House of Commons Hansard #249 of the 35th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was businesses.

Topics

Small Business Loans ActGovernment Orders

12:50 p.m.

Liberal

Rose-Marie Ur Liberal Lambton—Middlesex, ON

Mr. Speaker, I want to add my support to everyone in Montreal today for the walk for unity. Canadians have come from all parts of Canada and I truly wish the best for everyone in Montreal especially today. This is truly a reflection of our great Canadian spirit and our great Canadian family.

I am pleased to speak on Bill C-99, an act to amend the Small Business Loans Act. For almost 35 years now, the Small Business Loans Act program has provided a valuable means of assisting Canadian small businesses to obtain the financing they need for capital, improvements and expansion.

The government is firmly committed to maintaining the basic nature of this successful program. This act is truly important for the riding of Lambton-Middlesex. I represent a rural riding with the largest urban centre being Strathroy with a population of about 11,000. My riding depends on the small business for economic growth and success. Businesses vary from the manufacturing of clothing and footwear to food processing and auto parts, to name a few.

The Small Business Loans Act encourages financing for small businesses which typically have difficulty in securing fixed asset loans financing for the establishment, expansion and/or modernization.

Under the SBLA, the federal government guarantees loans up to $250,000 which are made to small businesses by private sector financial institutions. New and existing businesses which are not farms or religious or charitable enterprises are eligible for Small Business Loans Act loans as long as their annual gross revenues do not exceed $5 million annually. It is safe to say that the SBLA has been to some degree responsible for the dramatic success of the small business sector in helping keep the Canadian economy vibrant.

Job creation is one of the most important economic contributions made by the small business sector. Since the late 1970s, smaller firms have been the key contributors to net job creation. Between 1979 and 1989 alone, businesses with fewer than 100 employees created over 2.3 million net new jobs in the Canadian economy, 87 per cent of all growth in private sector employment during that period. The self-employed added a further 400,000 new jobs to this total.

The role that the SBLA plays in nurturing small businesses, particularly start-up businesses, is significant. The objective of the act is to assist in the establishment of small businesses and the stats indicate that this objective is being met. From 1990 to 1994, 40 per cent of SBLA loans were made to start-up companies, which together with other very young businesses, those three years old or less, have been obtaining about 50 per cent of all SBLA loans.

The SBLA is meeting its goals and objectives in other ways as well. As is intended, the average size of loans made is modest. From 1989 to 1993, the average size SBLA loan was $38,000 and 38 per cent of the loans were $20,000 or less, 63 per cent were $40,000 or less. In 1994 the average loan size increased to $58,000, mainly because of an increase in the permissible maximum loan limit.

While these stats confirm that the program is serving start-ups in young business and providing loans of smaller amounts, there is other evidence to show that the SBLA is promoting the establishment and expansion of businesses in other ways. In a review carried out by independent consultants in 1992, some 60 per cent of the borrowers surveyed indicated that they would not have been able to obtain a bank loan without the assistance of the program. The review cross-checked and confirmed this finding when lenders surveyed reported that 50 per cent of the loans would not have been granted in the absence of this program.

Another study of the SBLA was undertaken in 1994 by a team of analysts under Dr. Allan Riding of Carleton University. Dr. Riding surveyed SBLA loan files and also worked with the Canadian Federation of Independent Business survey data. Dr. Riding found that the SBLA borrowers tend to be those targeted by the act and, as intended, their businesses tend to be smaller, more risky and with fewer resources than the non-SBLA borrowers.

Dr. Riding concluded that some 50 per cent to 70 per cent of the SBLA loans are truly incremental; that is, the lender and the federal government as guarantor are demonstrating confidence in the borrowers because of the risky nature of his or her business.

The SBLA program is an important one for small businesses and a popular one. A fivefold increase in the use of the program has resulted in a potential annual program deficit of $100 million or more. Clearly this would have been an intolerable burden on the taxpayer, one which would have made the SBLA program unsustainable.

The importance of the program to small businesses required that it be updated and modernized so that it can continue to provide its benefits. In particular, the program needed to be truly sustainable through a move to a full cost recovery. Full cost recovery was supported by all those who made their opinions known, both borrowers and lenders, during the extensive consultations that preceded both the changes before you today, as well as the changes of April 1, 1995.

Significant action has already been taken by the government to achieve cost recovery. Effective April 1, 1995, a new annual fee of 1.25 per cent was introduced on lenders' outstanding balance of SBLA loans made after March 31, 1995. The maximum interest rate charged by lenders was increased by 1.25 per cent to the prime rate plus 3 per cent for floating rate loans and to the residential mortgage rate, plus 3 per cent for fixed rate loans.

Bill C-99 will institute a second set of changes, some of which relate to program improvement and others to the recovery of the program cost. These changes include accelerating already scheduled decreases in the government loan guarantee from 90 per cent to 85 per cent. They will grant authority to make regulations for the establishment of claims processing fees and regarding the release of security, including personal guarantees taken by lenders in repayment of SBLA loans. They will improve the government guarantee coverage for low volume lenders.

Furthermore, they will enable future changes to the level of government guarantees to be made through the regulatory rather than the legislative process. This will add flexibility to the program and permit easier fine tuning in the future.

The move to cost recovery for the SBLA and the introduction of a new fee structure were announced in December 1994 when the Minister of Industry presented the paper "Building a more innovative economy" to the House of Commons. After consultations with all stakeholders the annual 1.25 per cent fee was deemed necessary

to achieve immediate cost recovery on all new loans made after March 31, 1995.

The losses being incurred annually under the SBLA program were threatening to spiral out of control. They were in excess of $100 million a year. The SBLA shortfall was also adding considerably to the overall deficit the government is determined to reduce. The program is a good one. The SBLA performs a valuable service, one that should be continued.

With the changes being brought about by Bill C-99 the move to bring the SBLA to full cost recovery will be completed. Efficiency in making future changes to the SBLA will be improved. Unnecessary subsidies to businesses will be ended and a significant advance will be made in the government's fight to control the deficit.

I urge all members of the House of Commons to work for swift passage of the bill.

Small Business Loans ActGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

Liberal

Reg Alcock Liberal Winnipeg South, MB

Mr. Speaker, it gives me pleasure to speak to the debate today. I have been involved in the question of how we provide financing to small business for some time and it is my feeling that the act in some way is somewhat misnamed.

If we reflect on it for a moment, perhaps we should call it the Canadian banking system failures act, because it is the failure of our banking system to adequately provide support to small businesses that makes the act necessary.

In the late 1980s and early 1990s I had the privilege of co-chairing a task force on the Manitoba economy which travelled the length and breadth of the province. It held meetings with chambers of commerce, town councils, small business people and large business people from all over the province of Manitoba. The one thing we heard over and over again was that for small, remote centres access to financing was extremely difficult.

We must ask ourselves why that is. We have a comprehensive system that the government has supported since the creation of the country. Banks throughout the country function in an oligopoly and have incredible protection from competition. They have the ability to fall back on the government and the taxpayers to bail them out whenever they make a mistake in a foreign country.

Why cannot banks, which as a result of that protection have become incredibly profitable, adequately meet the needs of small business? That is an important question we must ask ourselves and must keep asking the banks until we get an answer. We are correcting a flaw that should be corrected by the banking system.

We are talking about raising the loans, capital or equity available to small business to an average level of about $4 billion a year. We say that will cost us, if it spirals the way it has been, about $100 million a year. I ask members to reflect on what percentage of last year's bank profits is $100 million. If they do the mathematics they will find that it is something less than 1 per cent. Is it too much to ask the Canadian banking system to invest 1 per cent of its profits in Canadian small businesses? Why is it incapable of meeting this challenge?

An example that comes to mind is a small business in south central Manitoba in the riding of the member for Lisgar-Marquette. It had 12 employees and made electrical equipment. It designed a yard light. The principal of the business was something of an amateur inventor. He developed a number of successful products that are now being marketed throughout the world and can certainly be found in almost every farmyard in western Canada.

Through ingenuity and hard work he managed to convince a giant company, Quebec Hydro, of the efficiency of one of his products. Quebec Hydro gave him an order. It is a huge company that is certainly capable of paying its bills. The first order in the series was something like $9 million. However there was a catch. He had to meet the just in time requirements that are quite common in today's business world. He had to run up his inventory to a level that would meet the demand requirements of the order from Quebec Hydro.

Despite the fact he walked into the bank he had been doing business with for 20 years with the signed contract in hand, he could not get the bank to lend him the money. It could not happen because it was larger than the bank's policy for that area or because the bank did not understand that a business capable of doing that amount of business could exist in a small rural town in Manitoba. Whatever its rationale the bank did not respond to his need.

The banking system that we protect, that we bail out when it gets into trouble, that we protect because we want to have secure access to capital available for the economy, could not respond to his need. It is a tragedy.

If we look at whom we are talking about here and we look at the Carleton study we see the average business which received funding under the legislation had 7.5 employees. They have annual sales of roughly three-quarters of a million dollars and before tax profits of just under $50,000. These are the small businesses of the country.

On average 88 per cent of the businesses that received funding under the act created 5.3 new jobs. They did what we have claimed small business would do. If we give them access to capital they will create the jobs and they will create per dollar more jobs than will large corporations. That is one of the reasons we agreed to increase the total lending available under the legislation.

Nearly 30 per cent of small businesses reported that as a result of the loans they were able to obtain they became more efficient and decreased their costs, and 41.7 per cent reported their loans helped their firms to survive.

I support the legislation. It is a necessary and important change that makes it possible for small businesses in Canada to continue to fulfil a role in our community that is important to all Canadians, the creation of jobs, allowing people to obtain work and live in dignity. This is the foundation of the economy. Why cannot large banks, the banks with the billion dollar profits, find it within their operations to fill this niche? Why cannot they find resources within their huge operations to meet the needs of small businesses?

We have a real problem. I was disappointed today to hear the question of the member of the Reform Party from Lloydminster who spoke strongly against regional economic development and against the provision of capital to businesses in western Canada. It showed a profound misunderstanding of some of the problems businesses face.

Another example I will use that came across my desk recently is of a company in Winnipeg, not a small town but a relatively large centre with some financial strength. It is extremely profitable and doing very well in the construction sector. It has lots of work and has never been at risk. All of a sudden its credit lines were changed. It had not defaulted on anything. Its business was still strong. It was doing well. It inquired into why there was a change in the payment of certain bills from 90 days to 30 days.

The answer had nothing to do with western Canada. It had nothing to do with that business. The answer was that losses had been sustained in southern Ontario.

There is a real problem. If we talk to people with medium size businesses in western Canada we find there is a serious problem. They can grow to a certain size but to get above that the capital is not there. Or, if it is there, they have to work harder and pay more for it than a similar business in Toronto. That is not right. That is a failure of the market in the same way that the legislation represents a failure in our banking system.

Those are the places where government can play a role. Those are the places where government can act to ensure that the necessary resources are available so small businesses continue to produce the jobs members of Parliament and our constituents want them to produce.

I support the legislation I am sure all members of our caucus support it. We will be voting for the legislation when it comes forward. We are saddened by the fact that the banking system has been unable to respond to this need. We feel it is such a vitally important area that the government must continue to be involved and strengthen its involvement in support of small business.

Small Business Loans ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Is the House ready for the question?

Small Business Loans ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

Question.

Small Business Loans ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Small Business Loans ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Small Business Loans ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

No.

Small Business Loans ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

Small Business Loans ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

Yea.

Small Business Loans ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

All those opposed will please say nay.

Small Business Loans ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.

Small Business Loans ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

In my opinion the yeas have it.

And more than five members having risen:

Small Business Loans ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Pursuant to the standing orders the division stands deferred until Monday at the ordinary hour of daily adjournment.

Small Business Loans ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Liberal

Marlene Cowling Liberal Dauphin—Swan River, MB

I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I believe you would find unanimous consent to further defer the vote on second reading of Bill C-99 to Tuesday, October 31, at 5.00 p.m.

Small Business Loans ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Do I have the unanimous consent of the House to defer the vote until Tuesday, October 31, at 5.30 p.m.?

Small Business Loans ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Small Business Loans ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Liberal

Marlene Cowling Liberal Dauphin—Swan River, MB

Mr. Speaker, on another point of order, I believe you would find unanimous consent to call it 2.30 p.m.

Small Business Loans ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Is there unanimous consent?

Small Business Loans ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Small Business Loans ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until Monday at 11 a.m.

(The House adjourned at 1.16 p.m.)