Human Resources Committee on Nov. 2nd, 2006

[François Roy]

I just want to add that the current environment is such that we should be investing more in social development. And yet, we see the government making significant budget cuts even as we are swimming in surpluses.

Mention was made earlier of the fact that there are 150,000 homeless people here in Canada. But that is a very conservative figure. At the present time, based on our analysis...

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Excuse me, but I want to move on. I only have a couple of minutes left, and I have another question that I want to ask.

Ms. Kirk.

[Teri Kirk]

We need to lay off about 35% of our workforce who were engaged in programs that the federal government had initiated and financed. They are divided into three broad categories. One is something called the Knowledge Development Centre, which was a national initiative to help charities become more knowledgeable about federal regulations, such as under the Lobbyists Registration Act, charity law, and the taxation of charities. That activity centre is eliminated.

We're working with Heritage on trying to solve insurance crises for organizations that try to run summer camps, for example, for disabled children. They face liability costs that are through the roof, and many in the sector were very much looking forward to trying to come together through that initiative to deal with insurance challenges, as well as some important research on the sector.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Was there a dollar amount?

[Teri Kirk]

I don't know the exact dollar amount. Frankly, there are some sensitivities. We have not given notice to employees about talking about this in a public forum, but it's certainly in the range of several million dollars.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

I have a question for Mr. Williamson, specifically about what you feel the role of government is to fund external advocacy, regardless of what it's for. Oftentimes in the past, however, we've seen that it has been in favour of its own particular agenda.

[John Williamson]

First, there's actually one correction about how Revenue Canada treats advocacy versus charitable organizations. If a charity exists, they're permitted to issue a tax receipt in their work. Their advocacy organization, their lobbying, if you like, is limited to 20% of their budget. Advocacy organizations do not have charitable status, but they then have no limitation placed on their advocacy of ideas. So there is a difference between charities that are actually doing work or educational work and are delivering services and an advocacy organization, which is what the Canadian Taxpayers Federation is. We promote ideas, we push ideas, and then we talk about them in the public square.

Every year, the Government of Canada spends $26 billion on grants and contributions to organizations large and small, big businesses, libraries, up and down, throughout society. Of that, $6 billion to $8 billion goes to fund activities of special interest groups, non-governmental organizations, and third party groups. I can't stand before you here today and say that all of that $6 billion to $8 billion is being used for political pressure, and it would be irresponsible just to cut it out, because in that there certainly is some good work being done.

Having said that, the Government of Canada—or any government, for that matter—should not be funding political opinion. Far too often, what we hear from some of these groups being cut is that they truly believe they are actually neutral, that they are independent, and that they come to their conclusion without any political viewpoint, which is completely false.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Jean-Claude D'Amours]

Sorry, Mr. Williamson. You will have to come back in another round.

[John Williamson]

Okay, I think you get my point.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Jean-Claude D'Amours]

Thank you, Mr. Lake.

We will now start the second round of questioning for five minutes each, starting with Ms. Brown.

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Williamson, we're talking about consultation by ministers as to consequences of actions, and we found out this morning that most of the groups, including yours, were not consulted about these changes.

I'm wondering if you were consulted about being in the tax business. I wonder if you—and you represent taxpayers—were consulted about the income trust tax changes.

[John Williamson]

No, I think that was a surprise for everyone.

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Okay. Good.

Then we shouldn't all feel so bad because the groups that provide human services at the community level with the help of volunteers weren't consulted about the cuts affecting them. Nor was Mr. Williamson consulted about the cuts or the changes affecting the particular group he serves.

[John Williamson]

That's actually incorrect.

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

You just said you weren't consulted.

[John Williamson]

Income trust is not something we advocate on.

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

That's the most recent impact on taxpayers. Believe me, my emails tell me they're affected.

But then we have a finance minister who has a reputation for not consulting. I wouldn't be surprised if he did not consult the minister this committee refers its information and advice to. I'm pretty sure he didn't consult the good people over on the other side of the table, who seem to have a better understanding of civil society and community than these cuts would indicate.

My first question is to Ms. Kirk, who is responding to all her member groups, and I'd like to know what she has in her coffee to keep herself so calm, when in fact I'm sure she's facing outrage. I would like to get some of whatever it is.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Teri Kirk]

Those are very fair comments, Ms. Brown. We spend a lot of time thinking about what positions to bring forward here. There's no doubt about it; there's a lot of upset in the sector about these public policy and funding changes.

On the other hand, I think all of us who are engaged in our communities—and I think everyone around the table is, from hockey to libraries, and so on—have to focus on how best to move forward and what our ways of serving this community are in order to make sure it remains viable, because it is vulnerable. As somebody indicated, we look around the world and see governments changing, and these sectors largely disappearing.

So we're really asking for three positive things. It's really one and three activities within that bundle. Let's have a partnership with government—with the federal government, which can even endure changes in government—that addresses how we will finance and work with this sector, and what kind of partnership is in place. Let's look at some investment funding. Grants and contributions over the last 10 to 12 years have been reduced to the point where they cost organizations almost more to comply with and apply for than their benefit. Let's look at some longer-term investment instruments.

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Thanks, Ms. Kirk. I have such a short time.

I would take issue with one of the witnesses who thinks the government has a deep misunderstanding of the activities of civil society. I wouldn't call it a misunderstanding; I would call it ignorance, and a misunderstanding, therefore, of the impact of the cuts. But I don't think it's that. We have a government that does not want to be burdened by the facts. The proof is the cutback to the Canadian Policy Research Networks, and the new examples we found out this morning, to the Alpha database and library.

They don't want to know, and the reason is that they have a different view of society than the healthy, pluralistic society that Canada has become, with all this activity among volunteers and citizens interacting with each other to build a civil society. The proof of that is the Prime Minister's own statement before he was the Prime Minister, when he said that if he became the Prime Minister of this country, in two years we would not recognize the country. No one really knew what that meant at the time, except those of us who had heard some of his earlier speeches.

The lack of respect for civil society and the volunteer sector that is shown by these cuts, the lack of consultation, the lack of discussion, the lack of consultation with those who deal with many volunteer groups, like Ms. Kirk, suggests that it isn't a misunderstanding. It's the moving forward to a different kind of society, one that is characterized more by huge expenditures into the military. There was $1 billion announced on Monday or Tuesday of this week. That is probably the same $1 billion they're saving, taking off your backs. There is much more money put into police and much more money set aside for more prison cells for the anticipated increase in prisoners—this is taken from the budget speech.

Mr. Roy and Mr. Laporte are absolutely right. You put the money in to keep people busy and helping one another, training them to do good work, or you put it in at the other end. This government's own budget suggests that they are going to put it in at the other end, with more police, more jails, a bigger army, more deadly equipment.

[A voice]

Get the American crime rate, right?

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Exactly.

The interesting thing is the states in the United States, often referred to as the red states, that have those very strict and punitive laws and large police forces also show the highest incidence of social problems, the kinds of social problems that your organizations are trying to prevent or eradicate.

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Jean-Claude D'Amours]

Thank you, Ms. Brown. You're out of time.

The next five minutes will be shared by Ms. Bonsant and Mr. Lessard.

[France Bonsant, Bloc, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

I would like to talk about the Summer Career Placement program. I have been working on this file for the last two years. If you're wondering why you haven't received a response from the Minister, well, if it's any consolation, neither have I. She is not in much of a hurry to provide answers.

Last year, we looked at 14 recommendations regarding the Summer Career Placement program. Everyone around the table agreed to increase the hourly rate, whether they were Conservative, NDP, Liberal or Bloc Québécois members of Parliament. Indeed, we felt that this sometimes penalized the profession. But now we're talking not only about the secondary level, but the university level as well. And in response to our 14 recommendations, we received an utterly simplistic letter from the Minister saying that she did not approve of them, but she didn't disapprove of them either.

You are from Montreal. I'd like to know whether you ever had an opportunity to talk to students living in rural areas who only have access to jobs in non-profit organizations. Have you heard any complaints about a lack of funding or resources for students living in rural areas?

[François Laliberté-Auger]

A large proportion of the members of our federation live in many different regions of Quebec. There is no doubt that this kind of program allows a great many of them to find a job, particularly in regions where the unemployment rate is high. When it is a first job, this kind of program is extremely useful.