House of Commons Hansard #29 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was tax.

Topics

Economic Action Plan 2013 Act No. 2Government Orders

7:55 p.m.

NDP

The Deputy Speaker NDP Joe Comartin

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

Economic Action Plan 2013 Act No. 2Government Orders

7:55 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

No.

Economic Action Plan 2013 Act No. 2Government Orders

7:55 p.m.

NDP

The Deputy Speaker NDP Joe Comartin

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

Economic Action Plan 2013 Act No. 2Government Orders

7:55 p.m.

Some hon. members

Yea.

Economic Action Plan 2013 Act No. 2Government Orders

7:55 p.m.

NDP

The Deputy Speaker NDP Joe Comartin

All those opposed will please say nay.

Economic Action Plan 2013 Act No. 2Government Orders

7:55 p.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.

Economic Action Plan 2013 Act No. 2Government Orders

7:55 p.m.

NDP

The Deputy Speaker NDP Joe Comartin

In my opinion the yeas have it.

And five or more members having risen:

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #34

Economic Action Plan 2013 Act No. 2Government Orders

8 p.m.

NDP

The Deputy Speaker NDP Joe Comartin

I declare the motion carried.

Economic Action Plan 2013 Act No. 2Government Orders

8 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

I wish to inform the House that, because it is getting late, the period provided for private members' business is cancelled. Therefore, the order is deferred to a future sitting.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

InfrastructureAdjournment Proceedings

8:05 p.m.

NDP

Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet NDP Hochelaga, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak further about a question I raised a month ago in the House, and to which we still have not had a reply, for a change.

The current building Canada fund, which invests in infrastructure, expires at the end of the year.

In its last budget, brought down eight months ago, the government announced the creation of a new 10-year infrastructure program to be launched in 2014.

The NDP is certainly not going to complain about that the government is thinking long term for once. We were hoping for a 15- or 20-year plan to eliminate the infrastructure deficit, but at least we have something.

However, we have been given very vague answers, or none at all. Some groups have shared their concerns about the terms of this new program, and that is why I am raising this issue again today.

As is the case with many of their fine announcements, the Conservatives' are quick and obliging when it comes to making promises, but not so quick when it comes to providing the details and information about how to access the announced funding.

I have raised this issue many times over the past few months. The government looks really good when it announces new programs.

However, everyone and their dog has to know that the Conservatives' announcements are often empty promises. In other words, the government announces all kinds of new programs, but then takes its sweet time telling us how those programs will actually be implemented.

In the meantime, those who currently get funding or who would like to apply under the new program have no idea what is going on. For some, that is starting to get really stressful.

As of now, there is still no framework agreement to get the ball rolling on the application process for the new infrastructure program. The truth is, we cannot even be sure if those on the other side of the House have bothered to take a good look at this issue.

I raised this question on November 4 after meeting with the Association of Consulting Engineering Companies of Canada, which wants the new building Canada plan to be up and running as soon as possible so that the project planning and application process can start now and new money can start flowing in April 2014.

The Minister of Infrastructure, Communities and Intergovernmental Affairs replied that the parameters had not yet been established. He also said that meetings had taken place with all of the provincial and territorial representatives. That is a good start, but as of today, nothing has been announced. What exactly are they waiting for?

The government shut down Parliament for months. Nobody had better tell us that there was not enough time to look at this issue. I also hope nobody will seriously tell us that they had no idea what they wanted to do with this program before they announced it, because that is kind of what it is starting to look like.

Since becoming the official opposition's infrastructure critic, I have met with representatives of various groups many times. They all tell me the same thing. They all want the same things and have the same concerns. We are still waiting.

Groups, entrepreneurs and municipalities are worried that they will be forgotten. This is urgent because jobs and programs and more are at stake.

Can the minister tell us what stage negotiations to finalize this framework agreement have reached? Can he tell us when he plans to announce the new parameters so that the application process can begin?

InfrastructureAdjournment Proceedings

8:10 p.m.

Kitchener—Waterloo Ontario

Conservative

Peter Braid ConservativeParliamentary Secretary for Infrastructure and Communities

Mr. Speaker, since 2006, our government has taken unprecedented action to support the provinces, territories and municipalities in building new, modern and efficient public infrastructure in every community across Canada. In budget 2007, we launched the historic building Canada plan, which is providing $33 billion over seven years for provincial, territorial and municipal infrastructure projects. In 2009, when the economy needed a boost, our economic action plan provided an additional $14 billion in funding for infrastructure and housing. Budget 2012 also committed an additional $150 million in infrastructure funding under the community infrastructure improvement fund.

Building on the success of past infrastructure investments, budgets 2011 and 2012 committed our government to consult with our partners to develop a long-term plan for public infrastructure that extended beyond the original building Canada plan. The outcome of this engagement process was the new building Canada plan, which was announced as part of our budget 2013. The new building Canada plan includes over $53 billion in new and existing funding for provincial, territorial and municipal infrastructure over 10 years.

The plan features three key funds that will see $47 billion in new funding for provincial, territorial and municipal infrastructure starting in 2014-15. First, the 10-year, $32.2-billion community improvement fund consists of an indexed gas tax fund and the incremental GST rebate to support municipalities across Canada in investing in roads, public transit, recreational facilities and other community infrastructure. Second, the new building Canada fund will provide $14 billion over 10 years in support of major economic infrastructure projects of national, regional and local significance, including highways and public transit infrastructure. Finally, economic action plan 2013 renewed the P3 Canada fund with $1.25 billion over five years to continue supporting innovative ways to build infrastructure projects faster and provide better value for Canadian taxpayers through public-private partnerships.

On November 5, new gas tax fund agreements were sent to the provinces and territories. Our government is now ready to sign those agreements. We have been working diligently to finalize the new building Canada fund program parameters. The new building Canada fund will be launched on schedule. There will not be a break in federal funding for our country's infrastructure. While we continue to develop the new building Canada fund, $6 billion from the original building Canada fund continues to flow to provinces, territories and municipalities as they continue to build and renew infrastructure that contributes to economic growth, job creation, a cleaner environment and strong, prosperous communities.

InfrastructureAdjournment Proceedings

8:10 p.m.

NDP

Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet NDP Hochelaga, QC

Mr. Speaker, the minister, and now the parliamentary secretary, tell us that there has never been so much money invested in infrastructure in Canada's history. On paper, we are talking about $47.5 billion, but just now the parliamentary secretary mentioned $47 billion spread over 10 years.

In fact, and according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, over the next five years there will be $5.8 million less than the amount provided for this fiscal year. In addition, there are still long delays to access the funding announced by the Conservatives, which means that several unspent moneys are included in the $47.5-billion amount. Therefore there is not $47.5 billion in new money, since the old amounts are included in this total. However, we are being told that this is new money.

Is the minister's new strategy to cause delays in order to save money and then make people believe that this is new money?

I never received an adequate answer to my questions. He said there would be no break in funding. I asked him when the application process could begin, to ensure there is no break in funding on April 1, 2014.

InfrastructureAdjournment Proceedings

8:10 p.m.

Conservative

Peter Braid Conservative Kitchener—Waterloo, ON

Mr. Speaker, as I explained earlier, our government recognizes the importance of infrastructure as a key enabler of economic growth and job creation. We also know that investments in infrastructure provide a high quality of life for families in every city and community across this great land.

That is why in economic action plan 2013 we announced that federal infrastructure investments would reach $70 billion over the next decade. This includes unprecedented funding for federal, provincial, territorial and community projects such as roads, bridges, subways and water infrastructure.

I am proud to say that this is the largest and longest federal investment in job-creating infrastructure in Canadian history. We are working hard to finalize the parameters and I look forward to working with my colleagues and all stakeholders as we launch the next phase of our government's historic infrastructure investments.

Science and TechnologyAdjournment Proceedings

8:15 p.m.

NDP

Laurin Liu NDP Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to have this opportunity to revisit a question I raised on November 6 regarding the indirect costs of research, which are severely penalizing Canada's universities.

Research infrastructure is crucial to advancements in many major scientific sectors. Consider, for example, the supercomputers needed for data processing or the MRI machines used to study advanced materials. Such equipment is what determines the quality of research done in our universities. It is key to the retention and recruitment of researchers, and is an essential part of training students.

Furthermore, in the global context, the availability of cutting-edge research equipment is essential to maintaining the competitiveness of our research institutions and is a deciding factor in the creation of partnerships and development of consortiums, both with the private sector and with other public institutions.

Consider Quebec, for example. For the past 15 years, Quebec has invested nearly $2 billion in major equipment and the development of modern research infrastructure. While Quebec, the provinces and universities have been investing massively in their research infrastructure, the federal government has refused to do its part and has covered only a tiny fraction of the operating costs of the research infrastructure.

In addition, the Conservative government eliminated the research tools and instrumentation program, instituted a moratorium on the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada's major resources support program and also eliminated funding for a number of flagship projects, including, for example, the monitoring program at the Experimental Lakes Area, which was a world-renowned research program.

To sum up, universities and the provinces are stuck with the bill for research infrastructure costs more often than not, even though they are already suffering because of federal cuts to transfer payments.

Research infrastructure is expensive for these institutions. For example, the direct costs that research institutions must take on include: equipment maintenance, facility costs, energy costs, support staff costs and equipment.

In 2003, the federal government created an indirect costs program to provide support for a portion of the indirect costs of federally funded research incurred by Canadian institutions.

With an annual budget of just over $300 million, this program was to cover 40% of the indirect costs of research, but that never happened. It is estimated that barely 20% of these costs are covered today. In Quebec, for example, that represents a yearly shortfall of $113 million.

Canada's record is not good compared to other countries. European Union countries cover 40% to 60% of these costs, while the United States and the United Kingdom cover nearly 50%. This shortfall puts a huge financial burden on Quebec research organizations. For example, for the University of Montreal's Institute for Research in Immunology and Cancer alone, which receives some $10 million in federal grants for its research, the shortfall in indirect costs is $4.7 million.

Since the holidays are approaching, I will put it in other terms. That would be the same as receiving a $100 gift but having to spend $50 on batteries.

Does the government still plan on covering 40% of the indirect costs of research?

Science and TechnologyAdjournment Proceedings

8:15 p.m.

Kitchener—Waterloo Ontario

Conservative

Peter Braid ConservativeParliamentary Secretary for Infrastructure and Communities

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to respond to the comments made by the hon. member for Rivière-des-Mille-Îles regarding the federal government's support for the indirect costs of research.

Research excellence is essential to the success of our economy, our health, our society, and our security. That is why our government continues to invest in science, technology, and innovation. The numbers speak for themselves. Since 2006, our government has invested more than $9 billion in science, technology, and the growth of innovative firms, not to mention that Canada leads all G7 nations in R and D performed by universities and colleges as a percentage of GDP. This is thanks, in part, to successive and sustained investments in federal granting councils, including $37 million in budget 2013.

Our government recognizes that federally sponsored research undertaken at post-secondary institutions carries with it some associated indirect costs, which is why we provide support for these through the indirect costs program. For more than 10 years, this program has been successfully mitigating a portion of the institutional costs associated with granting council funded research, research that cannot be attributed to a specific project.

With an annual budget of $332 million, the indirect costs program assists universities, colleges, and their affiliated research hospitals in providing a cutting-edge environment for our world-class researchers. This enables them to pursue scientific advances that benefit our economy and improve the quality of life for our families.

To ensure that this program is meeting its objective of reinforcing research excellence and is adequately responding to the needs, budget 2013 announced a program review. The program review will be informed by input from the post-secondary education sector, including institutions, associations, and our provincial colleagues.

Our government continues to enhance support for research and innovation. Budget 2012 committed $500 million, for example, to the Canada Foundation for Innovation, an excellent organization, to support advanced infrastructure improvements at research institutes across Canada. We also continue to support highly skilled researchers through funding for the granting councils and support for scholarships, fellowships, and research chairs.

All of these investments are paying off. Despite being home to only half a per cent of the world's population, Canada produces 5% of our most frequently cited scientific papers. Additionally, we were the only G7 country that increased its output of scientific papers above the world average. We have enjoyed a net inflow of highly qualified research personnel between 1997 and 2010. I see that in my riding of Kitchener—Waterloo.

In conclusion, our government recognizes that stakeholders from across the public and private sectors have a critical role to play in achieving our objectives, and we look forward to working with all involved to realize our collective goal of advancing Canada's scientific enterprise.

Science and TechnologyAdjournment Proceedings

8:20 p.m.

NDP

Laurin Liu NDP Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

Mr. Speaker, for once I would have liked a real answer to my question, but as someone once said, it is called question period, not answer period. I can see that the same holds true for adjournment proceedings.

In response to the parliamentary secretary, I would like to quote the president of ACFAS, Louise Dandurand, who wrote to the Minister of Industry in the fall to condemn this situation. Here is one eloquent excerpt:

There is an urgent need for action. For years, Canadian universities and the college system have been forced to dip into their own operating budgets to compensate for the lack of investment in the [indirect costs program], thus jeopardizing certain student services and the survival of research projects.

Like us, she is calling for a federal investment to cover 40% of the indirect costs of research. Will the government listen to the people who know?

I hope so because for now, the government's inaction is creating an unhealthy climate in which the top research universities are being penalized. The more grants they receive, the harder it is for universities to make up for the shortfall resulting from indirect costs that are not covered.

Science and TechnologyAdjournment Proceedings

8:25 p.m.

Conservative

Peter Braid Conservative Kitchener—Waterloo, ON

Mr. Speaker, as I explained, our government is taking action to ensure that Canada has the necessary conditions in place to foster innovation and secure the prosperity of Canadians. We understand that federally funded research undertaken at post-secondary institutions is accompanied by associated indirect costs, as I explained. This is why we help ease the financial burden through the indirect costs program.

As I mentioned, we are conducting a review to ensure that the program is reinforcing excellence in research and is responding to the needs of our important research community. Views from across the post-secondary education sector and from our provincial colleagues are instrumental in this review.

Our government's investments have helped position Canada as a leader among G7 nations in R and D performed by universities and colleges. We made these investments because we recognize that our researchers need the right tools and the proper environment in which to conduct their work. That is why our federal science and technology expenditures, $9 billion since 2006, support a suite of investments in research, people, and infrastructure.

Finally, our government remains committed to maintaining a strong foundation in research excellence. I would ask my counterparts across the aisle to recognize and support this continued commitment.

Science and TechnologyAdjournment Proceedings

8:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 2 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 8:25 p.m.)