcome addition to the suite of housing funding possibilities, but for more of our members to be able to access it, these types of applications need to meet them where they are. Capacity support at the local level is required, and it must be a whole-of-province approach, with all partners at the table.

Municipalities can play a role in all of this, and they do, but they need more support—funding, legislative and otherwise—to make this happen. They can’t do more with less. Let’s do this together. Let's get to work.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, Ms. Walsh.

Now we'll go to the Newfoundland and Labrador Public Sector Pensioners’ Association and Sharron Callahan.

[Sharron Callahan, Executive Director, Newfoundland and Labrador Public Sector Pensioners' Association]

Good morning. I am Sharron Callahan. I am the executive director of the Newfoundland and Labrador Public Sector Pensioners' Association and the chair of the Newfoundland and Labrador seniors' and pensioners' coalition. Collectively, this coalition represents the membership of 13 affiliated associations to which the NLPSPA provides leadership and infrastructure support, so our outreach is quite large.

I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak to you about the pressing issues impacting older persons in our province and across the country. I'm sure the issues are pretty common everywhere. I'm sure you will acknowledge that none of these issues are new or something that you have not heard before. These issues are focused on health, wellness, financial security and social interaction.

I apologize to the interpreters if I go off script a bit at times.

Seniors' issues are everyone's issues, as the impacts of these are felt within families, their communities and the service systems that are needed. I want to start, however, in somewhat of a positive, solution-focused direction, rather than on a negative note.

I want to begin by talking about ageism. Every time one listens to any news or social media broadcast—and governments are no exception to this rule—it begins with a negative tone on the aging population. We are seen as a burden. We are seen as the reason for all that ails us in society, and our demands for service are taking away from our younger citizens. Yes, it is true that there are many older persons who require care and support, but there are many others who are still high-functioning and able to continue to contribute to the social betterment and the economy of this country.

My first ask is that we need an older worker strategy that promotes and supports older persons who wish to return to work or to continue to work beyond retirement while at the same time supporting employers to be successful in their line of business. Across Canada, there is a crisis of unavailable employees, for multiple reasons. I'm not going to go into those. Minor changes to tax rules, businesses offering more workplace flexibility and some accommodation for mobility challenges could have a huge positive impact on resourcing the employee crisis that would be productive both for employers and for older persons alike.

Older workers have proven attitudes and attributes of loyalty and reliability, but unfortunately these do not outweigh the negative ageist stereotypical attitudes: that we are resistant to change and that we have decreased capacity to learn and decreased productivity, which attributes employers unfortunately have assigned to younger workers. A cultural shift in thinking and positive promotion could go a long way toward shifting these opinions.

Also, you need to look at some of the internal processes within the federal government. I am 76 years old. I returned to work three years ago, but you have taken away my old age pension because of a limited supply of income. You need to look at that. That's my personal case.

I wanted to speak about matters of health. I'm well aware that health delivery is a provincial/territorial responsibility, but it is critical that health transfer funding allocated for particular programs have an accountability attached to it. Don't let the money go into general revenues, to go for purposes other than what it is intended for. Problems already identified include increasing shortages of health care workers, facilities overload, wait-lists for treatments, emergency room and bed closures, delays in the promise of a national pharmacare program, the quality and safety of long-term care, a lack of available qualified persons for at-home caregiver services, and the list goes on.

Canada needs a health transformation, just as we do in this province, but we cannot wait 10 years for a protracted plan. This needs to be given priority in funding allocations over the next two to three years.

I'll skip through some of it because my time is running out.

I want to refer to the high cost of living and financial security. I certainly see Barry's point about rolling it down to the individual consumer. All past initiatives to put money into the hands of Canadians are great. Notwithstanding these, however, the continuing increases in the cost of living, heating, fuel and social activities are just draining people's pockets. They cannot keep pace anymore and any hope is fast diminishing for most folks.

All I ask of you is to fix it. Do something about it. Stop talking about studies and everything else. Take some action.

Can I offer a bouquet? I want to offer a bouquet for some of the programs that the Government of Canada offers.

The New Horizons for Seniors program is a welcome program. It does a lot. However—and I think Deatra mentioned this—the barriers to getting funding are complicated. The process is a bureaucratic nightmare, and you have to have a degree in computer technology in order to get it. A lot of senior-based organizations that depend on that funding, and could use it, give up in the long run.

Thank you very much for the opportunity to present these few issues. I have a whole lot more, but that's it for now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, Ms. Callahan.

We want to hear a lot more, and that's the opportunity we're going to have right now, because we're going to get into our questions and answers time. For the first round, each party will have up to six minutes to ask you questions and get answers on your testimony.

We are starting with MP Small for the first six minutes, please.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for bringing this committee to St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, to hear concerns of the people in Newfoundland and Labrador regarding the upcoming budget.

I'm going to start off with Ms. Glode.

I heard you mention science. Since 2015, there's been a $5-billion increase in the DFO science budget, with approximately 5,000 new personnel. In half of these years, since 2019, we haven't had a trawl survey. I heard you mention the hardship in the fishing industry this year and what people are facing this winter. Had we had these trawl surveys since 2019—four of the last eight years—and given the experience on the ocean this year.... There's an overwhelming amount of codfish, and who knows what other groundfish species have recovered since 2019? It's a long time. Do you think there's any responsibility in the lack of science? Should there be a lack of science, given how much money and personnel have been allocated under this government?

Would we be facing what we're facing this year if we'd had the proof that's ultimately going to come out of this trawl survey for our coastal communities? How much more employment do you think we'd be able to get if you had your 25,000-tonne increase in cod quota, for example?

[Courtney Glode]

You make some really important points.

On the mobile survey, this fall is the first year it's gone ahead in the last several years. For instance, with snow crab, increases to quota were based only on harvester-led science initiatives, because there was no data available from the federal government to make those assessments. In the case of northern cod, as you mentioned, there is a case to potentially double that quota and provide all that extra income.

We have people now who can't make the employment insurance cut-off because they couldn't go fishing this year or they had no buyer, so it is really important. If that science had been done and if that evidence was there.... Harvesters see what's on the water. They see all the mackerel, they see all the seals and they see all the cod, but that's not enough for DFO science. We understand that anecdotal evidence is not sufficient, and that's why we're asking for the comprehensive science.

I believe it's a lack of prioritization on where that money has been put. Research vessels need to be improved. The surveys were cancelled because of poor research vessels, unavailability and old vessels that couldn't work. Increase the collaborative science. With snow crab and other species, we've proven that harvesters can collaborate with DFO to achieve a lot of this needed data. We can work together on these important species to make sure that data is collected.

[Clifford Small, Conservative, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

Thank you, Ms. Glode.

The Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans, an all-party committee, made an all-party recommendation that the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans match the mackerel quota of the United States of America. Does it make sense to you that we have a federal minister and a department that won't follow basic recommendations that come out of an all-party, non-partisan committee and will deny the economic value that would enter our coastal communities and the spinoffs that would come from it?

[Courtney Glode]

Mackerel in particular is a really sore spot for our members. The fishery has been under a moratorium now for two years. DFO science claims that the stock is in trouble, but we have an enormous amount of evidence that shows that the spawning stock biomass has simply migrated. We have an enormous amount of mackerel around our coast. We have reports being submitted every day of massive amounts of mackerel all around our coasts while DFO science says there's no mackerel around.

If the science were to be done, there would be a huge amount of money that could go back into the province for fish harvesters to support the owner-operated fishery and to give plant workers the extra weeks of work they need as well.