Finance Committee on Oct. 22nd, 2024

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

You also said that this is going to blow a $90-billion hole in our country's GDP, which you estimate to be about 3% of GDP.

I wanted to ask you about this. There's been a lot of writing by economists lately about our per capita GDP falling behind the U.S., and it's slow now, or it's slower than it was during the Great Depression. If you were giving advice to the government under these circumstances, if they came to you and asked whether increasing the capital gains inclusion rate would be a good thing to do while our GDP per capita is lower now than it was in the Great Depression, what would you tell them?

[Dr. Jack Mintz]

I would tell them that, first of all, the timing is bad. When you have almost two or three years—we're getting into my view now—of negative real per capita GDP growth, I think that's a very serious issue. The timing is poor in terms of doing it.

I think there were changes required, but I would have done that through a more general tax reform. I think a number of complex issues are involved with capital gains taxation, such as inflation and the locked-in effect, and you can go on with a number of things. There's also the balance between dividend taxation and capital gains taxation. That's why it needs a general approach and not one that's very specific.

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Okay.

In the few seconds I have left, I'm curious to know your opinion on one other thing. Setting aside the whole issue of the efficacy of carbon pricing, the PBO has now issued two separate reports basically saying that Canadians pay more in carbon tax, when you take into account the knock-on economic effects, than they receive back in rebates. Do you agree with his assessment?

[Dr. Jack Mintz]

Yes. In fact, I've argued that many times. We have to remember that a lot of businesses pay carbon taxes when they purchase energy. They have to either shift it forward to consumers or shift it back by reducing employment. Somebody ends up paying. They've given the rebates only to households, but they ignore the fact that there could be other behavioural impacts. That's where I think the PBO will try to pick it up.

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, MP Morantz.

MP Dzerowicz, go ahead, please.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Thank you so much, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank all the presenters for their excellent presentations.

My first question is for the Toronto Biennial of Art.

Ms. Libralato, I should probably mention that you are located in the Davenport riding. I will say that I feel very blessed in Davenport, because we have a lot of artistic and cultural organizations. They really punch up above their weight in terms of the programming they do for the city. I think it's very beneficial for us. I just want to say thank you. Ten weeks of free contemporary art, 55-plus exhibits, 11 unique locations, all free programming—that's a godsend for many families that just don't have a lot of extra money to spend.

You mentioned that the federal government provided some support, I think, through different organizations. Maybe you could just take us through what the current funding is and what that extra funding would actually do for the Toronto Biennial of Art.

[Patrizia Libralato]

Thank you, MP Dzerowicz. You're a big champion of the arts. We all really appreciate it.

Currently, our overall public funding is hovering at about 20%. In conversation with my biennial colleagues around the world, that is probably one of the lowest contributions. Most biennials in major cities around the world—Berlin, Liverpool, Sydney, Guangzhou—see investment at 50% and up in their biennials. That's because of the impact biennials have on these cities and their communities.

We've been super grateful for the support we've received from the Canada Council for the Arts through project grants at the federal level. We receive operating funding from the City of Toronto every year. This year, for the first time, we received a one-time operating grant from the Ontario Arts Council, which was really fantastic. The CEO, Michael Murray, said that they felt they needed to support us: no more $10,000 or $15,000 project grants; they wanted to support the great work and the impact we were having on the city and for Canadian artists.

The only level of government that we do not get any operating funds from is the federal government. It would be a real game-changer for us to receive some stable funding from the government just so that we could work more sustainably and create stability within our organization. With this ask of $1.5 million, we feel like we can move forward, close off this incredible edition, move towards 2026, plan 2026, and work in a way that is not like we're painting the plane while it's taking off all the time. We would have that kind of stability where we could deliver more art for more people, and more jobs, bringing the city and the country together through free and accessible programming.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Thank you so much.

I want to turn my attention to Community Food Centres Canada, and I want to say a huge extra thanks to Mr. Musiwa, who valiantly tried to say my name and did a wonderful job. I just wanted to say that to you.

I also want to thank Community Food Centres Canada. It's been around for a while. You do heroic work around tackling food insecurity and poverty, not only in our city, the city of Toronto, but right across our country. I just want to say that, consistently, Community Food Centres Canada has been making excellent recommendations to this committee in our pre-budget consultations every year that I've been on this committee. I just want to acknowledge your excellent recommendations around the HST/GST transition to a groceries benefit and dropping the $5,000 minimum income requirement for the Canada workers benefit, plus a number of other recommendations that you made. I wanted to acknowledge that I've heard that.

The question I have for you, Mr. Musiwa, is this. Our federal government has very much made it a priority to support children and their families and to ensure that no child goes hungry in our country. We have introduced a national school food program, which is going to provide meals for up to 400,000 kids each year. It's just one step in our efforts. Can you maybe talk for a minute about the effects of having a healthy meal on a child's quality of life and success in school?

[Anthony Musiwa]

Thank you so much for the question, and thank you for the kind words in acknowledging the work that Community Food Centres Canada is doing. We really appreciate that.

We also really appreciate the government's efforts in implementing the national school food program. As members of the committee might know, we were the only country in the OECD community that did not have a similar program. Other countries in the OECD community had them, so we really appreciate that.

The national school food program is important in terms of giving children the opportunity to learn. What I mean is that we have children who come from different social backgrounds and different incomes, and they have different access to learning opportunities. One of those would be food insecurity. Households that are experiencing food insecurity and poverty are more likely to have children who have challenges in accessing learning. They might not attend school or they might be hungry at school. They might have challenges paying attention in class. They might have challenges connecting with other children within the school community and participating in the whole wide range of programs that are provided within the education system. If those children have access to school food, they're able to participate in learning, in sports and in extracurricular activities, and to form social connections with their peers, which is really important.

We also know that school food eases a little bit of the worry among the parents who have been sending their children to school hungry. They might have a little bit more in savings within the household to attend to other needs. We all know that food insecurity is an indicator of household circumstances, household financial hardship. By the time a household reports having challenges with accessing food, they are already having challenges meeting their other basic needs. What a school food program does is enable parents to have a little bit of savings to channel to other needs.

I also want to emphasize that having school food programs—

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Mr. Musiwa, we're well over time. We really have to wrap this up. I'm sure you're going to have more opportunity.

I'm sorry. I know time runs fast. Thank you.

[Anthony Musiwa]

I'm sorry. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

We're now moving to MP Ste-Marie, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I, too, would like to welcome all the witnesses and thank them for their remarks, which were very enlightening. We don't have time to ask all our questions, but we are taking notes. The witnesses' remarks and answers will inform the documents we submit to the minister.

My questions are for Ms. Laflamme, but before I ask them, I'd like to say two things.

First of all, I agree with Ms. Dzerowicz that Mr. Musiwa and his organization have always provided very valuable content to this committee. I would direct my colleague's attention to the Montreal Canadiens calendar in the top-right corner of the witness's screen. He clearly has good taste, so I hope that most of my colleagues will take a page from his book. Good on you, Mr. Musiwa. You have good taste.

Second, I have a request for Dr. Mintz. We've had a lot of discussion about the capital gains changes. As you said, what the Financial Management Institute is saying is really quite different from what you are saying. The government, specifically the minister, told us that 40,000 people a year were affected. You said that it will affect 1.26 million people on a lifetime basis. That is not at all the same thing. According to you, the change would reduce real GDP per capita by 3%, which is significant. You also say that it would lead to the loss of 414,000 jobs. Personally, I'm very concerned. We don't know whether the matter will come back to the House, whether the notice of ways and means motion will be voted on or what the text of the bill will be, but all of this concerns me greatly.

I am therefore asking you to provide the committee, in writing, with your data sources, hypotheses and methodology so that we can ask economists to reproduce your results. We have the resources to do the translation. Your figures stand in stark contrast to what the government and the Financial Management Institute are telling us. I would therefore ask you to send us all of that in writing, if possible, so that we can seriously consider the issue, which is very worrisome. Thank you in advance.

Having said that, I will now ask my questions.

Ms. Laflamme, did you have time to finish your remarks, or do you want to take a few minutes to finish up?

[Véronique Laflamme]

If I may, I'd like to complete my presentation with our recommendations.

First, in the very short term, in preparation for the economic update, we think the tenant protection fund should be enhanced, that it be included in the budget. Several housing committees in Quebec are doing essential work, but they are overwhelmed by the multitude of requests. FRAPRU members have always believed that the Canadian government should fund tenant associations and housing committees that work with tenants to support them in defending their rights. We welcomed the announcement of the tenant protection fund in the last budget.

However, the program's thresholds unfortunately make it very difficult for small organizations to develop a project that meets the criteria. We believe that the government has a role to play in ensuring that local organizations are funded for this important mission. The program should therefore be reviewed and improved in terms of subsidies. Above all, it should better reflect the reality of organizations such as the housing committees and tenant associations in Quebec, which have been very disappointed in recent weeks by the difficulties associated with the program criteria.

Then, again in the very short term, we think the eligibility criteria for the new co-operative housing development program also need to be reviewed. At the time, we welcomed the announcement of the federal co-op 2.0. Unfortunately, we see that in this program, rents can exceed median market rents. We think this is unacceptable. Housing co-operatives must offer housing at below-market prices. We're concerned about the new rhetoric that says to justify the lack of government contributions as in this case, that housing may not be affordable now, but it will be affordable 20 years from now, because no one is making a profit. We think this is another example of the importance of having sufficient subsidies at the outset, to ensure that rents are truly affordable, while respecting the ability to pay low-income and modest-income tenant households. This illustrates the importance of the federal government aligning its affordability definitions in programs that allocate public funds.

I have a lot more to tell you, Mr. Ste‑Marie, but I imagine you may have some questions to ask.

In the very short term, and in preparation for the next budget, if I had another concrete request to make, it would be the enhancement of the rapid housing initiative, another step forward that we welcomed. Unfortunately, there isn't enough funding associated with this new stream, which is attached to the affordable housing initiative. Again, if we really want to meet the most urgent needs, the funds must follow, and they must first be allocated to households with the greatest needs.

Before I conclude, allow me to make the connection with the right to healthy eating, which is linked to the right to decent housing. Right now, if demand is overflowing at food banks, it's because people are spending 50%, 80% or 100% of their income on housing, and there's nothing left to live on at the end of the month.

Investments are therefore needed on both sides. We have to keep in mind that when we invest in social housing, the money that stays in people's pockets stays in the local economy, and often at the local grocery store. It's not an expenditure to invest in social housing; it's an investment in our communities.

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

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, Mr. Ste‑Marie.

We're now going to go to MP Davies for six minutes.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to all the witnesses for being here.

I'll go to you first, Mr. Couillard.

Mr. Couillard, the Liberal government recently expanded the Canada student loan forgiveness program to include a number of allied health professionals. Can you briefly tell us who is included now in that program?

[François Couillard]

The nurses and the physicians have been included for several years. Recently it was expanded to include social workers, dentists, dental hygienists, physiotherapists, psychologists, and pharmacists.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

In your pre-budget submission, you have called for that program to continue its expansion to include a number of other allied health professionals, including audiologists, speech pathologists, dietitians, chiropractors, optometrists, etc.

Is there any reason why these health professionals whom you want to have added were excluded from the program? Is there any difference between them and the ones who are included?

[François Couillard]

Not that we know of. We asked the government that question, and we have not received an answer.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Can you briefly elaborate on how expanding that program to include the additional health professionals you propose would strengthen rural and remote care in Canada?

[François Couillard]

There are two major health coalitions in Canada. There's us—we have about 12 members—and there's a broader one, Heal, which has 40 national health care associations. I was past chair of that group, so I know it well. Both have identified as priorities health human resources—attracting Canadians into health professions and keeping them there.

The additional challenge is the regional geographic distribution of these professionals. If you look at optometrists, for example, there are enough optometrists in the country; they're just not in the right place. There are a lot in Toronto and in Montreal, but not in rural regions. That applies to a lot of our professions, so we have to find creative means to attract professionals to these regions and keep them there. We know that 20% of Canadians are in remote areas, so we need to find a way to do that. They deserve the care of all our professionals, not just doctors and nurses.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

You anticipated where I'm going with this. I was health critic for the last eight years, and I think they say, “Old health critics don't die. They just get more critical.” I note that in your pre-budget submission you also call on the government to ensure the ongoing collection of pan-Canadian health sector workforce data across the public and private sectors. Can you outline for us what types of data should be collected to support health care system planning, recruitment and retention?

[François Couillard]

Absolutely. We listed some of them in our submission. Once a year, CIHI will reach out to our professions. For example, they'll reach out to optometrists, whom I represent, and they'll ask us for the number of professionals we have, and that's about it. However, you don't get into any granularity that would help you develop models to assess where to put your health care resources. Do you need more schools? Do you need to invest more in the private or the public sector? Knowing gender, knowing the distribution of those resources in the country, knowing whether they're working in private or public practice.... Those are the sorts of questions we're asking.

Now, with the new agency, Health Workforce Canada, they're going to be developing models, but they'll need the data, so we're encouraging government to do a better job. Be more ambitious in your collection of data.