Evidence of meeting #45 for Finance in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was subamendment.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Karina Gould
You know I'm going to check.
Can we stand this subamendment and continue on?
Conservative
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Clarke, ON
Because of the precedent set by Mr. Turnbull, no. I think we've been working....
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Karina Gould
Colleagues, you will have subamendment six to CPC-13 in your inboxes.
Mr. Lawrence, you have the floor.
Conservative
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Clarke, ON
I believe another member wants to comment on that, so I will stand down and allow Mr. Kram to do so, unless there's someone else on the list.
Conservative
Michael Kram Conservative Regina—Wascana, SK
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
I'm pleased to have the opportunity to speak to the amendment moved by my colleague Mr. Lawrence.
It's my understanding that Bill C-30 seeks to lower the CPP contribution limit from 9.9% to 9.5%. That doesn't sound like a particularly large number, but given that the Canada pension plan is a very important part of this country's social safety net, on which many seniors depend for their standard of living, it's important that we be prudent in making sure that we identify any potential ramifications of this decision.
It's my understanding that the chief actuary officer has provided to the committee a statement that the minimum contribution to the CPP should be 9.2% if the CPP is going to be sustainable long-term. As we all know, this is just an estimate. It depends on many different things and many factors that influence economic performance. For example, what happens if people start living longer? What happens if people have a longer life expectancy and collect CPP benefits into their eighties and nineties and beyond? What will that mean to the sustainability of the Canada pension plan? What happens if more people opt to collect CPP closer to 60 or closer to 70? Have all these factors been accounted for in the figure that was provided by the chief actuary officer? What happens if economic performance increases or decreases?
We have to take into consideration the performance of the investment portfolio, which is obviously not carved in stone. They're just estimates and well-educated guesses that the chief actuary officer has to make. If the investment performance deteriorates, what will that mean to the long-term sustainability of the Canada pension plan?
We also have to consider that the investment portfolio is adjusted on an ongoing basis. Sometimes the investments will be in one sector versus another. Sometimes the investments will be moved from one country to another. Have we considered the sustainability of the countries in which we are making these investments? We certainly don't want to rush into any decisions that we may live to regret in the future.
For all these reasons, I think it's pretty reasonable to have this study take place. I hope that all members of the committee will support the subamendment that was moved by my colleague Mr. Lawrence.
That should do it for now, Madam Chair.
Conservative
Matt Strauss Conservative Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON
Hi, Chair. It's nice to see you again.
I see we have two screens in the committee room this time, so it would be nice if one of the screens had the follow-along. I still think it would improve the discussion from every corner.
Liberal
Conservative
Matt Strauss Conservative Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON
I know, but it's good to have it in real time. I don't have the random access working memory to—
Liberal
Conservative
Matt Strauss Conservative Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON
I think it super matters.
I'm new here, but sometimes a fresh perspective is worthwhile. Just because something has been done one way all along, that doesn't mean it always has to be done that way. I would love to see more openness to suggestions for improvement.
As for the subamendment, I'm merely arriving now. I want to voice my strong concurrence on the subamendment. I can see that a lot of work went into its preparation. This level of nuance is extremely commendable. I'm very proud of the team that put it together. I think they were up all night.
It's a shame that something as important as an economic update implementation measure has to be as rushed as it is. That might be coming with this fresh perspective. It seems like something that could have taken a lot more time or could have had a lot more time budgeted for it than it had.
It's always a good time to voice my surprise at how silly some of the stuff that happens here is. We probably would have had an agreement from both sides on that particular statement at this particular time.
It's nice to see Mr. Sawatzky chuckling. I haven't seen him in a while—not since yesterday.
To familiarize everyone with the text of the subamendment, it says, “The report prepared under subsection (1)”—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Karina Gould
It's already been read into the record, Mr. Strauss. We're trying to avoid repetition, so if you could make your argument, that would be appreciated.
Conservative
Matt Strauss Conservative Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON
That is commendable. I despise repetition. I didn't know that had occurred.
Mr. Sawatzky is really losing it over there. How long has he been here? Someone should sub him out.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Karina Gould
Mr. Strauss, please speak to the subamendment. This is clause-by-clause. We try to take it seriously.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Karina Gould
If you have arguments to make in favour or against, you're welcome to do that.
Conservative
Matt Strauss Conservative Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON
Mr. Turnbull isn't here. I thought he made a good point yesterday.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Karina Gould
Mr. Strauss, we're not supposed to talk about the whereabouts of individuals.
Conservative
Matt Strauss Conservative Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON
I'm sorry. I didn't realize that was a committee rule. I thought that was just in the chamber.
Conservative
Matt Strauss Conservative Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON
I appreciate your tutelage on that point, Chair.
Yesterday, another committee member, who may or may not be here at the present time, made the point that Conservatives frequently oppose measures to increase red tape. I'll be honest with the committee. I thought that was a really good point. Having commended all of the work that went into this particular subamendment, I also have to voice my concern on that point. It does seem like these endless reports could increase billable hours from the public service. I don't want to see that.
As you're aware, Chair, I have just arrived. Hopefully, I can talk about my own presence or absence in the room. I think there are good points to be made on both sides. I'm interested to see how the debate grows and how it evolves. Hopefully, it can be organic and bipartisan. I will make my decision on how I'm going to vote on this one only when the vote occurs.
Liberal
