Finance Committee on April 18th, 2024

[David Brown]

If an international property owner sells to a Canadian, the following could occur. First, the resale of these properties would not go to local community residents. As resort lands, properties are not suitable for residential living, so the resales would likely go to British Columbia second-home owners, who would use their properties more often due to their close proximity to Whistler. However, this would further decrease the volume of accommodation inventory available to rent for tourists.

Further, B.C. second-home owners typically visit on weekends and holidays adding to the busy weekend congestion, whereas international second-home owners and nightly vacation renters typically support longer stays, filling the needed mid-week periods.

However, there's no guarantee that Canadian demand would fill these anticipated resale gaps that could occur if UHT tax proceeds to include tourist-zoned accommodation, noting that most international owners are not prepared to pay the tax so would likely sell at a time when real estate sales are currently soft. The B.C. market is also saturated. We have heard of some sales going to Lower Mainland second-home owners, but in other cases, these properties are sitting on the market, but...not willing to sell.

Instituting the UHT on resort land properties would therefore not add to the local tourist housing stock, not support increased residential usage, but rather, take away from needed tourist accommodation inventory and resort-wide tourism business revenues, while harming Whistler's real estate industry.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you.

I think the mayor has a very colourful term for the type of tourism for Whistler—brown paper bag tourism—which is not necessarily the same type of high-value tourism that makes Whistler the economic driver that it is.

We have some experience now. The tax will need to be paid in less than two weeks. Is it the experience that the property owners are paying the tax, or are they selling their properties so far?

[David Brown]

No. Unfortunately, we have both first-hand and second-hand knowledge of international owners of accommodation selling their properties with the institution of the UHT. In fact, they are extremely disheartened, as they were solicited to invest in Whistler and they recognize that Whistler's success is, in part, due to their investments. They believe that Canada is now turning its back on them.

Of note, they don't make a large financial return on property ownership in Whistler. It's very slim, at around 4% to 6%, noting that Whistler's a mature resort destination. Hotel and condominium units require ongoing maintenance, regular capital upgrades and reinvestment, all of which are directly paid for by the individual property owners. That's the foundation and a pillar of Whistler's success.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you.

Are there other destinations like Whistler that may be similarly impacted by the underused housing tax?

[David Brown]

Yes. There are two municipalities. Whistler and Sun Peaks are both zoned as resort municipalities in Canada that have designated tourist zones.

However, other destinations that would also be impacted are larger resort destinations that rely on international investment, such as Big White, Mont-Tremblant and, possibly, Niagara-on-the-Lake. I can think of a number of other resorts that have ski areas that would be in the same sort of situation.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Now we're going to hear from MP Ste-Marie. I apologize; it's MP Trudel. That was my mistake.

Welcome to our committee.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I don't mind that you mistook me for Mr. Ste‑Marie. Though I'm far less intelligent than he is, I'm far better-looking. That makes up for it.

I thank all the witnesses for being here.

Mr. Dorais and Mr. Surprenant, in your brief, you talked about the mandatory code for grocers. As we know, three amendments were made to the Competition Act through three different budget bills. Do you think it's time for a complete overhaul of this law? If so, what should be included?

[Olivier Surprenant]

As for reforming the act, I refer you to Ms. Quaid's edifying comments. For our part, we have focused mainly on small measures and the grocers' code. We believe this code should be mandatory. Indeed, when you want to regulate a business or an industry, you have to ensure that standards are set, that they are mandatory, and that compliance is monitored by an independent authority. It's up to the government to decide what shape it should take, but we believe that it should be done within this framework. We also believe that consumers should be consulted, so that it truly represents their interests.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

All right.

In your budget brief, you propose that “criminal” interest rates be reformed. Can you tell us more about that?

[Olivier Surprenant]

It's not necessarily in this brief, but we want to ensure the rate is sufficient to deter lending that could be considered abusive and that preys on the most vulnerable people in society.

My director may have something to add to this. Personally, I was more focused on food, the grocers' code and competition law.

[Maxime Dorais]

On the matter of criminal interest rates, what we want above all is for the reduced rate to be adopted as soon as possible. For us, this is a priority. Obviously, the projected targets are higher than we'd like, but there's nonetheless an appetite for rapidly lowering the current rate.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

All right.

You also asked that the government swiftly adopt Bill C‑319, which deals with increasing the Old Age Security pension for people aged 65 to 74. As we know, this pension was increased for people aged 75 and over, but we're told there's no need to do so for people aged 65 to 74. However, we at the Bloc Québécois think it is necessary. Can you explain why you think it would be important to do this swiftly?

[Olivier Surprenant]

Ultimately, all seniors should be able to benefit from this increase so that they don't find themselves in a precarious position by being penalized if they work. We understand that some seniors can no longer return to work, but we believe that all seniors should be covered by this reform, which was submitted, I believe, last year. That is why, in our opinion, the House of Commons should swiftly adopt Bill C‑319.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

I will now turn to another subject.

We are obviously disappointed—though unsurprised—that there was no reform of employment insurance in the newly tabled budget. The budget announces a planned reform of the computer system, which will take five years and cost $3 billion. That could take us to 2030, a year before workers and businesses will have replenished the EI fund, which was needed in the wake of the pandemic.

Do you have any comments on that, and could you tell us why it would be important to move swiftly on this much-needed reform?

[Olivier Surprenant]

We agree. The governing party has been proposing this reform for a long time, since 2015. There were consultations in 2022. We believe the time has come to pass a bill and implement measures, since we're talking about vulnerable people right now. Reform should be undertaken as quickly as possible. I think we're all ready for this reform, as discussions along these lines have already taken place.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

In your opinion, what would be important to include in this EI reform? Can you tell us a little about that?

[Olivier Surprenant]

Basically, it would be a matter of broadening accessibility to benefits, extending the period during which one can receive such benefits, and ensuring that each person receives a viable amount until they find a job.

[Maxime Dorais]

I'd like to add something.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

We're listening, Mr. Dorais.

[Maxime Dorais]

The first point to consider is the fact that income replacement rates were lowered in the past. We believe that we should return to historical levels, which were higher. That would mean increasing the income replacement benefit.

The second point deals with the penalty imposed on people who leave their jobs voluntarily. In many cases, these people are excluded from access to employment insurance. But there's no reason to penalize people who want to improve their working conditions, which sometimes entails quitting their job. Sometimes people leave a job for perfectly legitimate reasons, perhaps because it's unhealthy for all sorts of reasons. In short, under current EI rules, that freedom is not granted. We believe that access to these benefits should be extended to people who leave their jobs voluntarily.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Surprenant and Mr. Dorais.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, Mr. Trudel.

Thank you.

We now go to MP Boulerice. Welcome to our committee. You have six minutes, please.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you, Chair.

It's a pleasure to be here with you today.

I'd like to thank the witnesses for joining us for this important study.

To those of you here on behalf of Union des consommateurs: As you know, the NDP is very proud to have begun setting up a dental care program for a good segment of the population. We're talking about individuals whose net income is below $70,000, or families with an income below $90,000, who would be reimbursed, in most cases, at a very high percentage rate. At least, that's what we hope, but negotiations are ongoing. That's four million Quebeckers who don't have dental insurance right now. This program will help many people with their oral health, as well as their health in general.

In a press release issued on March 12, you said that, while this new program was a desirable initiative, it still left out many Quebeckers and Canadians and remained incomplete. In your opinion, what measures should be implemented to enhance this program that will benefit thousands, if not millions, of people?

[Olivier Surprenant]

The Canada Health Act calls for universal coverage. In our view, all dental care should be covered by a plan and there should be no discrimination, regardless of a person's income or whether or not they already have group insurance with their employer. Everyone, without exception, should have access to the dental care they need. However, under the current program, some 4.4 million people are excluded from the plan due to specified restrictions, and therefore do not have access to what we consider basic care.