Debates of April 16th, 2018

Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 1

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech, which was just as inspired and dynamic as usual. I will give him a chance to catch his breath, but I want to continue talking on regional development with him.

I want to talk about regional development in a corner of Quebec that is quite a bit closer to his riding than mine, but that concerns us all. I want to talk about the Davie shipyard, which has already had to lay off more than 800 workers over the past few months because it did not get the Liberal government contract to carry on its operations, when we know that the Canadian Coast Guard and the Royal Canadian Navy have needs to be filled.

When he was in the region, the Prime Minister promised icebreakers. However, it is already mid-April, spring is around the corner, and no contract has been signed.

I would like my colleague to say a few words about the consequences to the economic development of the Quebec City region when good jobs disappear because of the Liberals.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will talk about two things. First, with tongue in cheek, I might say that the Liberal icebreaker policy is to wait until there is no more ice, then there will be nothing to break. That is a stupid joke, but that is okay. I wanted to make it. Now, let us get down to business.

I am from Quebec City. I am 53 and I was a journalist for 20 years. I have heard a lot about the Davie shipyard in my time and, unfortunately, it has not always been good things. However, one of the Davie shipyard's great successes was the Asterix supply ship. Our government signed the letter of agreement so that the Davie shipyard could design and build a supply ship for the navy. It was to be built from an old ship at the Davie shipyard.

These people finished building the supply ship on time and on budget. It was a great success. They are now ready to build the second supply ship, the Obelix. The table has been set, but unfortunately the government is refusing to move forward. What is worse, the Prime Minister went to Quebec City in January. He turned on the charm for the people at the Davie shipyard—and interestingly, this time he wore his suit instead of dressing up like a dock worker—but nothing came of it. There was a lot of talk but no action.

We are holding the line. The government must give the Davie shipyard the contract for the Obelix, not as an act of charity or because the workers are nice people, but because the Davie shipyard deserves it, because those workers built the Asterix on time and on budget. They are prepared to build the Obelix. That would be good for all of Canada.

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I want the member to drill just a bit deeper on infrastructure. During an election campaign and then in budget after budget the government promised the infrastructure. Where is the infrastructure? The infrastructure will ensure we have more Chinese billionaires in the belt and road initiative, but where is the infrastructure for Canada?

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is not as expected.

The Liberals were elected saying that they would invest a lot of money. That was why they asked Canadians for a small deficit. The government does not invest in infrastructure. It invests in deficits to give money to people, but the children will have to pay for the money we do not have right now.

When we were in office, the Conservatives had a realistic plan for infrastructure, $85 billion under the Hon. Denis Lebel, who was a member in the House for more than 10 years. We are very proud of what he did. We had a realistic plan, with a budget and a zero deficit. It was not a huge plan for absolutely nothing with a huge deficit that our children would have to pay.

[Filomena Tassi, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the focus for the government was clear from the very beginning. The commitment in our platform was clear, that we were going to invest in Canadians because we believed in Canadians. Those investments have been working.

For example, there has been the creation of over 600,000 jobs since November 2015. Some of those jobs are being carried out as a result of our infrastructure investments. There have been 300,000 young people who have been lifted out of poverty with our Canada child benefit, which we know today has been indexed, and 70,000 workers will be lifted out of poverty with our Canada workers benefit.

Would the member agree that investing in the middle class is a good thing and that the numbers we are seeing and producing because of our investments are in the interest of Canadians?

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague for her French. A few weeks ago, she spoke a few sentences in French, and I welcome each and every member to speak the other official language.

When I talk about the other official language, I am not saying that French is the second official language. French and English are at the same level of official languages.

In response to the member's comments, I would first like to point out that, under our leadership, Canada outperformed every other G7 country, creating nearly 200,000 jobs per year despite the economic crisis. I also want to make it clear that the reason the Canadian economy is doing so well today is that the price of oil is three times higher now than it was when we had to deal with the worst global economic crisis since the Great Depression. In addition, our top trading partner and customer, the United States, is experiencing an economic boom that is creating opportunities for our businesses to sell more. That is a huge boost for the economy.

What the government can control is the budget, but its spending is out of control. Yes, the government is giving money to families. I know this because they have been saying so forever. The problem is that it is not the government's money. The government is running deficits. Sure, we all want to help kids, but the government is helping them so much that those kids are going to have to pay the price later on.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to my colleague's speech. He gave a great example of how sometimes the head of the household has to decide whether to borrow money for a mortgage, or a car, or the kids' education. However, I ask him to look at who is running the country, a trust fund baby who has never even thought about a mortgage or a loan for a car. What is that? He is putting money aside for the education of his kids. This is something that is not done. When we look at the finance minister, it is pretty much the same thing.

The member talked about the importance of balancing the budget. If we have people running the country who have never had to balance a budget themselves, does he think they will ever balance the budget?

I am sure the Prime Minister was given this little plastic card called a “credit card”. If he puts it into a machine and punches in four numbers, money just keeps coming out. I think he thinks Canadian taxpayers are the same as that credit card.

Does the member think the budget will ever be balanced under the finance minister and the Prime Minister?

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as a family, we have to balance our budget. Yes, we have to borrow money to buy a car or a house. That is normal, because we need that. We cannot wait to have a half a million dollars in the bank so we can pay cash for our house and car. However, we do not borrow money to pay for lunch or dinner, but that is exactly what the government is doing right now.

The government gives money to people that we do not have, and this is the worst way to administer. We send the bill to those we are supposed to help, which is not the way to balance the budget correctly. When we have a leader who says that the budget will balance itself, well, we have that kind of stupid action.

[David Lametti, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour for me to rise in the House this evening to talk about the budget.

First of all, on behalf of the people of LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, as well as all Canadians, I would like to extend my condolences to all those affected by the tragic event that has befallen Humboldt, Saskatchewan. This was an absolute tragedy. We offer our prayers, condolences, and thoughts to all those it has affected. We hope that, through this tragedy, we will forge stronger ties across the nation.

It goes without saying that my constituents in LaSalle—Émard—Verdun will benefit from many elements of this budget. Some of my colleagues have already discussed these measures, such as housing, the child benefit, and benefits for workers seeking retraining. I would like to talk about one element of the budget that I personally think is very important for Canada's future. I am often asked why I went into politics. I used to be a university professor. I was full professor in a fantastic faculty with an exceptional teaching staff and amazing students, whom I must admit I miss very much. It was a good gig. Why change careers to go into politics?

The answer often turns, at least in terms of part of the answer, on funding for fundamental research in this country. As a university professor over the 10 years under the previous Harper government, I saw the literal destruction of research funding in Canada. There were cuts to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, cuts to NSERC, cuts to CIHR. Colleagues and students across Canada whose funding was compromised by these very radical cuts in our education system struggled. Colleagues struggled, but worse was that students struggled. Graduate students struggled.

My funding for graduate work for my doctorate was funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council in a period when funding was more generous. How many people were unable to have that education that I was fortunate enough to get through SSHRC funding during the period of the Conservative government? How many are out there that we just do not know about, because they did not get the funding? How many good research projects that would have funded graduate and post-graduate students did not get funded in Canada because of the Harper cuts? How many good, innovative, brilliant students and academics went to other countries and never came back because of the budget cuts to basic research funding under the Harper government?

What is worse is the number of academics, intellectuals, and experts in various domains who left simply because they were sick and tired of hearing academics being run down by Stephen Harper and the people around him. That is why I jumped into politics. I gave up a good gig because I thought that everybody had a responsibility to make sure that we could do everything in our power to make sure that we could change that government, and we succeeded.

Before I go on, I just want to inform the House that I will be splitting my time with the member for St. John's East.

The election day came in 2015. Immediately, in budget 2015, we stopped the gap in terms of the deficit in basic fundamental research funding in Canada.

David Naylor and his colleagues were tasked with reviewing the state of basic research in Canada. In budget 2017, we invested a great deal of money in that part of the puzzle, specifically in innovation and skills. Budget 2017 really was about innovation and skills. Still, basic research in this country needed additional support.

We waited for the Naylor report, and once we received it, we appointed a new chief science advisor. This measure was very well received by the scientific community. Then we began rebuilding. In budget 2017, we invested a lot of money in superclusters and in strategic funds for innovation. We made an important announcement today at Bell Helicopter, north of Montreal. That is another very innovative company in this country. We also invested to help young people learn how to code with the CanCode initiative. However, we waited until budget 2018 to create and build a future together through basic research with a $3-billion investment over five years in Canada's research organizations.

That is $1.7 billion over five years to support the next generation of researchers in Canada. This is curiosity-based research. It is research that is driven by the intellectual curiosities of basic research. It is absolutely critical that in addition to any innovation spending and any spending on skills training that we do, we also buttress curiosity-driven research.

In Canada right now, in Montreal, Toronto, and Edmonton, we are going through a boom in the artificial intelligence economy. That is wonderful, and our government is investing in that, as are provincial governments across Canada, as are private sector partners as well. Why are we at that state? It is because 20 years ago, when Yoshua Bengio, Geoffrey Hinton, and Richard Sutton were doing machine learning and other bits of artificial intelligence and were not necessarily getting any traction in other parts of the world, they were being funded in Canada by NSERC. They managed to convince, in very rigorous competitions for funding, enough of their colleagues that their research should be funded, and it was. Having seen the other side, I can say that these academic funding competitions are tough, very rigorous, and held to the highest standard, with experts from Canada and around the world participating as a matter of academic duty. Now, 20 years later, we are beginning to see the economic fruits of that research. Sometimes it will work and sometimes it will not. However, the point is that we need to be funding basic research in a big way, and $1.7 billion over five years to the three major agencies is absolutely critical.

In addition to funding basic research, we also need to fund infrastructure for research. Hence, the Canadian Foundation for Innovation, the CFI, is receiving $1.3 billion over five years for labs, equipment, and infrastructure...I have that number wrong. It was $1.3 billion in total, of which $763 million will go to the CFI. That is critically important, because it wanted and needed a stable budget. It often does the structural work that makes the curiosity-based research possible.

To conclude, when I look at this budget, I see the fulfillment of one of the major reasons that I went into politics. It was absolutely critical to help restabilize the research picture in Canada to make Canada a destination for research. I would like to think we have succeeded.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Madam Speaker, the member is a learned colleague. He mentioned how he received a government grant to pay for his education. My educational experience was a bit different and was probably more similar to the experience of most Canadians: I went to work on the line at GM. I had a part-time job and I put myself through school. He has his perspective and I have mine.

The member really did not talk about business and how this budget pretty much ignores small business. I guess he believes in the Liberal policy for small business, that being to start with a large business like Kinder Morgan, regulate and tax it to death, and when there is a problem, put money into it to subsidize it, and then after that business fails, there is a business plan for small business. A big business is made into a small business.

I would like the member to comment on whether there is anything in the budget that would help streamline regulation or lower business taxes or anything that says the government will balance the budget in any time certain in the next few years. Is there anything about increasing Canada's competitiveness overall? We are losing out to our biggest competitors, such as the United States, and we are losing out around the world. Even former Liberal John Manley, who was the finance minister, recognizes that.

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Madam Speaker, I am rather amused by the tone of my colleague's question. My parents came to this country with no formal education, and the one thing that they wanted their children to get was a formal education. Yes, I went to a number of very good universities on scholarships, and they were earned by merit. I earned the Social Science and Humanities Research Council money through a competitive process. I earned that money. I also worked on construction sites in the summer and worked my way through college.

The member seems to insinuate things quite often but his insinuation that everyone else had a silver spoon except him is completely off base. I stand by my education. I stand by the work I put into getting that education. I stand by the work I did to get funding for that education through competitive processes.

What we are trying to do in this budget is to give those same opportunities to Canadians who come from a socio-economic background similar to mine.

[Wayne Stetski, NDP, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Madam Speaker, Bill C-74 contains 556 pages and would amend 44 acts.

I looked at some of the things that would be impacted by this legislation, such as carbon pricing. Climate change is probably one of the most important environmental issues of our time. It is top of mind for people in my riding of Kootenay—Columbia.

Pensions are important. I held a telephone town hall and almost 4,000 people stayed on the line to talk about pensions. Veterans are another important issue to Canadians. Cannabis is a hot issue in my riding. Part of my riding traditionally gets a fair bit of its economy from cannabis; these are outdoor growers. The Canada Infrastructure Bank would privatize our infrastructure projects. Mineral exploration and mining are very important in my riding.

When I look at this list, I see that every one of the items on this list deserves individual debate and discussion. I am wondering if the member would agree that these items should be split out and debated separately because of their importance, not only to my constituents of Kootenay—Columbia but to all Canadians.

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Madam Speaker, the hon. member asked a legitimate question. These are all important issues, and the budget is important.

I do not know that my answer will satisfy the member. These other issues are included because they have a financial aspect to them and it is important to include them in the budget. That is a matter on which we may very well reasonably disagree, but that certainly would be the answer to that concern on his part.

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to stand today on behalf of the people of St. John's East in support of budget 2018. Budget 2018 proposes real and tangible benefits for my riding of St. John's East and reflects many issues raised by my constituents in the consultations I have had with them over the past year.

In my short remarks, I will focus on three aspects of the budget: specific supports to St. John's East and Newfoundland and Labrador; economic growth that benefits all Canadians; and support for the opportunities in trade, pharmacare, and innovation that will grow the future Canadian economy.

Budget 2018 proposes many important investments for Newfoundland and Labrador, including $250 million to renew the network of small craft harbours and work with municipalities where investments and divestitures can enhance local communities and support a safe and prosperous fishery. I visited eight small craft harbours in and around my riding over the break weeks, and it was lovely to see what great work the small craft harbours do and what the priorities for improving the safety and the industriousness of those harbours would be.

There will be $80 million in 2018-19 and $150 million in 2019-20 to the provinces for training and support for seasonal workers who have exhausted their EI benefits. The new Canada workers benefit is expected to provide almost $40 million to support 5,000 additional low-income workers in my province. There is $48 million in new funding for ACOA, of which $8 million is dedicated to women entrepreneurs. In 2018-19 alone, Newfoundland and Labrador will receive $750 million through the Canada health transfer and the Canada social transfer.

There is also enhanced support for research and researchers, including those at Memorial University in my riding of St. John's East, by investing nearly $4 billion across the country to help researchers solve the problems of today and create the innovations of tomorrow.

The benefits of budget 2018 are not only for St. John's East, obviously. They are intended to be enjoyed by the entire country. It is clear that the fastest and best way to grow our economy is by identifying and correcting systemic biases holding good people back. Budget 2018 identifies and addresses unfairness against women and indigenous people. Levelling the playing field for those groups will drive economic growth.

Women in Canada are among the world's most educated, and it is time we acknowledged that by ensuring greater participation of women in the workforce. It is not only the right thing to do, but the smart thing to do for our economy. That is why this budget puts gender at the heart of its decisions. Advancing women's equality in Canada will drive economic growth, while boosting the income of Canadian families. More women in leadership positions will not just grow the economy, create jobs, and strengthen communities; it will also lead to innovation and changes in the workplace that will benefit everyone.

In this budget, the government is providing leadership to address the gender wage gap. Through the increased transparency required by pay equity legislation, we will see how our government is meeting its commitment that women working in federally regulated sectors receive equal pay for equal work. We will also seek to introduce GBA+ legislation to make gender budgeting a permanent aspect of the federal budget-making process going forward.

The push for a level playing field does not end with gender equality. We will also be working to create a fair playing field for Canada's indigenous people by forging a new relationship based on trust, respect, and a true spirit of reconciliation.

Through budget 2018, the government is working to help close the gap between the living conditions of indigenous people and those of non-indigenous people, facilitate self-determination, and advance the recognition of rights. We will do this by, first, building on significant investments of $11.8 billion in the past two budgets, and second, by investing in priority areas identified by first nations, Inuit, and Métis nation partners in the spirit of reconciliation.

We are committed to ending long-term drinking water advisories on public water systems on reserve by March 2021 and will make greater investments through budget 2018 to ensure that this happens more quickly. Nearly one in five indigenous people live in housing that is in need of major repairs, and others live in housing that is overcrowded. We are working to ensure that they get the support they need to enjoy safe, adequate, and affordable housing, something the majority of non-indigenous people take for granted. These investments will ensure that indigenous people can benefit from similar conditions for growth as their non-indigenous counterparts.

By addressing existing inequalities, we can grow the economy and create a better country for all Canadians.

Canada's future is bright. We have a lot to be optimistic about. Future opportunities in trade, pharmacare, and innovation will make it even brighter. This government knows that Canada's economic success also depends on strong trade relationships in an increasingly globalized world. Canada is a trading nation, and if done properly, trade can be a positive force for change. That is why this budget funds Global Affairs Canada with up to $75 million over five years to establish a stronger presence for Canadian diplomatic and trade support in China and Asia. This includes bolstering the number of Canadian diplomats and trade commissioners on the ground in China, as well as new initiatives to promote Canada's trade with China and other Asian markets.

We are continuing to work with the United States and Mexico to modernize the North American Free Trade Agreement. We know that this agreement has been beneficial to the lives of workers and families in all three partner countries. Under NAFTA, North America has become the biggest, most comprehensive trading bloc in the world, comprising a quarter of the world's GDP, even though we represent only 7% of the world's population. That is why we are working hard to renegotiate an updated and improved North American Free Trade Agreement that would benefit all three countries and foster greater opportunity for the middle class.

Trade maintains the high standard of living enjoyed by many people in St. John's East. They are proud of Canada's improved global brand as a reliable partner in fair, progressive, environmentally conscious, and gender-balanced trade. Our country is one of innovators. Curiosity, courage, creativity, and a collaborative spirit are what leads to the kind of innovations and technologies that improve our daily lives and drive our economy and our country forward.

Science and technology, along with stronger international trade, are rapidly changing the way Canadians live and work, bringing new challenges and more opportunities. Nowhere is that more evident than at Memorial University, the university of Newfoundland and Labrador, where our Genesis Centre is fostering numerous young, smart, and innovative companies that are doing great things in oceans tech and health care in the digital economy, providing opportunities in clean energy and home improvement. Innovation is an integral part of Newfoundland and Labrador's growth.

On February 15, 2018, the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development announced groundbreaking funding for Canada's five superclusters. I am proud and happy to say that this includes an ocean supercluster, which is based in Atlantic Canada and will use innovation to improve competitiveness in industries that we know very well in St. John's East: fisheries, oil and gas, clean energy, and oceans tech. The OECD predicts that the ocean economy will double by 2030, and St. John's is poised to enjoy that growth, partially due to budget 2018.

Many of my constituents in St. John's East are calling for a national approach to ensure that no Canadian needs to choose between food or heat and the medicine he or she needs. That is why I am excited about the creation of a new advisory council on the implementation of national pharmacare that was announced as part of this budget. The council will begin a national dialogue that would include working closely with experts from all relevant fields, as well as with national, provincial, territorial, and indigenous leaders. The council will report to the Minister of Health and the Minister of Finance, and will conduct an economic and social assessment of domestic and international models. As we move forward with some version of national support for access to pharmaceuticals, I think everyone would agree that this will improve the lives of the majority of Canadians.

Our government is investing in new generations of Canadian research and researchers by proposing $1.2 billion over five years to the granting councils for fundamental research to provide increased support and training opportunities for researchers, students, and high-quality personnel.

There are so many great components to this budget. Once again, I am proud to say that I stand on behalf of my fellow citizens of St. John's East in support of this budget. If I were to highlight one thing, it would be the small craft harbours in my riding. For centuries, they were the lifeblood of the community. When Newfoundland joined Confederation, they became federal assets, and they provide one of the main connections that ordinary citizens have to their federal government. In places like Pouch Cove, Bauline, and Portugal Cove-St. Philip's, we really get an opportunity to see how the Government of Canada can make positive change in the lives of people. Those small craft harbours have been neglected, and by having this additional funding in place we will be able to make them safer and more economically useful for the fishers who create their livelihood and the livelihood of their communities out of those ports.

Business of the House

[Filomena Tassi, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. There have been discussions among the parties, and if you seek it, I think you will find unanimous consent for the following motion:

That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practice of the House, during the debate tonight pursuant to Standing Order 52, no quorum calls, dilatory motions or requests for unanimous consent shall be received by the Chair.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Does the hon. member have the unanimous consent of the House to move the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

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

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

(Motion agreed to)

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-74, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 27, 2018 and other measures, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 1

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Madam Speaker, my colleague said that there were many more great things in the budget that he would like to enumerate. I am sure he would have liked to enumerate the fact that taxes for the middle class have gone up by 90%. He would have liked to say that there are new taxes on small businesses and employees, and that we are borrowing another $18 billion to facilitate the budget. That is on top of all the other deficits this budget has incurred, not to mention the carbon tax, which estimates say will cost a family of four between $1,100 and $2,500 per year. All of these costs are going to make it that much more difficult. The debt alone is going to cost $26 billion just in interest this year. That is not paying down any of the debt. It will be $33 billion by 2021.

Does the member actually believe that these are helpful expenditures, when they are simply going to be pushed forward and will need to be paid for by our children and grandchildren?

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Madam Speaker, the hon. member touched on a lot of different aspects, but I will focus on the one related to deficit spending. I agree with what the Minister of Finance has said. The appropriate metric for measuring Canada's progress on reducing debt is the debt-to-GDP ratio. We see that it is going down now. It has gone down each year under our government's tenure, and it will continue to do so.

When we focus merely on deficit without looking at the overall growth of the economy, we are seeing the trees and failing to see the forest. We need to see the overall economic growth that Canada has enjoyed over the first two years of the government's mandate, which has greatly surpassed expectations and provided for additional economic growth that renders the deficit spending less than the overall growth of the economy, so that we see an overall reduction. Therefore, Canada's fiscal position is stronger under our government. Even though there are modest deficits being run, they are less than the overall growth of the economy. This is more than the previous government can say, because it grew the debt-to-GDP ratio over its tenure, and we have reduced it.

[Filomena Tassi, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

Madam Speaker, I was very pleased that both my hon. colleague and the speaker before him mentioned the commitment to research and the $1.7 billion over five years being invested in research. In my riding, I have three post-secondary institutions, and I cannot tell you how thrilled they are with the commitment of the government to research. In fact, the president of one of the post-secondary institutions has stated that this has breathed a whole new life into the institution.

I would like to ask the hon. member about the importance of this investment in research and how not only researchers but all Canadians would benefit from this very important investment.

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Madam Speaker, St. John's East is the home of Memorial University, the university of Newfoundland and Labrador. There are over 18,000 full-time students at the institution. There is an engineering faculty, a business faculty, and social sciences. There is a new science building, to which our federal government has contributed $100 million in infrastructure funding. There is a world-class medical school. Within each of these departments and programs, there are researchers who are solving today's problems. However, they often cannot do that without the support of additional faculty, without research staff, and without Ph.D. students who are working on those problems with them. In order to build those labs, build that base of knowledge, and have that work done, they need additional funding and support.

The granting councils have been underfunded for a long time. The recent report that led to our increase in research funding called specifically for a massive injection of federal government dollars into primary research so that these problems can be solved. Ultimately, and we see it within the incubators at our national universities, companies develop out of this primary research, and those companies go on to sell products not only in Canada but in global markets. The people who work in those companies have high-quality, interesting jobs that keep them in their local communities and at the universities, and drive the cycle of growth that we need in the 21st century.