Industry Committee on Sept. 28th, 2006

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

We'll go to Mr. Masse for five minutes.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

With regard to the CTC cuts, what specific types of savings were there in the actual move?

[Richard Dicerni]

I'm given to understand that a number was identified. A Treasury Board submission went, and they received authorization to spend up to $25 million. It ended up costing about $19 million and change.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

But none of the operations has changed in terms of the presentation from the CTC--that, for instance, they're going to have a French language office here in Ottawa, with a certain amount of staffing and floor plan space? None of that changed, and the savings were just there to that significant degree?

[Richard Dicerni]

What I've described to you is how the case was developed. They had $25 million. Now, it is fair to say that the CTC would have preferred to retain that excess relocation money, as any agency that has a mandate in law to pursue certain goals would have preferred having probably the $5.6 million or $5.7 million retained within its budget, within its base, to do additional initiatives.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Okay, as long as the original mandate of the move didn't change. I'll talk to them about that, to make sure.

Second, I know it's not your responsibility, but the reality is that the Treasury Board's GST decision, to add the GST for American travellers, has provoked responses from industry experts that this is the biggest challenge they've faced since 9/11.

You're in charge of tourism in Canada. What is your response to the fact that this is now put in your lap? Does that change your thoughts in terms of how much the CTC should have in terms of funding to deal with that? Are you going to object to this position? What is going to be your response to deal with this additional challenge?

[Richard Dicerni]

A point of clarification and then a comment.

I thank you for the recent designation/appointment that puts me in charge of tourism in the country.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

From the federal government perspective, in terms of the Canadian Tourism Commission, you are.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Mr. Masse, you've asked a question. Let Mr. Dicerni answer it.

[Richard Dicerni]

Tourism is a highly atomized sector in terms of the number of people--officials and industry people--who are involved in this sector. So I just give the caveat that it's not totally accurate to deem me the Canadian czar of tourism.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

No, for federal programs.

[Richard Dicerni]

With regard to the federal government, as I said, we are quite cognizant of the importance of...and as I said, I have spent some time with both the chair and the president. I intend to meet with them again next month, and to follow that up with a series of other meetings with a view toward enhancing the role of tourism.

At one point I did discuss with them--as it behooves me, being senior official on the tourism file--a number of elements of the tourism industry, to ensure that they be brought to the fore. That's the point I discussed last week with Rod Seiling in Toronto, that there are a number of aspects to tourism that we must collectively make sure that people are aware of. The GST decision is one that was made by government. I referred to some other decisions that have been made--Vancouver, the Olympics, ACOA funding, etc.

So the government is not insensitive, I would say, to the importance of that sector. Hopefully the federal-provincial meeting that I alluded to before will move that further.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Do you have in your plan any funds to be able to work out some broad program with the provinces?

[Richard Dicerni]

I believe fiscal issues are those that fall within the parameters of political ministerial decision-making.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I just wondered if you had some money in your budget--

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Okay, Mr. Masse, thank you.

Mr. McTeague, for five minutes.

[Dan McTeague, Liberal, Pickering—Scarborough East, ON]

Thank you so much for being so diligent in pointing out the mirth and discussions and camaraderie between all of our colleagues here on the committee. I think it's working out very, very well.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Dan McTeague, Liberal, Pickering—Scarborough East, ON]

And I'll see you at the next hockey game.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Dan McTeague, Liberal, Pickering—Scarborough East, ON]

It's good to see you here, Mr. Dicerni. It's been awhile. I know we've worked very well together in the past and that you were very much responsible, in your time there, for bringing OPG back and bringing Pickering more in line with OPG...and the importance of making the two work together. There were a lot of good companies that were spun off from your organization and from that regulatory body or generation process that we went through back in the mid-nineties.

I know there was a lot of controversy in previous governments about people getting jobs who shouldn't have gotten jobs. I know the Treasury Board chairman knows OPG all too well, but I can tell you that in Pickering we were always very proud of a couple of the companies, OPG being one of them and the other being Clearnet. You will recall that the Simmons family had done very, very well using local technologies that emerged from a much smaller company, which was also one that took advantage of TPC grants in the early days. AirIQ is another one. I was somewhat concerned that the family might have found itself, notwithstanding its stellar track record—one that the chair, of course, may not have remembered when he going after us day in and day out, when we were in government....

But I am interested in finding out from your perspective, Mr. Dicerni, if you see a more enhanced role, consistent with the funding capitalization of key, new innovative industries throughout the country...and if in fact these cuts will, in your view, have the unintended impact of actually discouraging, limiting, or preventing new technologies or new entrants coming forth into the market.

[Richard Dicerni]

I guess the safe response would be no, but let me expand. The department is involved in reviewing a number of science and technology aspects. We have this huge chart in the office dealing with the government's science and technology ecosystem, which covers a wide range of initiatives, ranging from the granting councils to what we do through the Canada Foundation for Innovation, Genome Canada, and so forth. There are a number of initiatives.

We are very much focused on innovation, commercialization, and bringing product to market. I am going to see Jean René Halde of the Business Development Bank at five o'clock, because we think the bank has a unique role with regard to the venture capital fund it has; it has oversight and is seeking to broaden that in order to bring more venture cap to market and to facilitate product commercialization.

We're also trying to think more carefully about some of the granting councils. NSERC does have about $165 million for partnerships, and we're trying to bridge that with the IRAP program of the National Research Council and with what the bank is doing. We believe there is an opportunity there for synergy, and we're bringing these three organizations together next week.

So there are a number of other irons in the fire that are very much targeted at seeking to enhance commercialization.

[Dan McTeague, Liberal, Pickering—Scarborough East, ON]

Let me say this, Mr. Dicerni. I think it is becoming widely recognized that the landscape of Canada's business picture has changed rapidly, but even more so over the past summer with a large number of Canadian companies now being purchased or owned by foreign interests. It's such that there is a concern. It was raised in The Globe and Mail by Eric Reguly, but it has been said before, this concern with respect to the kind of impact we can continue to have if Canadian business doesn't find an opportunity to grow, to be discovered, to get the kind of advantages that help them through this.

Do you see a danger at a time when there seems to be this perspective...? And it's not a protectionist one motivating people but rather the recognition of the critical mass that a Canadian company can create. Are we not foreclosing the opportunity of our future prosperity if we don't give them the help at the beginning—and I appreciate what you're saying about the synergies between the bank and other instruments available—and we remove the potential for new Canadian companies to make it?

[Richard Dicerni]

What do you mean by removing? What are we removing?

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Answer very quickly, because your time is up.