Evidence of meeting #31 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cuts.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Janice Charette  Deputy Minister, Department of Human Resources and Social Development

11:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Dean Allison

Order, please.

Pursuant to Standing Orders 81(7) and 108(2) and to the motion adopted by this committee on October 3, 2006, this committee will commence its study on plans and priorities and continue the one on government funding cuts to Human Resources and Social Development Canada.

The minister and the department will have 10 minutes to make their statements, and a question and answer session will follow. This part of the meeting will go for approximately 90 minutes, and after that section of the meeting the committee will discuss its business.

With that, I would like to welcome the minister here today. Thank you for taking time out of your busy schedule. We certainly look forward to your opening statement. Then we'll start with one round of seven minutes, followed by a second round of five minutes, and we'll go from there.

Thank you, Minister Finley, for being here today.

11:15 a.m.

Haldimand—Norfolk Ontario

Conservative

Diane Finley ConservativeMinister of Human Resources and Social Development

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to have this opportunity to appear before the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities to discuss my department's report on plans and priorities.

Joining me today are some of my departmental officials. Starting at the left is Sherry Harrison, who is our HRSD comptroller. To my immediate left is Janice Charette, the new deputy minister. To my right is the deputy head of Service Canada, Hélène Gosselin, and to her right is Karen Kinsley, the president of Canada Mortgage and Housing.

This is our second opportunity to discuss our new government's initiatives since the new department was created last February. As you know, we consolidated the former Department of Human Resources and Skills Development with the former Department of Social Development. The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation is also included in my portfolio.

This is a large ministry with a very significant mandate. With over 24,000 employees, and planned spending of approximately $80 billion, our department is working hard to make a difference in the lives of countless Canadians. We have programs that help Canadians through all the stages of their lives: from maternity benefits and childcare initiatives, to student support; from labour training and support for the homeless, to programs to help older workers and programs for seniors. All these initiatives have a common theme in that we help build the quality of life of Canadians.

In the labour market, for example, we do this by helping to ensure that Canada has a sufficient number of workers to meet the needs of our changing and growing economy. As members of this committee have undoubtedly come to realize during the course of your ongoing employability study, Canada's labour market is strong. But despite the strength of Canada's labour market, too many Canadians with disabilities, recent immigrants, older workers, aboriginals, and low-skilled individuals remain unemployed. As the growth of Canada's labour force inevitably slows due to an aging population, we have an opportunity to tap into this increasingly important, yet underutilized, labour pool.

Across Canada, from the oil sands of Fort McMurray, Alberta, to the fish processing plants of St. George and Blacks Harbour, New Brunswick, a growing number of sectors are facing labour shortages. At the same time, though, we must make sure that Canada has a high-quality work force, with the skills and knowledge to compete globally. We know that globalization is bringing new competitors and new types of competition. In order to effectively compete, we need to raise the skills of individuals to make them more resilient and more adaptable. In order to fully take advantage of the opportunities presented by the prosperity of today, Canada needs an efficient national labour market. We must, therefore, remove the barriers to learning and worker mobility. Canada needs enough workers with the right skills to meet the needs of a growing economy in a competitive world.

Simultaneously, the department administers the government's programs to help some of the most vulnerable in our society. We have a vision for a strong and competitive Canada, where individuals can make choices that will equip them with the skills to live productive and rewarding lives and to participate in our economy and in our society. Budget 2006 announced several initiatives that pursue this vision, Mr. Chairman, and respond to the priorities of Canadians.

For example, since July, parents of children under six have been receiving cheques of $100 per child each month from the universal child care benefit. About two million Canadian children and their families are benefiting from this new initiatives. We've also increased the pension income credit to $2,000. Over the next two years, this will put nearly $900 million into the hands of our seniors. And we've dedicated $1 billion to the post-secondary education infrastructure trust that will support the provinces and territories in modernizing libraries, laboratories, classrooms, and other infrastructure projects.

We've provided a one-time strategic investment of $1.4 billion for the establishment of three housing trusts, with provinces and territories, for affordable housing, for northern housing, and for aboriginals living off-reserve.

By January, we'll have implemented the apprenticeship incentive grant, which will benefit up to 100,000 first and second-year apprentices.

We are also working with partners to examine ways we can address and improve upon existing homelessness programs. In the meantime, we extended the national homelessness initiative to the end of March 2007, and have invested an additional $37 million from funds unspent in the previous year.

And we have recently announced the targeted initiative for older workers. Some $70 million will be available over two years for a new federal-provincial-territorial program to help displaced older workers in vulnerable communities get new jobs.

For all Canadians, the Service Canada delivery network reaches more communities than ever before. The number of service points has increased by 157, for a total of 477. In its first year of operation, Service Canada paid about $70 billion in benefits to nearly eight million Canadians.

Mr. Chairman, we are focusing on priorities that will have a positive impact on the lives of individual Canadians and on the Canadian economy. That is why I have a responsibility to establish priorities, ensure prudent spending of taxpayer dollars, and ensure that programs and initiatives falling within my portfolio achieve results for those groups for whom they were intended.

This is a responsible course of action, and what the majority of Canadians expect and demand from their government.

Mr. Chairman, as a responsible and accountable government, we have reviewed our programs and refocused our activities to ensure that tax dollars are invested in programs that deliver results, that provide value for money, and that reflect the challenges we face as a country, now and in the future.

I want to emphasize that as we move forward in addressing the new priorities of our new government, we will listen to Canadians to ensure that our new investments meet their needs and their interests. In that spirit we have already embarked on several consultation exercises. They include speaking to my many provincial and territorial colleagues, and listening to Canadians. For example, we're working with provinces, business, academia, and interested organizations on the creation of a recognition of foreign credentials.

We're getting ideas and advice from business, communities, experts, and parents on how to move forward with our child care spaces initiative.

We are consulting provinces on national objectives, roles, responsibilities, accountabilities, and results for post-secondary education and training.

We will also continue to work with the sector councils on ways to build a strong and flexible labour force in Canada. In fact, a few weeks ago I met with the Construction Sector Council, which has been doing excellent work.

I've also been consulting with my international colleagues. In Toronto, I hosted my OECD counterparts as we updated the job strategy that has guided our efforts for the past dozen years. More recently, I was in Moscow where I consulted with my G-8 employment and training colleagues.

We consult because we want to get things right before we act, Mr. Chairman. A year from now, when we meet once again to discuss the report on plans and priorities, I will be very pleased to report on how these consultations have been turned into action by this government.

Finally, before I respond to the committee's questions, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to thank all of you for the work you've done and continue to do on your employability study. Your work on this important file will provide useful insight into this very elaborate and very complex issue and will inform the government. I look forward to examining your insights on this issue when your study is complete.

In conclusion, the 21st century requires a new approach to the labour market, an approach that acknowledges the need to address the significant challenges we face and the new realities of a knowledge-based global economy and an aging workforce. As Canada's new government, we are committed to exploring and implementing innovative solutions to the important labour market challenges that lie ahead. I welcome your suggestions and input as to how we can best achieve this.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to speak, and I welcome the committee's questions.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you for this opportunity to address the committee. I will now field your questions.

11:20 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Dean Allison

And I would like to thank you, Minister Finley, for being here once again.

We're going to get started. We've been on the road, and I've been a little bit flexible with the timing. I know everyone wants to get a chance to ask questions, so I'm going to hold you to your seven minutes and five minutes respectively. You can look over here as we get close to those times and I'll give you the signal for a minute, so we can keep everyone going and get a chance to ask as many questions as possible.

Mr. Regan, seven minutes, please.

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Minister, thank you for coming today.

It was interesting to hear you talk about trying to build for a 21st century economy, which seems remarkable to me, since a very important part of it would be building a workforce and obviously providing for literacy for adult Canadians, when your government has cut literacy funding to the tune of $17.7 million. It seems to me it's obvious from these cuts and from comments from your government that you've given up on people who can't read and write and who are trying to learn to read and write.

Why else would the Treasury Board president say the government is not interested in doing repair work after the fact? Or why, for example, would you claim that your meanspirited literacy cuts only affect lobbyists and advocates, when that clearly is not the truth?

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Diane Finley Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON

I would beg to differ with the interpretation, for starters. Literacy is very important. If we're to have a skilled workforce, then we absolutely must make sure that workforce is competent in their literacy and their numeracy skills.

One of the problems we've encountered, and it goes right across a range of ministries, is that over time many of the programs in existence had been allowed to just continue. Canadians elected us because they wanted us to make sure their tax dollars were being spent wisely, and we committed to doing that. We're reviewing all the programs government-wide to make sure they are effective.

One of the areas where we found there were opportunities for improvement was in the delivery of our literacy programs. As we were looking for ways to save Canadians dollars on their tax bill, we said we have to spend responsibly. We want to focus on programs that are going to deliver real results for Canadians in literacy. We want to make sure there are programs that are going to help people learn to read and write, particularly for the workforce.

We are going to be spending over $80 million in this area. That's just in Human Resources and Social Development. There is also a lot of money being spent by other departments, including Citizenship and Immigration.

We are going to be honouring all commitments that have been made to existing programs. We're going forward. We're going to be focusing on projects and evaluating them on the basis of merit, as to whether they're delivering—

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

I want to thank the minister for her answer, but I do have some other questions, so I'd like a chance to ask them. If we could have short answers, I could ask more questions, obviously.

Minister, you have said you're spending more than $80 million on a number of initiatives, but in fact this isn't just for adult literacy, as you know. What I'd like you to agree is that your officials will provide us, by tomorrow morning, with a breakdown of federal spending by your department in the area of adult literacy in 2006-07. I don't want it now; I'd like it by tomorrow morning. I don't want to take too much time right now.

But what I would like to know is, if your cuts to literacy aren't hurting Canadians, then why is it that Wayne Baltzer, a 46-year-old in my province of Nova Scotia, who is trying to get his equivalencies, and is weeks away in fact from getting his high school equivalency diploma, feels he's been written off by this government? And why is it that we see groups like Aurora College in the Northwest Territories, and many others across the country that are doing direct literacy training or who are training literacy teachers, in fact being hurt by these cuts?

How can you say you're only cutting lobbyists and advocates? Are you misinformed? Are you misleading Canadians? Are you simply unaware of what's going on?

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

Diane Finley Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON

We did not say we were cutting where you said. What we said is we're going to focus on real results, and any programs.... We recently had a call for proposals. We are in the process of reviewing all of those applications with an eye to making sure that programs that merit it continue. But we will not be spending money again on, for example, $82,000 to build a website, or $300,000 to answer only 300 phone calls a year. We believe Canadians deserve better and that if we're going to work on literacy, then we need to work on it, not on bad spending.

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

Thank you.

We've heard, Minister, from various groups over the past while—volunteer groups, literacy groups, student groups, and others—that they were never consulted about the devastating cuts that were announced last month. In your own riding, over 800 people have signed a petition opposing the government's ideologically-based cuts to literacy programs.

Earlier this year, you attended a round table in Caledonia in your riding. What was the purpose of that round table? Did you consult with anyone from the Ontario Literacy Coalition, and did you say to them, or anyone else for that matter over the past number of months: “We are looking at possible cuts. How might these cuts affect what you do?”

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

Diane Finley Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON

We do a wide range of consultations on an ongoing basis. I'm consulting with groups, including all the provinces and territories--

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

I didn't say a wide range of groups. I asked a very clear question. Who did you meet with and actually say to them, “There are going to be possible cuts. How might these cuts affect you?” That's the question, Madam Minister, not what groups did you talk to about all kinds of other things.

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

Diane Finley Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON

There was a variety. When we speak with provincial ministers and territorial ministers, we do not limit the subject. We take advantage of the opportunity to consult them on a wide range of subjects.

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

In other words, you didn't actually say to any particular group, “There's a possibility of cuts and how would these cuts affect you?”

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

Diane Finley Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON

When we consult, as I say, we do it on a wide range of subjects. Because there isn't a formal definition of expenditure review topics, it does not mean those issues have not been addressed.

But when we look at our internal records and look at where Canadians' tax dollars are being spent, that's consultation internally and that's dealing with the facts.

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

So what you're saying is that your consultation is looking at your internal records. To me, that seems bizarre. It seems to me that you're claiming you consulted groups, as you're required to do by your own agreement with volunteer groups, for example, that you signed, Madam Minister, back in April. It committed you to consulting with them. Here you're saying you've done that, but in fact you can't give me one example of a group you met with where you indicated they might face cuts and ask how that would affect them. You're claiming you understand how all of these literacy groups who are facing cuts are being affected, but you can't give one example of where you've consulted one of those groups and said to them, “There's a possibility of cuts to your organization. How will it affect what you do?”

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

Diane Finley Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON

I would suggest that we keep these statings in context. They actually amount to two-tenths of 1% of this department's budget.

What we will not be spending money on, again, is $110,000 to develop and print ads about literacy. People know about the problems with literacy. We're not going to pay over $200,000 to one researcher. We're not going to pay $33,000 to an executive director for only 90 days of work. That is not helping the literacy cause whatsoever; that's not helping Canadian taxpayers.

11:30 a.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Dean Allison

Thank you, Mr. Regan.

We're going to move to Mr. Lessard.

Mr. Lessard, you have seven minutes.

11:30 a.m.

Bloc

Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I will restrict my comments to literacy, because thus far, it has perhaps been the most discussed topic in the consultations. There are many other subjects we could broach, but let's continue on with the topic you have just been discussing.

You have said often in the House of Commons or to the committee that it is important to investigate, consult, evaluate, etc. You said it again this morning. I will also comment on the responses you were just given concerning literacy.

With respect to Quebec, I received a letter from the Coalition québécoise against the federal literacy cuts, a letter which was signed by all of the labour confederations, the major community groups, groups that work on literacy and family reunification, etc. I would say that they represent virtually the whole of Quebec's population. The letter says that they are being insulted, because there has not been any consultation and because it is not consistent with the past commitments of the Canadian government. It also seriously jeopardizes the work they have been doing in the field.

When the $1 billion in cuts were announced on September 25, the Minister of Finance and the president of the Treasury Board said that they were eliminating inefficient programs or cutting the fat.

Madam Minister, which of the literacy programs are inefficient? Where is the fat? People don't know where you are making cuts. Can you specify which programs will be cut? Do you yourself know where you will be cutting?

11:30 a.m.

Conservative

Diane Finley Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON

First of all, I'd like to clarify that all of the existing commitments regarding literacy will be honoured, including the entente with Quebec. We are going to be honouring all existing commitments.

Going forward--

11:35 a.m.

Bloc

Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC

Madam Minister, what are you cutting?

11:35 a.m.

Conservative

Diane Finley Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON

I'm going to clarify what wasn't being cut.

11:35 a.m.

Bloc

Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC

I know that is what you want to say, but the people want to know which programs are being targeted. You have cut $17.8 million, almost $18 million out of a total of $80 million. That's not an insignificant percentage. So, what are you cutting? It must be identifiable.

11:35 a.m.

Conservative

Diane Finley Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON

What we do is fund projects, not organizations. There are projects that meet the criteria going forward. They will be evaluated based on their merit and based on their contribution, and then we will be funding them. But as you say, we're going to be honouring all existing commitments. That means we're not cutting things. All we're doing is refocusing going forward, to make sure that there aren't wasteful projects that are being funded.

11:35 a.m.

Bloc

Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC

Madam Minister, if there are projects going forward, it is thanks to the organizations. You say that you fund projects and not organizations, but have you cut funding to organizations? If so, which ones? How are they affected by these cuts? That is what I want to know.

You spoke about your intentions. We are no longer dealing with intentions but rather facts: you have cut almost $18 million out of $80 million. What is being removed from what exists at the moment?

You said that what was involved was organizations. What are the organizations that are going to disappear? It is organizations that implement programs and carry out projects. What cuts have you made? Do you know? If so, which ones?

11:35 a.m.

Conservative

Diane Finley Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON

We have a number of organizations that provide very good services. As long as they are submitting applications for funding for good programs, we will be funding those programs as long as they meet the criteria. We're not going to fund organizations just to keep them alive if they're not delivering value and measurable results for Canadians. That's not our job. Our job is to promote literacy, not just to create jobs. We want to make sure the funding going forward actually gets the results it's intended to.