Industry Committee on Dec. 14th, 2021

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Since we're all throwing out different ideas, I have the two that I would be interested in. These are in addition to the good ideas that others have thrown out.

I think we should have the CRTC chair in to speak with us for a meeting. I'm particularly interested in the complete reversal of their decision related to wholesale rates and its impact on affordability, but there are other things we could obviously discuss on that front. Given that we had Mr. Scott appear previously on this issue, I think it would be good to have him in early on in this session for one day. It doesn't have to be part of a formal study, per se. He could just to speak to us about the ongoing work of the CRTC and the status of that work in delivering affordable wireless Internet for Canadians—or the lack of affordable wireless Internet, at times.

The second piece is around the innovation agenda and the strategic innovation fund, and specifically the billion-dollar net-zero accelerator. It is within Minister Champagne's remit. It would be quite interesting for us to look at that as a matter of accountability and as a matter of constructively looking at some of the innovation that is happening there.

Lastly, Mr. Chair, do we need a formal motion here? It's been great to hear different ideas from others. Do we need to formalize kicking this over to the subcommittee, or since there appears to be consensus, are we good with that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Mr. Erskine-Smith, it seems that we don't need a formal motion. There is consensus in the room for the subcommittee to work it out.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Perfect.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

I have Mr. Fast.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Let me begin by welcoming you to this position. As someone who occupied a similar position on the justice committee back when it was a minority Conservative government, I know how challenging it can be. I think you will find that if you are even-handed and understand that everyone at this table is working for the best interests of Canadians, we'll get a lot done here. That's my hope.

When I speak of even-handedness, I think what will give you the most difficulty are witnesses who may want to run out the clock on their testimony. Given that there are different interpretations at different committees, and also in the House in committee of the whole, as to how much time will be allocated to the questioner versus the witness, I'd be interested to hear at a future meeting—to give you some time to ascertain what your position would be—exactly how you would handle witnesses who are trying to run out the clock. If it's a six-second question, will it be a six-second answer?

I know there are occasions when you're going to have to exercise a great degree of judgment and discretion, because if you ask the question, “Please describe to me the origins of life”, that is a five-second question, but it may require five millennia to answer it. Situations may require great judgment on your part, so I hope you'll exercise that wise judgment.

I also have a number of motions I want to read into the record, if I might. There are five.

The first one reads as follows: “That pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee undertake a study on the national security risks posed by certain foreign telecommunications equipment providers, and that the committee call as witnesses the Minister of Public Safety and the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry and their officials, industry stakeholders, and telecommunications experts, and that no fewer than three meetings be dedicated to the study.”

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

You can continue, Mr. Fast. I just had a quick question.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

The second one reads as follows: “That pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee undertake a study on the most important issues impacting the competitiveness of the Canadian economy, with a special focus on (1) labour shortages across the country, (2) barriers to interprovincial trade, (3) supply chain constraints and (4) red tape and burdensome regulation.”

My third motion is as follows: “That pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee undertake a further study of accessibility and affordability of telecommunications services; that the evidence and documentation received by the committee during the second session of the 43rd Parliament as part of its study on the subject be taken into consideration by the committee in the current session; that the committee adopt the report entitled “Affordability and Accessibility of Telecommunications Services in Canada: Encouraging Competition to (Finally) Bridge the Digital Divide”, which was adopted during the second session of the 43rd Parliament; pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee request the government table a comprehensive response to the report; and that the chair present that report to the House.”

The next addresses the issue of patents and patent boxes. It reads, “That pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee undertake a study of the benefits of implementing a patent box regime in Canada, similar to the patent box approach adopted by the Province of Quebec, with a goal of supporting our innovators, attracting investment to Canada, and developing, commercializing and keeping innovation and related intellectual property in Canada, and that the study review Canada's historical business expenditures on research and development as a share of GDP.”

Finally, I give notice of the following motion: “ That pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee undertake a study of how to streamline and eliminate red tape around federal science, research and economic development programs; that the study review Canada's historical business expenditures on research and development as a share of GDP, which have been well below the OECD average and have continued to fall since their peak in 2001; that the study include a review of the extensive costs that our innovators incur in hiring consultants and advisory firms to fill out and complete the copious paperwork for funding applications; and that the study focus on how science, research and economic development funding can be invested directly into research without being diverted into a complex administrative system.

Finally, there is an additional one, Mr. Chair, if you will bear with me. It's a very short one. It reads as follows: “That pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee invite relevant officials from Statistics Canada to study the latest inflation numbers, that this study consist of at least two meetings, and that the committee report its findings and recommendations to the House.

I make that motion given the fact that Statistics Canada reports to the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you very much, Mr. Fast.

To your first point, I can assure you that I will do my utmost to be fair and even-handed. With regard to allocating time between witnesses and questioners, I'll take it under consideration and reflect on it during the holidays. To seek guidance, I'll probably watch videos of the chair of the justice committee in years past to see how he handled this matter.

As for the notices of motion that have been given, I think there is already a lot for the subcommittee to reflect on, to work on and to prioritize, and then to come back with a plan for this committee.

I would also suggest that members from the various parties here send notices before the subcommittee meets, perhaps in the next two to three weeks, and that the subcommittee meet early in 2022—not too early, but fairly early—so that we can try to hash out a plan for this committee going forward.

If that's agreeable to all, I think that would be a path forward that could work.

I guess there is nothing else on the agenda for this committee.

I see Mr. Généreux.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

I don't know if you have time, because I think everybody wants to go back to the House for the presentation by the Minister of Finance, but it would be interesting to know each other more, so maybe when we come back we could present ourselves and state who we are, where we are from and how long we've been in the House so that we can understand who we are dealing with as partners here around the table.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

I think that we can certainly put those introductions on the agenda. Thank you.

I have been told a lot of good things about this committee. I have also been told that it works very collaboratively. I hope that we are going to continue that tradition.

The meeting is adjourned.