Industry Committee on May 13th, 2010

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Let me try one last one.

Again I note that planned spending for 2010-11 is $395 million, and then it levels off the following two years to just over $200 million. Could you speak to why the planned spending is higher for the next fiscal year?

[Johanne Bernard]

I'm sorry. We don't have that information either.

[Paul Boothe]

I would just tell you, though, with respect to your previous question, that SODP, I'm advised, is a five-year program.

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Do you need more time?

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Can I share my time with Mr. Van Kesteren?

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Yes.

Go ahead, Mr. Van Kesteren.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Boothe, I don't know if you can answer this question for me. I don't have any questions on the estimates, but the government has made a conscious effort to concentrate in certain areas rather than spread its resources right across the field. There was a report done and, of course, that report made that recommendation.

I'm sure you have a system of monitoring the success of this program. Can you comment on that and just tell the committee how that has been working? I know that we zeroed in on high tech and the areas in which we feel that Canada is going to be able to excel in future years. Can you just comment on that?

[Paul Boothe]

When you're talking about this program, do you mean our spending related to R and D?

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

Yes.

[Paul Boothe]

This is obviously a very important question for us. There are a couple of facts that are staring us in the face here. One is that we are a leader in the OECD on public support for R and D, and we're pretty successful in terms of our results, especially in terms of basic science.

But where we're not very successful is in business support for R and D. In fact, at best, we're in the middle of the pack.

This is, I believe, one of the reasons that the government has decided to undertake this R and D review, because we do spend a lot of money in this area, in two parts. One bucket is on the tax support side, the scientific research and experimental development—or SR and ED—tax credit. The other part is direct support, some of which is for basic science but some of which is directly aimed at R and D.

We have some areas that, we hear from stakeholders, work really well. For example, IRAP is one that stakeholders feel is very successful. We have increased our support in other areas, but this is something that the government wants to look at through the R and D review.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Boothe.

Mr. Garneau.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Thank you very much.

I have a question for Mr. Watson in answer to Mr. Dhaliwal's question about why the WED's budget was ramping down. It seems to me, if I understood correctly—and this applies to other regional development agencies as well—that you said a decision was made to remove infrastructure, that component, from it.

If it's going down, I just want you to tell me whether that means this infrastructure component that was removed from it is actually increasing, because that's the only way I can make it work out.

[Daniel Watson]

Yes. If you look at the estimates—I don't have them right in front of me now—while it was in WED's component, it was not in Infrastructure Canada's vote. Of course, you only vote on it once. What got taken out of our vote got put into the Infrastructure Canada vote.

There is another piece that's worth mentioning here. In 2005, 2006, and 2007, there were moneys set aside to celebrate the centennial of Alberta and Saskatchewan joining Confederation. As much as those of us from Saskatchewan and Alberta would like to celebrate that every year, the parliamentary vote of the day was that it was a fixed amount of money for a fixed period of time. Of course, one knows the payment for those celebrations ended and those programs ended. Obviously it stopped being in our vote.

So between infrastructure and the centennial program, that would be the vast bulk of what has actually disappeared from it.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

So if I look into the estimates for infrastructure, I will see that they are actually increasing for your western region.

[Daniel Watson]

You'll see that entire vote. I don't know that they identify it by region particularly. It's one big number for that department. I don't have it in front of me, but that's the principle, and I'm quite certain that's the way it shows up.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

I have a quick question for Mr. Boothe on SADI. SADI has been around for a while, and if I'm not mistaken, there have been three announcements with respect to it for a total of about $50 million. There's still over $300 million for that program that has not been allocated. I just want to know whether we can be assured that the money will be reserved and continue to be reserved for the SADI program.

[Paul Boothe]

I would say it's certainly our working assumption that this is the way it will work. This, of course, depends on the decisions of Parliament in the future, but I would also say, without saying any names, that we are in active discussions with a number of companies right now related to the SADI program. So the program is alive and well, and we're working through the discussions with companies to make further use of the program.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

I make the assumption that the money will stay there because, after all, it was announced specifically for SADI by the government with a great deal of fanfare.

I have one last question.

Is the government of Canada going to continue to subsidize the asbestos industry? Is the federal government going to continue to fund the Chrysotile Institute? Is that this government's position?

[Paul Boothe]

I did not understand. What industry are you talking about?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

I'm talking about the asbestos industry. Is it the government's policy to continue to finance the asbestos industry through funding of the Chrysotile Institute?

[Paul Boothe]

I'll have to confess that I don't know anything about that funding now. If it is in fact Industry Canada funding, I will find out and get back to you in a timely way.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Your point is valid--it may be another department--but I am curious about the question.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Garneau.

Before we suspend briefly to allow our witnesses to depart, we'll have just a brief question from Monsieur Bouchard.

Brièvement, s'il vous plaît.

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I will put my two questions, and I would ask for a written response, even if it has to be sent to me later.

First of all, what might the deadlines be for a company requesting a grant? My question relates mainly to the economic development agencies. We know that there are four economic development agencies in Canada. What is the expected timeframe, between making an application and receiving the minister's signature?

Secondly, I would like to know to whom authority is delegated within the operational structure of each one of the economic development agencies. There is the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec, Western Economic Diversification. Is a decision-making power granted to a deputy minister or to representatives of the other levels of government? Is the decision-making power held exclusively by the minister? I would like to have this information for each one of the agencies.

Answer me in writing, it is not a problem for me.