Industry Committee on April 14th, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Thank you. Your time is done.

I just want to point out that my role as chair is not to defend our ministers here. That's not what it is, but I will demand that we pay due respect. If you ask a question, let them finish answering their question, please.

Okay, we are going to move on to Mr. Masse. You have seven minutes.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I appreciate this opportunity to follow up.

I'm going to ask a question with regard to asbestos, and then how it relates to our industry. Asbestos is actually estimated to kill around 2,000 people per year, and the exposure actually has been increasing: lung cancers, death. In fact, some of my family members...and one of them in particular was in a plant in Windsor where asbestos was the leading cause of death and illness.

It's on the rise. In 1992 there was 276 recorded cases related to asbestos, and 25 years later, they're up to 560. Despite the fact that Sweden, Iceland, Denmark, Singapore, New Zealand, Japan, Australia, and South Africa have banned asbestos, Canada still has asbestos not only in many of the products that we have here, but also we allow the importation.

A specific example where it relates to industry is the fact that we bring in, say, brake pads from other countries. It's against the law, for example, for Canadian manufacturers.... I worked on the right to repair bill. That was the automotive aftermarket where there was a.... I wanted legislation, but we got actually an agreement with the industry and the government at the time for that. Some Canadian companies could actually import asbestos brake pads for the use and sale. Meanwhile, those Canadian retailers in other small shops are only trying to do the right thing, and have to compete against that.

I know the Canadian Labour Congress is working on this issue as well, and I would be remiss if I didn't note Pat Martin's work on this, my former colleague here. I can't use his terminology the way that he used to, by any means, and I miss it on a regular basis, but he's not here for that.

I know the CLC is looking at a comprehensive ban. I know the government has announced that no new public buildings will have that, but also a national registry of our public buildings.... I think also what's most important for the industry in terms of fair competition is that we actually ban asbestos products coming into Canada so those that want to do the right thing don't have unfair competition.

I'll conclude with this and leave it open to everyone.

I worked really hard when I first got here with the government of the day. I think it was Minister Goodale who made the decision at the end of day. It used to be that you could have business fines and penalties as a business-related expenses and get up to 50% back at tax time for that. It actually held up the industry committee for a long time until we actually got that finished. For example, one case was a company with drug-marketing problems with a $40-million fine and they got $11 million at tax time. So we ended that.

Is there a way we can work toward, sooner rather than later, banning asbestos imports so that non-asbestos products can compete fairly?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Thank you very much, Brian, for that set of questions and your advocacy on this very important issue.

I must say that you raised some good points about the positions we've taken with respect to the national registry. You raised some good points about competition and making sure that's fair.

I can tell you that we're more than willing to work with CLC on this matter to be able to address this issue. I can say personally that I don't support the use of asbestos. I think we need to move beyond that. I think the government is committed to that, and we're willing to work with CLC and you and others to make sure that we find a solution that helps the issues around competition, and of course, making sure that we identify all our assets, all of the different areas that have asbestos, and make sure that's part of the registry as well.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I really appreciate that because what I found with some industries is that they felt they could take the shortcuts because the business-related expense was something they could actually incur in their operations, and they expected that, versus doing the right thing. Oil dumping, all those different things that took place.... I find the same situation here with asbestos.

If we're successful in that market, would it be too much to then look at a comprehensive business—especially with small business in the future—private sector registry? I think we really need to start at least thinking about that. The public sector is one thing we could immediately control, and then the second thing would eventually be a registry of all those buildings because I know this has affected a lot of small businesses that are trying to do start-ups. They often have to take older buildings and they find uncertain surprises. I don't know if anybody....

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

I just would say very briefly on your point that we have to lead by example first, so we have to figure out from a public point of view what our policies are and lead by example. There's no doubt, then, that would send a clear signal to the private sector. But I think the first step is that we have to make sure that from our perspective, the public perspective, we show leadership.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I don't want to forget about tourism here. I have to declare a conflict of interest in this one because I have a private member's bill, C-221.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

You're a tourist.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I'm a tourist, yes.

I have that coming up for first debate. For those who aren't aware, Bill C-221 was passed in the House of Commons previously under a different incarnation. It's about single-event sports betting. The reality is that we have about $10 billion of single-event sports betting going on in this country, which goes basically to organized crime, for the most part. There is $4 billion that goes to offshore accounts that are unregulated, because they just do it with the click of a mouse, so to speak—or a tap on the screen now; I'm becoming dated.

This bill is coming forward to allow provinces the choice—only if they want to; it's not necessary. We have Ontario, British Columbia, Quebec, and others that are in support of this. It's a huge issue for our tourism sector. It will also bring revenues back to the province. It will finally be regulated, and some money will go toward the various public policies.

Is that something that is going to be analyzed? Is there a position of the government on that? I know it's a PMB, but I'd like to hear what type of stance you might have on it.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

With respect to private members' bills, there's a process that we have in place. We consult widely with our caucus members and cabinet colleagues on this. As you just mentioned, it has just been put up. We're looking forward to the debate and discussion. We at this time don't have an official position. I don't, on a personal level, and I believe many of my colleagues who will learn about it will start to have the discussion. At this point, we don't have an official position.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

You're getting packages in your office now—as we speak, actually.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Thank you very much for that, Brian.

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Waterloo, ON]

I'll just reiterate the comments of the minister. Part of open and transparent government is actually having these debates and receiving that information. When we're going back to evidence-based decision-making, any insight and information that the member will be able to offer through the chair will be more than welcome. We look forward to that conversation.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Thank you very much.

We'll go to Mr. Arya.

You have seven minutes.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Bains, the strategic aerospace and defence initiative, SADI, is one of the best programs I know that Industry Canada manages. I know a bit about this program because I was involved with one of the recipients supported by the program.

One thing I noticed then, which has now been changed, is that the processing time required for small industries has been reduced to four months; however, this is four months after the application is accepted, which may take anywhere between two to three months. That's point number one.

Number two is that in this program the bulk of the money contributions that have been made are going to major companies.

I think we have to streamline this a bit so that it's much easier for the small companies to access this great program. What are your thoughts on this?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Thank you very much for the question.

You raise a good point with respect to SADI, known as the strategic aerospace and defence initiative. It obviously helps firms develop new technologies—the ones that you described with your own personal experience—and attract and retain a highly skilled workforce and collaborate with universities and colleges. It's a neat initiative that really focuses on collaboration and R and D.

As of March 31, 2016, this year, SADI has approved funding for 39 projects, with total government support of $1.3 billion. The key part, the exciting part, is the leverage. It's not simply about that investment, but how much it is leveraging, and it's leveraging close to $2.7 billion.

I think the point you raise with respect to processing times is an interesting one. I haven't heard it much, I must confess, from our clients, but absolutely, we're more than willing to look at it, because the idea is, if they meet the requirements, to get them the funds sooner rather than later so that we can not only make those investments but can leverage the additional dollars that I alluded to.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Minister Duncan, we are investing about $1 billion in NSERC, which deals with about 11,000 professors and about 30,000 post-graduates and post-doctoral fellows. Once again, in my previous life as a technology executive, we collaborated with some universities in the very high-end technology R and D development we were doing.

One challenge we faced was that, being located in Ottawa, we knew the research being done at Carleton University. We had collaborated with them. However, it was very difficult for us to know what sort of research is being done in, say, the University of Calgary or in Vancouver, Edmonton, or Halifax. With this huge investment of $1 billion that we are making, how can we streamline the process so that the outcome of this investment is easily available to small companies across Canada?

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Thank you for your excellent question, and thank you for the work you've done throughout your life.

I'd like to start by talking a bit about NSERC, which funds natural sciences and engineering research. I've talked about this $95 million top-up and I'm going to briefly mention it again. This is the highest contribution in 10 years. There will be $30 million to NSERC and $30 million to CIHR, which is the Canadian Institutes for Health Research. To come back to Mr. Dreeshen's question, there is $16 million now for the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. That's actually an increase closing the gap that existed, so it's really positive news. There was also $19 million for the research support fund.

You raised a really important question. I think this is why in budget 2016 I've been tasked with looking at a comprehensive review of federal support for science. We want to make sure we have the right support system for basic science, for an applied system—for that continuum that I've talked about—and this fundamental review is going to allow us to start answering some important questions.

For example, are we doing enough to help our young researchers? We're hearing that some young researchers are getting their first grants at age 41 or 42 or 43. Well, you can all imagine the difficulty of starting a job, trying to build a research program, and possibly having to balance family needs.

We want to ensure that we have the right investments. Are they effective? Are they strategic? Do they meet the needs of Canada, and do they meet the needs of our researchers?

Another example I'll give you is the Networks of Centres of Excellence, a really good program. I talked about the stem cell network at the beginning, and that investment, that $80 million for 225 researchers. Is there something that needs to be available afterwards?

This review is going to allow us to start to ask a question like yours as well as other questions: do we have the right system?

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

In my riding of Nepean, we have lost quite a number of federal scientists. One complaint I heard was that under the previous government, because of the cutbacks, the opportunities for these scientists to participate in various conferences where the real knowledge-sharing and knowledge exchange occurs were quite limited. I hope that under your leadership things have changed.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Thank you for the question. We heard similar things as we went across the country. What the researchers said first of all is that the granting councils were starved during the last decade. I mentioned that we fell from third to eighth on higher education investment in R and D, and fell from 18th to 26th on business R and D. We heard at the institutions that there were real infrastructure needs across the country. We had one institution say that they have a billion dollars in delayed infrastructure needs in construction, maintenance, and repair.

We have been listening, and that's why we have this new infrastructure fund that is due on May 9. It's to take advantage of the summer construction season and it's to build local development in our communities.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Thank you very much.

We will move on to Ms. Gladu.

You have five minutes.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Excellent. Thank you, and thank you to Minister Duncan, Minister Bains, and Minister Chagger for being with us today.

My first question is for Ms. Duncan, and it has to do with the granting councils. I'm very pleased to see that the structure of the granting councils, which fund excellent applied research, was kept in place, but I'm looking for more detail on the breakdown of what percentage of the funding for them goes to agriculture, forestry, mining, natural resources, and clean tech.

Do you have any additional detail on how the money is spread out in those areas?

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Let me begin by thanking my honourable colleague. I want to say it's been a pleasure to work with you. We have a really good working relationship and we talk very regularly.

You raise a really important point: applied research matters. Let me take this opportunity to recognize the work of the colleges and polytechnics in this area. Because colleges are so embedded in their communities—I'm proud to have Humber College in my riding—they know the communities well. They can thus do a lot of work on social innovation—we have a social innovation fund—but they also respond very quickly to industry's needs. I know that you're a former engineer, and you work very closely with your college. Industry can come in—a small business, a medium-sized business—and can get the answers they need very quickly.

You've also talked about clean tech. This is an area that's extremely important to our government. This is a government that believes in climate change.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Do you have percentages to help break it down?

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

This is an important area and there are investments in clean tech to take action on climate change, but I'd like to talk about an initiative that is very relevant to Minister Bains and myself.

We've announced $20 million for the Canada excellence research chairs program. Currently, there are 26 excellence research chairs in Canada. For those of you who do not know about this program, it's to attract the best and brightest—