Industry Committee on Nov. 7th, 2006

[Richard Dicerni]

There are going to be a number of initiatives going forward within the context of the government's environmental initiative. You referred to some of those initiatives.

Also, the Department of Natural Resources is developing a number of measures focusing on energy efficiency and improving environmental performance. So the government, I would say, is continuing to focus on improving environmental performance.

In the months to come, I think there will be some further initiatives coming out of the Department of the Environment and the Department of Natural Resources.

[Jim Karygiannis, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

Minister, what initiatives is your department taking in order to make sure we're not only meeting the global targets but are also surpassing them as far as environmental concerns in the auto industry are concerned? Have you sat at the table and talked to the auto industry giants about improving environmental concerns? Are you thinking of giving any initiatives to people driving hybrids?

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Minister, you have about forty seconds.

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

That's a very good question. Last week, I met with automotive industry representatives to discuss the regulatory system that will apply to them regarding energy and new vehicles. I can tell you that consultation is going well. We want to set greenhouse gas emission reduction objectives and targets with regard to the regulation of new vehicles, as a result of which that industry will...

[Jim Karygiannis, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

Sir, you're long-winded, so let me again bring it to you that the United States, Ontario, and British Columbia are giving initiatives for hybrid cars. Is your department looking at such a long-range plan, especially one affecting all Canadians? Will you consider giving $1,000 or $2,000 to people who want to buy hybrid cars, just like you are giving to people who are buying efficient dishwashers and—

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Minister, you have time for just a brief response.

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

It will be something we will look at in the consultation that my colleague Jim Flaherty is doing right now. It's something that will have an impact on our budget, but if you have a proposition, we'll listen to it, like all the propositions that we're going to receive for the budget. It's simple.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you, Minister.

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

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I know we don't have a lot of time here. I do have one quick question, and then I thought I'd share the rest of my time with Mr. Arthur, if he would like that.

My question is about the payday loan legislation, Bill C-26. There seems to be some confusion out there, so I was wondering if you could explain why provinces and territories are best suited to regulate the payday loans. Also, what happens if provinces choose not to regulate the payday loans in their jurisdictions?

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

You have before you Bill C-26, the purpose of which is to amend the Criminal Code. As you said, it concerns payday loans. Allow me to summarize the purpose of that bill.

The purpose of the bill is to address the concerns of the provincial governments. We listened to the provincial governments and to consumers, and we want to treat the payday loan industry adequately in order to protect consumers. That industry, as you know, is relatively new to Canada, and it has grown in recent years. Bill C-26 exempts payday lenders from section 347 of the Criminal Code, which concerns criminal usury, that is to say usurious loans.

In limited circumstances which are very narrowly defined, the exemption will be applied solely at the request of a province or territory. It will apply solely where a province or territory has passed statutory or regulatory measures protecting borrowers.

We're saying that section 347 of the Criminal Code won't apply in respect of usurious loans for the payday loan industry where a province or territory has made a request and where that province or territory has regulated that business. These provincial or territorial measures must include limits on borrowing costs.

The bill was carefully drafted in consultation with the provinces and territories. Our purpose is to guarantee both that the provinces can adopt what they consider appropriate regulations, that consumers are protected and that the industry can continue to exist in Canada.

This bill deserves your attention. It is a brief statutory instrument, and we are anxious for it to be passed. I hope the House of Commons will pass the bill as soon as possible. Thank you.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Merci.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Are you finished, Mr. Carrie?

If so, I'm going to go to Ms. Stronach and then we'll go to Mr. Arthur. That way Mr. Arthur will get five minutes.

Ms. Stronach for five minutes.

[Belinda Stronach, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Minister, for appearing before the committee.

I have a number of questions. My first one relates to your competitiveness strategy that we have been waiting for. My concern is obviously with respect to maintaining jobs in Canada, our slippage on the world stage from 13th to 16th, and the disappearance of jobs over the last number of years.

Ken Georgetti was here the other day and said that we've lost about 300,000 jobs--highly skilled jobs--in the last number of years. We have a prosperity gap with the United States that is widening; it is now at about 18%.

How comprehensive will this competitiveness strategy be? Will it include an industrial strategy, by sector? When are we going to see it? Will it be in the economic update, or are you going to wait until the budget?

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Thank you.

You're asking me whether the government will have a strategy for each industrial sector. That's very specific. Earlier I told you about the industrial strategy that Ireland has adopted. That strategy has worked. That country, which had the highest unemployment rate, is now one of the most prosperous countries in Europe. Its industrial strategy was quite simple: lower the tax burden and promote science and technology.

When you look at the list of OECD countries where corporate subsidies are the lowest, you find a number of very competitive countries where businesses are very competitive, such as Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. A number of the least competitive countries have the highest subsidies, such as France, Belgium and Italy.

When you talk about an industrial policy that involves corporate subsidies, you have to analyze that in an overall context and look at the impact of those subsidies on other industrial sectors. However, if we're talking about an industrial policy for a specific sector, which involves less regulation or more efficient regulation, we can always have an action plan for various industrial sectors. I've met with representatives of the automotive industry and the ship-building industry, and they told us about various problems that can be addressed by reducing their regulatory burden or their tax burden.

[Belinda Stronach, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

More specifically to that question, when will you be releasing your competitiveness strategy? When can we expect that?

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

In the budget.

[Belinda Stronach, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

In the budget. Okay.

Let me jump to another pillar of our economy. You mentioned it is the backbone of our economy--the auto sector.

You have been meeting with CAPC, which I think is a good thing, because they are a focused organization.

One thing you didn't discuss is that CAPC is strongly opposed to a free trade arrangement with Korea. The CAW has done extensive studies, one of which recently assessed the impact of current trade relationships and South Korea, perhaps relating to about 180,000 jobs lost.

What is your feeling on a free trade arrangement with Korea? What principles are you holding as you go forward in these discussions? What's the timeline for this? How do you assess the impact on jobs in Canada?

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

I had the opportunity to discuss the impact of a free trade treaty with Korea at the last meeting of the CAPC. What I told the automotive industry people is consistent with what they heard from my colleague David Emerson, who is responsible for this file. Talks are starting between the two countries, and an issue table has been put in place to ensure that the more the talks progress, the more the industry's viewpoint is taken into account. The industry people told us that this was the best way to proceed to ensure that their concerns were well heard.

So these are negotiations, but I don't believe that this is a file that will come to anything in the very near future. However, it's important to have talks, because we believe that free trade is at the very basis of the creation of this country. Canada was not built on barriers, but on free trade, which enabled immigrants and a number of people to come and work in Canada. It has enabled Canadians to sell their goods and services elsewhere, in other countries. If we close our borders here, in Canada, our Canadian businesses may well experience the same thing elsewhere.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you, Ms. Stronach.

We'll go finally to Monsieur Arthur for five minutes.

[André Arthur, Independent, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon, minister.

I'd like to continue in the wake of Mr. Crête, whose question was taken up by Mr. Vincent, and discuss the policy direction aimed at the CRTC. However, I'd like to do it in my own way.

You said you wanted to study the evidence provided to our committee before a motion is passed requesting that the issuing of that the direction be stayed. That reassures me. I hope with all my heart that you'll overrule the committee's motion when you realize that the witnesses were not very credible. Some were clearly remote-controlled by very powerful people needing to keep control, for reasons they may want to explain one day.

Representatives of large companies came to implore us to shelter them from their competitors. Representatives of bogus consumer organizations even asserted that competition was not a good thing and that the resulting lower prices had to be prevented. In fact, what may be most surprising is that one spokesperson of the Union des consommateurs came and told us that, in any case, your bill violated the Telecommunications Act.

In view of the study that you have conducted and of the context leading up to this direction, do you think you violated the Telecommunications Act?

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

I've never violated anything in my life, and, as a politician, I don't believe I've violated the Telecommunications Act. More seriously, I'll say that the work was done in total compliance with the existing act.

One section in the Telecommunications Act enables us to issue a policy direction. I can imagine that that woman was not aware that section existed. For the first time in the history of this country, we are issuing a policy direction to the CRTC to remind it that Canada is a capitalist country, a country of freedom, and that regulation must be as limited as possible, to allow market forces to play out, particularly in telecommunications. Businesses in this sector around the world are free to set their prices and provide their services.

We're asking the CRTC to act in that perspective. Whatever the case may be, I'll take note of your comments. I'm going to read the minutes of the debates on the subject and I'll speak to committee members again if I have other questions, then I'll prepare a report to Cabinet. We'll then decide on steps to take in the telecommunications file.

[André Arthur, Independent, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

A dentist could tell us, in view of the reaction that you've caused at the CRTC, that you've touched a nerve, something precious, in this case their power. These people sent us their representatives, that is to say people with whom they constantly have transactions, dealings and compromises, in an attempt to convince us not to lower our guard too quickly. The most credible of our witnesses was undoubtedly Mr. Shaw, of Shaw Communications. He told us that, in any case, the problem with telephony would solve itself within a year. Perhaps that was very wise.

Do I have a little time left?

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

You have a minute and a half.

[André Arthur, Independent, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

You who are the minister responsible for Statistics Canada, do you get the impression that, with all the data bases that we have and the skill with which computer experts link them, the censuses in which people are asked for information that the Canada Revenue Agency already has or information on their sexual orientation are still a justifiable expense?

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

That's a very good question. Thank you, Mr. Arthur.

I could answer you by saying that the Constitution of Canada requires the Government of Canada to conduct a census, but that that obligation concerns a census in the strict sense. However, the trend in Canada is increasingly toward surveys that go beyond that obligation. The purpose of a number of questionnaires is to obtain information on the everyday lives of Canadians so that we can create programs better suited to their needs.

The question you raise should be studied. I believe that, right now, the census is necessary. We have to meet our obligation, which is constitutional in nature, but perhaps there are grounds to question, as a government, the scope of the census.

Thank you.