Evidence of meeting #16 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was vote.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Excuse me, Mr. McTeague. We'll give them a minute to get seated.
9:30 a.m.
Liberal
Dan McTeague Liberal Pickering—Scarborough East, ON
You know what? Actually, in the meantime, maybe we'll allow Mr. Dhaliwal to ask a question. I believe it's for Mr. Watson.
9:30 a.m.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Deputy Minister Watson, contrary to what the minister was talking about here.... I'm an engineer. I work with numbers. When I viewed these numbers from the core side of the budget, excluding the stimulus package that is temporary for two years, in 2006 it was $239 million. Then I saw $247 million, $242 million, $297 million, $183 million, and $173 million, and then, in 2012, $160 million.
Could you speak specifically to reducing the core operating budget compared to what it was under the Liberal government? Why is it decreasing every year?
9:35 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Western Economic Diversification
Sure, absolutely.
We can get you some detailed answers on this later, but the main reason is that at one point in time the infrastructure budget for Infrastructure Canada was actually found in several votes all across government. ACOA, Développement économique Canada in Quebec, and Western Economic Diversification, for example, all had pieces of that vote.
So if you wanted to know what the Government of Canada was spending on infrastructure, you had to go all over the place and add them all up. It was felt that for transparency reasons, essentially, it made more sense to show that as one vote, as one activity. So a big chunk of what we used to have in our budget was infrastructure spending.
In the peak year, there was actually $80 million showing up in our vote. This year it's $5 million, which is a legacy. More money is actually being spent now in infrastructure than in some previous years, but you won't find it in our vote. You'll find it in Infrastructure Canada's vote, so that you can see in one place the entirety of what the Government of Canada is doing.
That's the biggest single difference in what's gone on here. It's a way of showing the accountability of who is actually spending what money. In this case, it's a bunch of money being spent by Infrastructure Canada rather than by WD.
9:35 a.m.
Liberal
Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC
So when you say WD is not spending as much money.... The minister talked about the short-term plans when it comes to the economic action plan, which is very temporary, but she has not talked about her vision and plans for this core operating budget when it comes to Western Economic Diversification bringing long-term opportunities to the west. Could you say something about that too?
9:35 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Western Economic Diversification
Absolutely. I think if you go to the minister's remarks, there are a couple of things there that I think are critically important. The western diversification program was born in 1987. If you look at where western Canadian businesses were at that point, a whole bunch of our major competitors today weren't even in existence then as major players. If you look at the industries that western Canada has in many cases today, those industries didn't even exist in 1987--most of the digital imaging business, I think, and all of that.
As western Canadian natural resource producers compete against players that have lower labour costs, that may have different regulatory regimes, which people might think are either fair or unfair depending on your perspective, but that Canadians need to compete against in the world to successfully maintain the standard of living we want, that's something that Western Diversification needs to be involved in.
As we look at places like Vancouver, for example, where the digital imaging stuff was shown off quite successfully at the Winter Olympic Games, if Canada is going to continue to be a player and it is going to be dominant in that field, we need different sets of skills, business capabilities, and investments than we've had in the past.
Western Diversification, as the minister noted in her remarks, needs to play a critical role in making sure that happens. We have world-class research and development, as Minister Clement and the deputy minister for Industry Canada have noted in their remarks. The question is how we can play a role in turning those ideas into world-class profits for Canadians.
May 13th, 2010 / 9:35 a.m.
Liberal
Dan McTeague Liberal Pickering—Scarborough East, ON
Thank you, Mr. Dhaliwal.
I'm glad to see you're here, Richard and Mr. Boothe.
Very simply, I note that there's some increase in the budget appropriated to the Competition Bureau and enforcement, some of that in regard to the changes as a result of Bill C-10 last year.
In your estimation, is that adequate? What will be the impact of limiting the need for further public exposure to increases with the introduction of successful administrative monetary penalties, AMPs?
9:35 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Industry
The short answer is that, in discussion with the commissioner, we believe the resources that have been allocated are adequate to the challenge.
9:35 a.m.
Liberal
Dan McTeague Liberal Pickering—Scarborough East, ON
This hasn't obviously come to the attention of the committee at this time, but previous holders of the position of director of the Competition Bureau, or as they are now called, “commissioners” , have indicated a shortcoming of resources for effective enforcement.
Do you see a request being made to this parliamentary committee at some point down the road necessitating greater financial resources? Again, I don't have an answer necessarily on the question of AMPs; obviously this goes back to general revenues. Is there a chance of recovering those specific to the department?
9:40 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Industry
I would note that the budget of the Competition Bureau over the last two or three years was not insignificantly increased. We can give you....
Do you know?
9:40 a.m.
Johanne Bernard Director General, Resource Planning and Investments Branch, Department of Industry
Ten million.
9:40 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Industry
Ten million dollars may not jump out at you in terms of the estimates, but there was an increase two or three years ago, I think, to address the issues you're mentioning.
9:40 a.m.
Liberal
Dan McTeague Liberal Pickering—Scarborough East, ON
There's been a greater reliance, and perhaps even.... I don't want to anticipate the outcome of a private member's bill that may put greater pressure on casting a much wider net on study or investigation. Should something like this happen obviously contingencies will have to be made should Parliament pass this.
9:40 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Industry
We would not like to speculate on parliamentary outcomes.
9:40 a.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
9:40 a.m.
Liberal
Dan McTeague Liberal Pickering—Scarborough East, ON
I figured that, but things can and do change very rapidly. I don't know... $200 a barrel for crude might suddenly create a new appetite and make them a lot busier.
Let me go to a smaller area in the few seconds that I have, and that's the budget allocated to Measurement Canada. Considering the new legislation that is proposed, which is not yet before this committee--obviously you'll have an opportunity to come back--will it, too, find itself in a position of being in a bit of a shortcoming relative to its new and renewed mandate?
9:40 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Industry
As you noted, the minister announced new proposals for Measurement Canada, two or three weeks ago, I think. One of the elements is indeed to have third parties become more involved. As the proposal works its way through Parliament and so forth, if there's a need for additional resources I'm sure there will be an opportunity to discuss that.
9:40 a.m.
Conservative
9:40 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for being here. It's one of my favourite topics, the estimates. I submitted a few questions in advance and will try to stick to them, but I may come off them a little bit.
Maybe you could answer this for me. This year's estimates book was excellent. It showed how much difference...a 22% difference that the As, Bs, and Cs, the supplementaries made, in terms of costs. Actually, we spent $309 billion last year, mostly, I'm assuming, due to stimulus. Would you concur that your budget is up? For your department alone, it's at $2.4 billion, whereas you're normally around $1 billion. Is it mainly because of stimulus?
9:40 a.m.
Director General, Resource Planning and Investments Branch, Department of Industry
Yes.
9:40 a.m.
Paul Boothe Senior Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Industry
Almost 95% of the increase, I think, is stimulus.
9:40 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
On last year's supplementaries that were submitted, I know you're not all at 22%, but you're a portion of that. Do last year's supplementaries get built into the main estimates this year or do you--
9:40 a.m.
Director General, Resource Planning and Investments Branch, Department of Industry
The answer is, it depends.... For some of the supplementary estimates, we have to ask for them every year, such as, for example, access to repayable contributions for previous years.
But if an initiative were continuing into this year, such as the small business internship program, which was approved in supplementary estimates last year, it is reflected in the main estimates here.