Evidence of meeting #17 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was sector.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Director, Policy, Innovation and Productivity, Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters
There is uncertainty in getting your claims through. Also, a lot of companies in recent years have been audited and have been asked to reimburse claims, although they had a record of claims going through. The CRA themselves, a couple of years ago, said in one of their reports that about 50% of SMEs don't even claim SR and ED, either for a lack of knowledge or because they think it's just too complicated. There's a mix. It is quite complicated, because it's all in the interpretations.
Liberal
Frank Baylis Liberal Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC
Would you say that it's an important program and that, if we could improve on it, this would be the way to go?
Director, Policy, Innovation and Productivity, Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters
I think it's a good program that is not functioning very well and needs to be updated.
Liberal
Director, Policy, Innovation and Productivity, Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters
It could have an impact on productivity, and commercialization as well, if we were to redirect the program and update the definitions of technological advancements in line with what other countries use.
Liberal
National Director, Social and Economic Policy, Canadian Labour Congress
It's terrible agreement, and I can tell you why.
Liberal
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
We can clearly find out that the current deal is fatally flawed and not supported. That's the evidence we just received.
My understanding is that it is the parliamentary secretary's birthday today. Happy birthday, Mr. Fergus.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
I understand, as well, that one of his birthday wishes is a national auto policy.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
I would like to turn it over to Mr. Roberts and Mr. Wilson to expand upon that subject matter. I still think that if we had the right national auto policy in place like other countries do with manufacturing and so forth.... We had Canadian Auto Partnership Council, which was a functioning council under Mr. Rock. At the time, Minister Rock had meetings that were inclusive of Parliament, inclusive of committees, inclusive of all the sectors that worked on targets. That's a starting point. I think a greenfield or a brownfield is still possible for our auto sector. It's not worth giving up on at this moment.
I'll turn over to Mr. Roberts and Mr. Wilson this highly charged subject that we should continue to consider. I want to hear your opinions about that. If they contradict my thoughts, that's fair game.
National Director, Social and Economic Policy, Canadian Labour Congress
It's urgently needed. In comparison to the scale of new investment in plant formation in the United States and Mexico relative to Canada, it's crystal clear that we're at risk of not being able to renew the kinds of investments that we have made historically. This is going to have all kinds of ramifications for high-paying, high-productivity employment in the communities these industries support. I think we need coordinated policies between the various levels of government to attract new investment and product allocations. I think this would be relatively easy to kick off.
Getting the incentives consistent and correct is important as well. There are other dimensions, including rethinking monetary policy to ensure that we have export opportunities for auto parts and assembled vehicles in the future. There are also trade agreements. We can't sign agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership and expect to have the investment and industries we need in the future.
Senior Vice-President, Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters
I'll disagree with that and just say two really important things.
First, Canada is often not even on the map when it comes to foreign investment decisions of major multinationals. We just don't exist. When they are asked the reasons for investing, most of them don't even know they invested here in the first place. Changing our reputation abroad, I think, is critical to our being able to track that investment.
Second, I'd say that we rely an awful lot on FDI, which is great, and the auto sector is really important, but we also need to focus on how we grow Canadian companies to be bigger and more successful. We have some world-class Canadian manufacturers in the auto sector. Magna, Linamar, and Martinrea would be three examples, and they're huge technological leaders in the parts development side of things.
A new assembly is critical to drive the parts side of things, but we could also figure out ways to grow more Canadian companies and make them more successful to drive investment, because often we aren't on the map when it comes to global investment decisions, unfortunately.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy
Thank you very much.
With that, we will thank our witnesses for providing some interesting conversation topics. It was really enjoyable.
Thank you again for coming.
We just need a minute to let them go, and we're going to suspend.
[Proceedings continue in camera]