Human Resources Committee on May 29th, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Order, please.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, November 22, 2006, the committee will now commence a study on Bill C-284, an act to amend the Canada Student Financial Assistance Act.

We'll have two panels. The first one will be Mr. Regan—welcome, Mr. Regan, good to see you back—for 45 minutes, and the second will start at 4:15.

We also have a notice of motion. Mr. Savage, we'll save some time to deal with your motion at end of the meeting.

Mr. Regan, it's all yours. How much time would you like?

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

I have a 44-minute speech, so that will leave a minute for questions and answers.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

This committee, as you know, works very well together, so we would be happy to let you speak for 44 minutes.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

I haven't timed it, but I'm thinking this should take maybe ten minutes.

Mr. Chairman, it is nice to rejoin the committee in a different capacity this time, after an absence since Christmas.

Mr. Chairman, this country's future prosperity and well-being increasingly depend on having a highly skilled, highly trained, and highly innovative workforce. Education, especially post-secondary education, which includes community colleges, is essential to develop the best-trained, highly skilled, and most innovative Canadians. And of course that's something we heard a lot about in this committee last year, during the study of employability and our study of the skills shortage: the importance of developing and continuing to develop a very highly educated and skilled workforce.

Ironically, a new report was put out today by the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation. The main conclusion was that federal and provincial tax credits are bad policy that do little to encourage enrolment. When you combine that fact with statistics that recently found that as many as 36% of high school graduates cite financial reasons as a barrier to higher education, you know that something has to change.

I believe that Bill C-284 can be part of that change. I'm not suggesting for one minute that it is the be-all and end-all and that it's the full package. I think it's one element of what needs to be done, but it can allow more high school graduates to go on to university or community college. It can be meshed with other programs to remove barriers to Canadians from low-income families, disadvantaged groups, the disabled, and new Canadians. It can help us develop a highly skilled, innovative, and knowledgeable workforce.

As members of Parliament, we need to take measures to reduce financial barriers standing in the way of students seeking greater access to post-secondary education, including grant programs, and to offset the high and growing costs of tuition. This bill doesn't require us to invent or reinvent the wheel. It's built on an established program that has been successful. It's a very clear and simple solution that is both easy to administer and avoids jurisdictional negotiations with the various provinces.

Let me give you some of the highlights as I see them.

Bill C-284 expands the Canada access grants, a program that provides financial assistance to students. Currently, access grants are only available for the first and last years of study for those who are from low-income families. This bill would extend the availability of these grants to all years of study for those from low-income families.

The goal of Bill C-284 is to break down barriers to higher education. It also creates a statutory basis for the Canada access grants, making it much more difficult to cancel or change the program in the future. I know there are some concerns about that, and I think there may be an opportunity to provide for regulations to increase the amount and add indexation, for example, and I'm sure we'll hear about that from colleagues.

I'm afraid we have taken a step backwards In the past two budgets in terms of making education the priority that it needs to be for a strong and economically healthy Canada. Today's study on Canada's tuition and education tax credits is clear proof that providing an $80 tax break on books is not the answer, Mr. Chairman. A cheque that comes next April doesn't help a low-income student get into university and pay the tuition this fall, right? That's the problem. And the move this spring to kill thousands of jobs created out of the summer career placement program was nothing short of a disaster, as I think many colleagues on all sides know. But if we want to invest in our future and our children's future, we need to invest in education at both the university and college levels. Bill C-284 is one way that can be done, and it doesn't require a big, expensive, new administration or long-drawn-out jurisdictional battles with the provinces. It's a very straightforward solution that builds on an existing program and can help remove barriers to higher education.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you.

Since, Geoff, you're not here for long, why don't we look at two rounds of five minutes each.

Do you want to get started, Mr. Savage?

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Thank you, Chair.

I want to thank my colleague, Mr. Regan.

This is very important. In my view, this is one of the most important things we can do, particularly for students. When I look at the issue of post-secondary education in Canada, I think one can make both an economic case for something like this--an economic case that, for the country, we have to maximize the human potential of all Canadians--and a social justice case for the individual. People need an opportunity to maximize their own skills to better take part in the wealth that is Canada.

Of course, Mr. Regan comes from Nova Scotia, as I do, where we have the distinction of having the highest tuitions in Canada. Tuitions are somewhere in the area of $6,000, on average. It's higher than that in some jurisdictions. When I graduated from Dalhousie University, my tuition in the last year was $1,170. Mr. Regan is much older than I am, so I suspect that the tuition was even less when he went, making the gap more significant compared to the current day.

Today we saw the release of information from the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation. They talked about how tax credits are criticized and how money is more effective as loans or grants. I think if we're really going to get at the heart of the issue, the issue is how we get people into university or community college--post-secondary education overall--who otherwise wouldn't go.

Tinkering with the tax system helps some students a small amount. It is $80 on textbooks, but $80 on a tuition of $6,000 or $7,000 is pretty small potatoes.

I wonder if you could just expand a little bit on the benefit of investing directly in needs-based grants as opposed to tax measures.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Well, as I was saying earlier, I think the problem with tax credits, as we've seen today in the report from the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation, is, in fact, that the person who is trying to go to school in September doesn't get the help they need when they need it to pay their tuition. Getting a tax credit eight months later doesn't do it, especially an $80 tax credit, which isn't much toward the cost of books these days.

I hope the government will in fact decide that it should move forward. As colleagues will know, the Speaker has ruled that this requires a royal recommendation. There's been no indication from the government that it intends to give that royal recommendation. Still, I'm going to remain hopeful on that and hope the government will change its mind. Because I see this as something that would benefit Canadians. If all parties decided that it makes sense to do it, why not move forward and do it?

Really, in terms of access, it's important. You talked about the cost of education those many, many decades after I was there, and of course after you were there--young fellow. But it is high in Nova Scotia. It's not just a problem in our province; it's all across the country and in many places. Many students face the challenge of paying for tuition. Quebec, for example, has the benefit of having a freeze on tuition. It may still be a challenge for some, but not for others.

Across the country, generally, it remains a big problem. Access doesn't just mean that you put in ramps and so forth for people with disabilities. It also means that you help students who are low-income or who have disabilities to get access and pay the tuition. That's what we're talking about here. I think it's obvious that there's a need for it.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

The former government recognized the importance of the Canada access grants and the great help they have provided to students. But there is a need to expand that. The economic update of 2005 included $550 million over five years to extend Canada access grants for low-income families to all years of undergraduate education. In essence, its the proposal you have adopted in this measure.

I think it's really important that we understand that you are trying to do something very specific on what I consider to be the number one issue in the post-secondary environment, which is access.

There are a lot of needs. Universities need infrastructure; universities have deferred maintenance. We need to keep the pressure on research. We made a lot of strides, up until the last government was elected, in terms of research and innovation. The economic update put more in that. We've seen some since then, but not as much.

Access, to me, is the biggest issue. You're not trying to cure all the issues of post-secondary education, as I read this, Mr. Regan. What you're trying to do is say that you think we need to do something to make sure that students from low-income families can get to university. An $80 tax credit doesn't do it. Making scholarships untaxable is not of any advantage to these people. If we're actually going to move people who can't go to university or community college in there, this is the way to do it. This is a very specific instrument for those people.

Is that a fair assumption?

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Yes.

You talked about issues like infrastructure. Clearly, that's a problem across the country. We have many buildings at universities that were built back in the sixties, and they're coming to a point now where they're having real problems with those buildings. Or as you say, there's a deferred maintenance problem, because universities have put off doing maintenance. We've seen that a great deal in our part of the country, and I think it's the case across the country.

There are other challenges, obviously, and for all students, not just low-income students. Other students can come out of university with a big debt load. The cost is a real problem. But this bill is seeking to address one aspect, and that is the aspect of low-income students and making it a little easier for those students to ensure that they aren't prevented from getting that post-secondary education because of a lack of income.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Thank you very much.

I congratulate you on this bill.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Mr. Savage and Mr. Regan.

We're now going to move to our next questioner, Mr. Lessard, for five minutes, please.

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to greet our colleague, whom I'm pleased to see. We worked together on this committee, and it was very constructive.

Once again, I think the bill before us is very positive, to the extent that it offers support, particularly for students who come from low-income families.

To start with, the Bloc will support this bill. We are aware, of course, that our support stems mainly from the fact that the federal Canada Student Financial Assistance Act contains a provision that allows Quebec to opt out with full compensation. That's what enables us to be free to support this bill. We won't speak much so as to enable our colleagues from the other parties who are more directly involved to do so.

It must be recognized that Bill C-284, like student financial assistance, does not promote the best training as such. In actual fact, the quality of training is not necessarily improved because this is a provincial jurisdiction

We think it is important that federal transfers be increased to enable the provinces to better meet their education obligations. As you will recall, the Council of the Federation made an effort to improve transfers, but it failed in that regard.

Mr. Regan, you were on the government's side for some time. Today, you've taken some distance from the situation. Do you believe that additional efforts should be made to improve federal transfers for education? At the same time, do you believe that part of the problem we are currently encountering, which requires that this type of bill be introduced, stems precisely from the fact that federal transfers have been cut over the years?

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Thank you for your questions and comments, Mr. Lessard.

I agree with you that quality is not necessarily improved by these measures. Access isn't exactly a question of quality. If this program enables more people to pay university expenses, if more students attend university because there's a little more money to do so, they will attend courses with other students, and that has nothing to do with the quality of education. If I had been completely satisfied with the situation regarding universities and students, I would not have introduced this bill.

I agree that we must still provide assistance to universities, and that is one of the reasons why our government increased payments to the provinces. Is it still necessary to continue increasing those payments? Absolutely.

You referred to the cuts that were made. We've discussed that a number of times in the past. When I was elected for the first time, in 1993, the government was facing a very serious financial situation. The situation was so bad that we had to make changes. As a result of those changes, the economy and the government's financial position vastly improved. Consequently, we were able to spend in order to make improvements. We were able to make payments for drugs, for example, and for other things. We continued paying for education, health and so on. Without those efforts, the Government of Canada would have had a lot of trouble continuing at the same rate.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Mr. Lessard.

Madame Savoie, five minutes, please.

[Denise Savoie, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thank you.

I very much appreciate the bill that you've tabled. I think we realize, as you mentioned in the report, that there is a serious problem in Canada and that we have to find ways to assist students who are falling into incredible amounts of debt.

In speaking to some intergovernmental researchers last week who focused on post-secondary education, they mentioned, as you mentioned, the problem that occurred in the nineties when transfers were cut and direct funding assistance was made to parents of students by way of tax credits and so on. I think we've all read The Globe and Mail report mentioning that this has led to an inadequate patchwork that has left students and their parents in a real quandary.

In a way, this proposes to help students at the time they need it. I think we're all aware that there are two ways of helping students. That's through grants, at the time they need them, or reduction of student fees, which is not within our purview, except by way of the transfers that my colleague has already alluded to. You also mentioned that this does not attempt to solve all problems for low-income people.

I have a couple of questions. I'm wondering if you are going to consider some amendments. It seems to me that the bill excludes mature students who have been out of school for more than four years. To me, that seems to be problematic. Many of them I've met in my riding, in my office, would fall in that category, but they would be excluded.

It also excludes middle-income students in some parts of the country. Middle income in one part of the country is not middle income in another given other cost-of-living factors such as housing, as it is in British Columbia. So that's a concern. Through an amendment, there would be ways of phasing the grant system to allow students of middle income to benefit from it at some point. That's a question I have.

I guess the other problem is that it excludes students who are financially independent from their families. If the bill you're proposing, rather than being income-based, were needs-based, as the report you referred to suggested, this might alleviate that problem.

I guess those are three questions. I have a couple of others, but we'll see if I have time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

You've have a minute and a half, Geoff.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

First of all, it's kind of funny when you say “what I consider amendments”. Clearly the bill is in the hands of the committee. As a private member, I'm at the disposal of the committee in terms of what it does with this bill.

Last night I was going over the second reading debate comments. I read your comments about needs-based. Were you talking about the fact that there's a different cost of living in different places, for example? Is that what you were meaning, or was it something else? I'd like to talk more about that and hear your thoughts on that.

[Denise Savoie, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Okay.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Dealing with mature students is of interest.... I think we also have to consider the cost of all these things. That's something for the government to look at. I want this to have the maximum chance of being adopted to start with, to make this one step. I don't personally feel we should exclude mature students, but I'm also anxious that we do something that might actually be adopted.

In terms of middle-income students, should we have programs that help all students? Absolutely. Again, this bill is addressed to low-income students. That's the intent here.

I think that answers the main questions.

With respect to financially independent students, I'd also like to discuss with you how that works at the moment, how they're excluded, and at what point they are considered on their own income. At some point it seems to me that they are considered on their own income and not on their parents' income.

The problem is this. If you have a young person who's saying they're financially independent when in fact they can get assistance from their parents and their parents are very well off, then you shouldn't be giving them help when somebody really needs it. To me, the key is to get this to the people who need it the most. If you can find a way to identify those who won't get that kind of assistance and make sure you identify the right people, why not?

[Denise Savoie, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Well, I was thinking--

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

That's all the time we have; in fact we're over time. You'll have to get in on the next round.

We're going to move to the last round.

Ms. Yelich, for five minutes.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

I'll be sharing my time with Patrick.

You mentioned the millennium report. I just want to mention that Statistics Canada recently released a report stating that financial constraints were not the major reason why youths from low-income families do not attend university.

You also talked about the investments in education. I want to say that, yes, we do think it is important, and the tax credits are important because they're part of the big picture. We have a bigger picture, I think, than you have, with $5.4 billion annually to support the students. We believe eliminating the federal tax on the scholarships and bursaries was a very important aspect of it, this year particularly.

When you want to talk about lower-income people or people who don't have access to university, some of the immigrants who have moved into my city have been able to access grants and were very happy to be able to get scholarships. It can indeed help even those who perhaps don't have a lot of money.

We expanded the eligibility for the Canada student loans and reduced the expected parental contributions. We did put $5 billion into research grants and loans for students, and provided $2 billion through grants, scholarships, and bursaries. We also provided apprenticeship incentives. I think we were looking at the big picture.

Of course, this is just another need; as Ms. Savoie said, maybe you're missing the middle class as well, or some of the people who maybe can take advantage of that. I think even those in the lower income will take advantage of those costs. My daughter went to university, and I think she would appreciate it. It's something that I think maybe you should have considered.

You also said that you were here when this legislation started, and you know it's good. How do you know it's good? How do you know it's successful? It's only going into its second year. There's no analysis.

The reason I'm asking is that I did meet with the department, as I think you did as well. I asked the department what they thought was the measurement of success here. With these grants, do we know that young people are accessing university because of it, and if they are, are they completing university or are they completing the first year? Is this what they need? Do you have any measurement of success?

Most programs in a prudent government would do that, would want to know how successful these programs are, or if we should perhaps look at it another way to have young people or lower-income people and families access these grants.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Mr. Chairman, through you to Ms. Yelich, I've certainly heard from student groups and from students who have benefited from this program and speak very highly of it and are strongly in favour of it.

You know, it's a new program, so I'm not surprised to hear that the department doesn't have a full analysis yet. But I don't think you're suggesting it's not a good program.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

No, I'm not, because the other suggestion was why don't we leave it in regulations. That way it's flexible. If it's not put it into legislation, we have the flexibility to make changes easily. With legislation, those changes could not be made easily.

I just think that's wise advice if you're doing prudent governing.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

First of all, I think it makes sense to put the basic program into legislation, to ensconce it and give it some kind of permanence. However, the criticism that you need to have the ability to make regulations to set what the amounts are, in order to be able to increase the amounts, to me makes sense. I'd certainly be open to that kind of change.

But I still think that putting the basic program into legislation, giving it a statutory base, is a good idea so that government can't decide, willy-nilly, they're going to cancel this now, and stop the program.