Human Resources Committee on Nov. 28th, 2013

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

I want to say that the mining companies, the extractive industries, that typically operate in northern and aboriginal areas need to come to the table. We're seeing more and more of that collaboration. It's very exciting.

But let's be honest: there have been decades of experience with many of these programs that have failed. I think we have to study those that have succeeded, and the private sector commitment is key to that.

We don't want to just fund a cycle of supporting organizations that take money for training for the sake of keeping their organizations afloat. That's not what this is about. We have to get the employers committing to hiring these people. There are some great examples. With Cameco, the uranium miner in northern Saskatchewan, approximately 50% of their workforce is aboriginal.

All those other extractive companies...and they are making efforts, to their credit. I was in Saskatchewan on the weekend, and I was told by the Saskatchewan Apprenticeship and Trade Certification Commission that the number of young aboriginals registered for apprenticeship programs in that province is almost equivalent to the percentage of aboriginals in the Saskatchewan population. So there are some real signs for optimism.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

Thank you very much.

That concludes this round.

We'll go on to Madam Sims.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Thank you, Minister.

I'm glad you mentioned your speech in Vancouver, because I was told about your speech and had a conversation about it with Mr. Sinclair as well. We were—

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

[Inaudible—Editor]

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

I can tell you that I am just so delighted and we were so pleased to hear you say the obvious, and that is that companies and organizations have a role to play in training their workers.

Also, you mentioned the OECD report. I was reading the same report. It was quite a shocker to me that the private sector in Canada is at the bottom for reinvesting in training and skills development of its workforce. I think those are obviously things we need to address, as well as the wages, the salaries.

I've talked to some employers, too, Minister, because I feel that I need to really get in and hear what their concerns are. When you start discussing with them what they're paying for some of those jobs and the area that the jobs are being offered in, I want to say to them: “Would you be able to make a living off this? Do you have to wonder why people are not applying?”

I really want to talk about good, quality child care. I know it's something that's really close to your heart, Minister. In this area, when we think of our children and our future, quality child care has social, economic, and health benefits for children and the parents, but I would say that it has a greater impact on our overall economy, and the economic gains should not be underestimated.

There is proven evidence that a quality child care program actually gives the economy a boost, not only in the jobs it creates, but also in that you have fewer people who will take time off because their children are sick. People are more comfortable at work. They are not stressed out and worried about their children. Also, more people are able to re-enter the workforce because they can find quality day care.

Yet government spending on early learning and child care in Canada falls far short of that in other OECD countries. I'm glad we mentioned the OECD earlier as well. Is it within your upcoming plans to work with the provinces and territories to make child care a priority?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Well, I would say that we've already done that through our actions, which matter more than words. In fact, our government spends $6.5 billion per year on various programs to assist with childhood development, early childhood development, and child care, including, of course, the universal child care benefit, the tax measures such as the child care expense deduction, and the child tax credit.

As well, of course, we have a number of other programs that alleviate families with children in poverty, which is one of the reasons, we're very proud to see, that the number of children living in poverty is down quite significantly over the past several years.

So I think we are making progress in this respect.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Minister, I want to pursue that a little. When you look at the economic gains of investing in a national child care program—and proven gains, because we can learn from other countries in Europe on this as well—it seems to me that when we're looking at lifting people out of poverty, I would point out that recent research indicates that one of the key indicators for lifting people out of poverty is also a quality child care program, because it makes it possible for people to go out to work. Then they pay taxes, and that feeds into the system.

I know that you have listed things, but I'm really going to urge you, Minister, because I know how open-minded you are, to pursue this a little more in looking at a national program.

Minister, I have one more question. It's something that niggles at one when lying in bed at night. It's the Canada job grant. It doesn't seem to address the problem it claims to solve. How will it solve the coming labour shortage, given that it is only for short-term training—for up to a year, I've heard recently in the media—while projected shortages are in occupations that require multiple years of schooling and/or training?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Well, I'm delighted to hear that the job grant is keeping you up at night, Ms. Sims.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Mr. Kenney, I can tell you, I was getting ready.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

A very quick answer, please.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

The answer is, it will not solve the skills gap problem. It is, we believe, one small but important effort at a much broader series of remedies that are needed to solve that problem.

Why don't we try something different for once? Why don't we actually try engaging employers and identifying the folks who have the aptitude to work and try identifying the incremental training they'll receive with a guaranteed job at the end of it? In a sense, this is a simplified version of what works in parts of western Europe, which has much lower levels of youth unemployment and much more efficient labour markets.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

Thank you very much.

On to the last questioner, Mrs. McLeod, and to the end of the first hour.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister.

I'm going to start by making a brief comment. I appreciated the thoughts on how this homelessness partnering strategy required some consultation, and some opportunities to get it going and flowing. I have to say that I see the results in the riding that I represent, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo. There's now actually a transfer, and there's a group that is very nimble and agile and are excellent at being strategic about what and how it gets funded.

I hear regularly from the opposition calls for a national strategy on this and a national strategy on that, and, to be frank, I love the words “homelessness partnering strategy”, because what we're doing is supporting the people who know how to create the solutions in the community. That's just a general comment, but perhaps you could talk a little bit more about the model and why it's being developed.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Sure. I have to admit, whenever I hear about a national strategy for X, Y, or Z—there's an endless list, and you could fill this room with proposals for national strategies—what I often actually hear is a national strategy for blank cheques for various other orders of government or organizations. Often those national strategies, I think, are essentially an expression of what economists would call rent-seeking behaviour.

I believe in, as you've just intimated, the principle of subsidiarity. I believe that those orders of government, those organs of civil society, that are closer to real people and their lives on the ground are much more effective and efficient at solving social problems than the office towers in Ottawa. That's why, as a general philosophical statement, I think all of this talk about national strategies misses the point. It's the folks in Kamloops who know that they have a particular population, with particular needs with respect to homelessness, who are going to be far more effective. If we can be there to support them through things such as the homelessness partnership strategy, I think—I know—we'll get better results.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Thank you.

My next focus is how we support university program students, a conversation that I have fairly regularly when I meet with some of the students from universities. As you start to go through the list, you look at the transfers to the provinces, you look at the income tax writeoffs that are available, you look at things such as the Canada research grants and the whole host of ways the federal government supports students. Then we get into the conversation around the student loans. Again, it completely puzzles me—because there are a number of people who are able to support their children through university—why students would advocate for support for everyone, when, really, if you need to focus your resources, you need to focus them on the students who are perhaps most in need.

I note that in the supplementary estimates (B), there's $1.3 to offset Canada student loans, but could you talk a little bit about the student loan program and it being a little bit more targeted? Again, to me, philosophically, why should the taxpayers help my children go to university when there are perhaps people who could use this support in a better way?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

That's a very broad question.

I would say that your last point is quite right. I hear some interest groups—I won't mention names....Canadian Federation of Students—suggesting that there be basically “free” post-secondary education, of course it's not free. It's money taxed from people, taxed from wealth creators, taxed from small business people who are already working seven days a week to keep their heads above water.

The data on this are clear and irrefutable, that those kinds of transfers, while important—and we of course have to support post-secondary education—represent an upward transfer of income in our society, often from working families or what we could call blue-collar families, or families of modest means, to families higher up the income spectrum.

I wish the NDP would join us on this. We have to be very careful. We have to look at post-secondary education policy through a social equity lens. That's why our government, by the way, created the post-secondary education savings plan, which puts a grant into those accounts for low-income families. They may not have the capacity to save, but we're going to help to prime the pump so that when their kids turn 18, they have a few thousand dollars in the account and then the dream of university becomes a reality for them. That's the kind of thing we are doing for them right now in federal and post-secondary education policy.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

Thank you very much. That concludes the first hour of our meeting.

Before we break, I'd like to thank you, Minister, on behalf of the committee, for being here and taking time out of your schedule to deal with our questions. I can also say, from observing the dialogue here today, that you never fail to show people how passionate you are about whatever task you undertake, and we thank you for that and your service to our country.

Thank you very much.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

I will be back. Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

We'll take a short break while we bring in the second group.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

We'll reconvene.

We welcome some new departmental officials to our witness table, but before doing that, I would like to remind committee members that in the second hour, the senior officials from the Department of Employment and Social Development have come here today prepared to answer questions on the supplementary estimates. I ask members to try to keep their questions to that topic.

We welcome Paul Thompson, assistant deputy minister, processing and payment services branch, to the panel. We would also like to welcome Frank Vermaeten, senior assistant deputy minister, skills and employment branch, and Jacques Paquette, senior assistant deputy minister, income security and social development branch.

Welcome to all. The other ones who were here are staying.

There are no remarks from any of the officials, so we will embark on questioning from members of the committee. Again, please stay on the topic of the supplemental estimates.

Madam Groguhé, you are first.

[Sadia Groguhé, NDP, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Mr. Chair, my question is about the supplementary funds for the Enabling Accessibility Fund. I would like to know how and why the assessment was made that the allocation had to be increased.

[Jacques Paquette]

Thank you for the question.

Actually, the budget has not increased. The program has been renewed. The program was established in 2008, in the amount of $15 million per year for a period of three years. It was then renewed.

In the last budget, the government renewed this program for a longer period. In a way, these funds are the equivalent of a new program. What you see in the supplementary estimates is the total amount for the program for this year.

[Sadia Groguhé, NDP, Saint-Lambert, QC]

So that means that the budgeted funds remain the same, but the time period has been renewed.