Finance Committee on May 18th, 2023

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Is it fair to say that your members have to sell more of other things, basically, just to pay a transaction fee to collect the tax and send it to the government? Is that about...?

[Anne Kothawala]

That is a very fair assessment.

Again, that's why convenience stores are unique. I know that the announcement took place at a small, independent bookstore. It's a lovely business, but it's very unlike a convenience store, because of the nature of the products it sells, which are not highly taxed. Our simple argument to government is that we should not have to pay for helping the government do its job of collecting taxes.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

I have a final question.

You mentioned the fees being the second-largest expense, second only to salaries, I believe.

Is that even more than rent?

[Anne Kothawala]

Yes, and that is something we have seen as a result over the course of the pandemic. As many of us may recall, at the beginning of the pandemic, people stopped using cash. In fact, some retailers didn't accept cash, because we still didn't know enough about the nature of COVID.

Contactless payments have gone through the roof. They've increased by 55%.

Rent used to be the second-biggest cost of doing business for a convenience retailer. That has now been overtaken by credit card fees.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Thank you very much.

I want to be fair to all of my colleagues. I think we are a little over time. I apologize, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

It's all good. Thank you, Mr. Chambers.

Now we're going to hear from the Liberals.

We have MP Chatel, please.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Madam Wilson, for your testimony.

We heard from other food banks earlier this week. It's a heartbreaking story.

I'm part of the national capital region. I'm in the Pontiac, just on the other side of the river. I have over 10 organizations trying to ensure food security at a time of crisis. I know that it has been very hard for people in my riding. I have among the poorest what we call “MRCs”—groupements of municipalities—in the whole Quebec region.

Times are hard with the inflation crisis. I was talking to colleagues in the U.K. who are working in charities. They are experiencing inflation of above 10% in the U.K. Prices for housing were already really high. Things are really hard.

We have tried to make life more affordable for Canadians.

Hopefully, the grocery benefit that we have helps some of the most vulnerable. We now have the dental benefit. We know that for children especially, going to the dentist is not affordable for many, and hopefully it helps with that. Students, too, are among the most vulnerable. I don't know about Ottawa, but I suspect that a lot of students are showing up at your door. We help them by eliminating interest charges....

For small businesses, we are lowering credit card fees as well. On predatory lending, some families resort to some lending...and then they're charged astronomical amounts of interest that they can't repay, keeping them in poverty. We have the workers benefit now at $2,400, benefiting 4.2 million. Child care also makes life more affordable. We have indexed to inflation a lot of the benefits.

Overall, we have lifted 2.7 million Canadians out of poverty since 2015. By the way, for all measures except one, the Conservatives voted no, so when they say they care about the situation of poverty in Canada, I just don't believe it at all.

Additionally, what we've done in the budget is to help with the food banks directly. We have a $50-million surplus food rescue program and a $200-million emergency food security fund. Can you tell us how these two programs help you?

[Rachael Wilson]

Absolutely. Those were very beneficial during COVID. We distributed funds out to our network of 112 agencies. Most of them used it either for purchasing of food or for staffing.

We lost a lot of volunteers during COVID, and staffing is critical for us to be able to help people move out of poverty. Food banking has expanded and become much more of a professional industry than it ever was, relying on well-trained, skilled people to help access supports and resources for people.

Unfortunately, those funds were completely spent. There is no money left from what we received.

We are back to serving more people. Unfortunately, the cost of groceries has gone up so high that even we, as an organization, are spending more and are not able to put out as much as we used to.

Before the pandemic, we were spending $1.4 million on food. This year, we'll spend well over $6 million—getting close to $7 million. We were a $15-million organization before the pandemic. We are now a $25-million organization. That is partially because of the cost of everything and the increased number of people who are accessing food banks.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

I know in my riding, what's very important is the collaboration with grocery stores, to have what we call the invendu, food that is not being sold. The partnership over the years has improved, but there's a lot of work still to be done in collaborating.

Is there more to be done with other businesses that could help contribute to the well-being of our communities?

[Rachael Wilson]

Here in Ottawa, we are one of the largest recoverers of food in the province. We do a significant amount of food recovery with grocery stores.

All of the major chains participate with us, and we're very grateful for their support. However, we really would prefer that the food banking system not exist at all. We would prefer to go away completely and allow people to purchase food at grocery stores, choosing what is most appropriate for them and their family and purchasing it when and where they want.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

There's a bit of good news on the inflation rate, but groceries are still very high, depending on the item. What happens too is that some families are sometimes resorting to buying products that are not fresh or good. Fast food, unfortunately, might be cheaper. I know families who are going to the dollar stores sometimes to buy food for their children.

What else do you see as a program that could help you?

[Rachael Wilson]

We see that a lot, that people are doing their grocery shopping at the dollar stores.

I give this example often, though it's not as valid anymore. It used to be that you could buy a hamburger at a fast-food restaurant for about a dollar, or you could buy an apple. Most families in precarious situations will choose the hamburger, because it will fill them up more, but it's often low-nutrient, not high-quality food.

Food banks like ours right across the country are investing significant dollars in purchasing fresh items. Those are the most expensive items. We spend $60,000 a month on eggs alone. We also spend about $30,000 a month on milk. We know families can't afford them, so when they come to a food bank, we give them high-quality, highly nutritional items. With any money they have, they can buy other items to help bulk up.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, MP Chatel.

We're now going to the Bloc for questions, and Mr. Ste-Marie, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First, I would like to welcome all the witnesses.

Thank you for being with us on such short notice on a Thursday evening. I'm really impressed to see so many of you around the table, which is rare. I thank you for that, and I really appreciate it.

There has been a lot of information in all the presentations so far. Not every member will be able to ask all the questions they'd like, because we're going to run out of time. However, I want you to know that we're taking note of all the information that came out of your testimony and in the various exchanges.

Ms. Wilson, what you're telling us is heartbreaking. We heard from your colleagues from other food banks yesterday, and we could see that the current situation is truly catastrophic. It has to change.

So I want to take the time to thank you for what you do. You're changing the lives of so many people.

As one of my colleagues said yesterday, your work reminds us of the importance of having social services and a social safety net to prevent this kind of situation.

I also want to turn briefly to Ms. Kothawala. We're well aware of all the challenges you face. We'll continue to listen to you and pass on your demands, so that they're reflected in the budgets, not only in words but also in measures that bring about real change.

Since my time is limited, I'll address my questions to Mr. Bissonnette and Mr. Fortier.

Thank you for being here.

Basically, your position is that of the Centrale des syndicats démocratiques, where you're from. However, since it deals with a central element—the EI program—it's also the position of the Confédération des syndicats nationaux, or CSN, the Fédération des travailleurs et des travailleuses du Québec, or FTQ, and the Centrale des syndicats du Québec, or CSQ; in short, of just about all the labour federations in Quebec.

The central problem is that the EI program as it currently exists isn't working and needs to be modernized. So I'd like you to hear your thoughts on the subject.

[Kaven Bissonnette]

Thank you for your question.

I represent all the labour federations in Quebec. During the pandemic, we saw simplified accessibility rules that greatly improved the situation, but those rules disappeared, and we're back to square one. As I said at the outset, accessibility is lacking. What's unfortunate is that the people most affected are mainly women, people who work part time or who have a precarious job. These people aren't able to qualify for EI benefits.

It's important to remember that people don't turn to EI by choice or for pleasure, and just because they have a full-time job doesn't mean that there aren't situations in life where they need that social safety net, as you so rightly said earlier. So there's that element as well.

Then there are seasonal workers. Canada is a big, beautiful country, and people say they want to revitalize our regions, but often the only jobs available in the regions are seasonal jobs. Even if these people work intensively for slightly shorter periods of time, if they find themselves in a hole, with no income, because we're unable to make benefits accessible for an adequate period of time, we're ultimately devitalizing our regions and encouraging these people to leave the regions and settle in the major centres. I don't think that's the spirit of the legislation.

The Employment Insurance Act is a social piece of legislation, and its provisions must be accessible. We've found that for people who have to go through the process to access this program, it's like climbing Everest. It's insurmountable and complex. Administrative directives aren't clear and change from one officer to the next. It needs to be made simpler and, as I said before, it needs to be made humane.

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

Thank you. I quite agree. Barely four out of 10 workers who lose their jobs are covered by employment insurance, or EI, so it's safe to say that the system isn't accessible.

Something else really upsets me. The government is saying that, because the EI fund has to break even in seven years, it's going to take $17 billion in taxpayer money to cover the deficit it ran up during the pandemic. In contrast, the government was there for just about every sector and paid for everything else during the pandemic.

The chair seems to be growing impatient. How much time do I have left? Do I have 10 minutes?

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

You have a minute and 20 seconds.

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

All right. I have time left.

All the government is doing in Bill C-47 is extending, for one year, a temporary measure to address the gap in the targeted regions. Is that enough?

[Kaven Bissonnette]

No.

Extending the measure for a year is fine, but it shouldn't end. We make the point in our brief that ending the measure would be disastrous for the regions. The measure needs to be made permanent, it needs to become standard, and it needs to be enhanced.

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

All right.

Thank you.

Next time around, I'll have questions for you about the appeal board.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Are you done, Mr. Ste‑Marie?

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

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Very well. Thank you.

Now we're going to the NDP and Mr. Blaikie for six minutes.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you very much.

I want to echo the thank yous that have already been made to our witnesses, both for the work that you do—in particular, our witnesses from the food banks, who have been doing extraordinary work over the last number of years to serve people in distress—and for being willing to appear on short notice. I know this has been a difficult process in that way.

I want to ask Mr. Brazeau, Mr. Cato and Mr. Harvey a question.

We've heard a fair bit from pulse and grain growers associations around the table on interswitching. We've heard a few different things.

We've heard that their intention isn't to use American railways at all. They just want to enhance their bargaining position.

We've also heard that, in their view, because Canadian crews are required in Canada, that means we're going to see whether there are interswitching unionized crews in Canada carrying goods on short lines. I wonder if you may have some comment about that.

We've also heard that they would expect a significant amount of public investment in short-line infrastructure in order to make use of the interswitching that they say is for better bargaining.

I wonder if you might help zero in on which claims you think are consistent with the way rail freight works and where there may be some discrepancies.

[Éric Harvey, Senior Counsel, Regulatory, Canadian National Railway Company, Railway Association of Canada]

Thank you for this invitation to speak today. We appreciate the time you're giving us with your question.

On the use of U.S. railways, the only thing we can say about it is that from 2014 to 2017, U.S. railways were used and interswitching was used to move traffic to the U.S. There is no doubt about it. It's not just a detail. It was significant volumes.

On crews and short lines, I think I understand that this kind of chain reaction between interswitching to the point where.... I would certainly say that before you get there, my sense is that the better approach is to hold on to the jobs we have now, which are moving traffic and which are the Canadian jobs we already have in place.

Most of the traffic we move goes to market. It goes to Vancouver, Rupert and the east coast for export. That traffic moves long haul. Our employees move that traffic long haul. Developing a policy that would detract from this to focus on the short move would certainly be a bit challenging at times in terms of its implementation. Frankly, I think it would reduce capacity in the supply chain if you focus the resources there instead of on the long haul.

For us, really.... I want to insist on this because Marc, in his opening remarks, indicated that we have many employees in this country. We have large investments in this country for which there is no comparison to any U.S. operator. We do this with an expectation of a return, which I think is a legitimate expectation considering that all parties in the discussion are business entities and what we're trying to achieve is essentially providing an efficient service to all our customers—to whom we have a level of service obligation.

Bear in mind that the traffic that goes to the U.S. is the most damaging, because suddenly we lose the revenue and our employees lose the work. For us, frankly, suggesting that there would be some form of compensation through employees and short lines is certainly not something that is obvious to us.