Evidence of meeting #31 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was investments.
A video is available from Parliament.
NDP
Peggy Nash NDP Parkdale—High Park, ON
Let me ask you about small business.
Industry Canada's report on planning and priorities shows a cut of 13% from the small business research, financing, and services envelope, with actual spending declining from $99 million in the 2011-12 period to just over $85 million in the 2016-17 period.
Why would the government be cutting funding for important programs that assist entrepreneurs in starting and growing businesses?
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
As you know, the minister of small business has done wide-scale consultations across the country with small business. In terms of the moves we've made, you're looking at one specific fund and one specific envelope, but perhaps you can look at the suite of policies we have to support small business across the country.
It's not just about spending money. I know this is a different paradigm for the New Democrats, but it's not just about spending money. It's actually about supporting small business in other ways: opening up international market access, lowering taxes, reducing the red tape burden and making it easier, and supporting programs like BizPaL, which we have done as a government. We have a one-stop entry port for small businesses that want to establish themselves. They have one portal of entry so they know all the licensing and regulatory requirements to start a small business.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
In terms of our support, I appreciate that the question is about one particular fund, and I know the minister of small business will be more than happy to come here and talk to you about that one fund, but it is a patently dishonest picture that you're painting—
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
—about our government's policy for small business. Because as you know—
NDP
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
—all of Canada's small business organizations, from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business to the—
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
—Canadian Chamber of Commerce, those organizations that represent small business have supported every single one of our government's measures.
December 4th, 2014 / 9:20 a.m.
Conservative
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
Our government has been consistent in promoting more choice, more prices, and better service for Canadians. Most certainly, the committee has reviewed measures that will end pay-to-pay billing and that will give you, Minister, and the CRTC, the administrative monetary penalties, the AMPs, to help enforce compliance. Why are these measures so important?
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
They are important. As you know, this is a commitment we made, and the administrative monetary penalties are within Bill C-43 on telecom. Ending pay-to-pay billing and ensuring that there is more competition in the wireless sector is something that as a government we've been very proud of, for its self-evident benefits.
I'm not sure, Kelly, if you want to give an update on the AMPs, the administrative monetary penalties, where that is at, and how the CRTC is viewing the reforms we've put in place.
Kelly Gillis Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Spectrum, Information Technologies and Telecommunications, Department of Industry
Certainly.
Thank you for the question.
On the administrative monetary penalties and what we have in the telecommunications sector, for us at Industry Canada we have the Radiocommunication Act, which regulates the management of spectrum. The radio frequency spectrum is a vital component for our connectivity in Canada today.
We haven't had the tool to be able to enforce certain conditions of licence. We've had different tools, such as education, suasion, and revocation of licences, but this provides an additional tool to ensure that this public resource is effectively utilized into the future. It will be an important component in the overall toolset in managing telecommunications going forward.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
Can you explain what other actions our government has taken in the last few years to protect consumers in the wireless sector?
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
Sure. It starts, of course, with driving at more competition in the wireless sector. I know there were many voices out there that said that it can't work, it won't work, there isn't capacity, and there's no real market demand for this, but of course that's not true.
When you actually look at the hockey stick curve of the voracious increase in consumption of wireless services by Canadians, frankly, and in almost every age cohort, by the way—it's not just a young person thing—you see that there's increasing demand all across the country. We know, of course, as the government, that in those jurisdictions in Canada where there is an aggressive fourth wireless player that is challenging the incumbents, the large, biggest three telecom providers, there's a greater mix of choices of services that are offered in the marketplace, prices are generally down, and there's greater market and consumer satisfaction with the offerings in the marketplace. This is a good thing.
By the way, as a country, we should be very proud of the wireless services that we have in this country: Rogers, Bell, Telus, EastLink, MTS, SAS.... All these firms provide incredible services. When you compare the quality of wireless services that we have in Canada to those in almost any other country in the world, we do extraordinarily well. Where we are challenged is on the question of pricing and making sure it is competitive and that Canadians can afford the quality services that we do have. That's where the government's responsibility is.
When we have an end of analog television, we transition to digital television, the spectrum becomes available, and we put it into the marketplace, as we did with the 700 megahertz auction, or the AWS auction of 2008, or AWS-3 in the new year. When we dispense of the spectrum and put it into the marketplace to meet the market demand for wireless services and for these firms to deliver on the capacity side, we should do so, and try to kill multiple birds with one stone and put in place the opportunity for more competition in the wireless marketplace, which is what we've done.
We now have the spectrum capacity in every single region of the country for there to be four wireless carriers in every single region of the country. There was informed opinion that said this was impossible and never would happen. Well, it actually has happened, and it is being realized, and the spectrum capacity is there.
Now we have firms in every region of the country that are looking to engage the marketplace with the highest quality spectrum ever put in place, so that we will have more choice and more competition in the market. This is a good thing. It's good for consumers. It's good for business, good for education, and good for health services, and ultimately it will lead to a shrinking price point for consumers so they can have access to the best technologies anywhere they live. This is a good news story for Canada.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
Our government recently announced $305 million for connecting Canadians. That's supposed to expand Internet services in rural communities. Why did our government take this step and how does it fit in with our government's digital strategy, DC 150?
Conservative
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
Maybe I'll come back to it, but it is essential.
Keep in mind everything I just said about wireless Internet. Set that aside, and remember that about 85% of all data downloads are still done through wired, fixed Internet. I'll give you an example that tells you everything that you need to know about connectivity in rural parts of Canada.
In September, I was with the Prime Minister in Pond Inlet, the third most northern town in North America. We went into the library/archive/city hall/computer lab for the entire village. On the wall was a poster in all capital underlined letters that said, “Anybody who is in the computer lab, stop using YouTube”, because whenever they use YouTube, they slow down the entire village, and nobody can get their e-mail, and nobody can talk to anybody, so they should stop using YouTube.
This is a village that's very remote. You can imagine that at difficult times of the year, with difficult weather, to get health services in there, to get connectivity in there, and to get learning opportunities up in the north, let alone e-commerce and all the opportunities that could exist through greater connectivity, it is essential that they have high-speed Internet.
Now, through our connecting Canadians program, they will have access to five megabits per second Internet speed, as a floor, which allows for a streaming YouTube video anywhere in the village. That's a phenomenal standard that will be mirrored all across the country. That's something we're very proud of.
Conservative
Liberal
Judy Sgro Liberal York West, ON
Welcome, Minister Moore. We're glad to have you back here with us again today. It's disappointing that we weren't able to get you earlier. Now that our purpose has changed, I'm going to focus my questions a little bit differently.
The auto industry continues to be a critically important industry for Canada. Needless to say, we all hear from people in the industry about their challenges. But I have to say, I don't hear you fighting a lot for that industry.
I say that because of the concerns that keep being raised that GM is focusing more and more of their work in Michigan and in Mexico, and less and less in Canada, and the fact that they don't have a model here in Ontario ready to move into 2016. In 2008, with the bailout, they agreed to make sure there was 16% of investment. I believe that was the number. Now apparently it's come down to 15%.
I'd be interested in your comment. That's an important industry for Ontario. I know that you share the same concern. But what are you doing, and what are you prepared to do in the future to insist that GM makes some new investments here in Ontario? I am very concerned. As you know, the jobs that are created in the auto sector are critically important, not just in their direct but their indirect spinoffs. .
What are you planning to do in the next year to make sure that GM is investing and that we're going to have an active auto industry, especially on the GM side?
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
I know that concerns have been raised, and that's why we have an organization called the Canadian Automotive Partnership Council. I essentially co-chaired a meeting with Brad Duguid, my provincial counterpart. We met last Monday on this very subject, to talk about 2015-16, and moving forward, about how we maintain a competitive advantage in the auto sector, so your question is timely.
As an example, we have put forward $750 million of investment into the auto sector, and that money is made available. I can tell you that we have a number of conversations happening right now with a number of firms about possible investments in order to not just maintain but expand footprints for the auto sector in Ontario, with benefits spilling beyond the province of Ontario.
We have been a good partner with GM. I know Kevin Williams has just left GM. They have a new president whom I'm looking forward to speaking with very soon about what the plans are for the future, but we're quite confident. It is said again and again, particularly by GM, that they want to make cars where they sell them. If you look at the sales numbers and how GM is doing in Canada, they seem to be going in the right direction.
The auto sector is one of our largest manufacturing sectors, and we do want to make sure that we are investing this money effectively, but look at the whole suite of policies that we have as a government. We're twinning the Detroit-Windsor border crossing. We're working on the regulatory question with the United States so we have a twin regulatory regime in Canada relative to the United States. We've lowered corporate taxes from 23 down to 15 points, giving us, on average, a 13 point corporate tax rate advantage over what's offered in the United States. We have a productive, educated, and thoughtful workforce that is doing great things in plants all across Ontario. Added to that are the investments available through the Province of Ontario in the form of a grant. There are $750 million on the table for investments from the Government of Canada through the automotive innovation fund.
We are working together across all party lines and across all ideological lines. When you have me, Brad Duguid, Jerry Dias, the OEMs, and everybody working together to align our policies to make Canada as competitive as possible, we are going to stay as a serious player in the auto sector for a very long time.
Liberal
Judy Sgro Liberal York West, ON
What about the jobs, though? You outline all kinds of ideas and things, but clearly what we see happening is more and more of a switch to do different things in Michigan, even though I think we have a better educated workforce, and all the rest of it, yet more and more of these jobs seem to be going to the other side of the border or into Mexico.
Now that the current agreement is about to expire, what are your plans to make sure we have conditions that these jobs are going to be here in Canada?
