Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 46 - 60 of 1884
Livio Di Matteo
View Livio Di Matteo Profile
Livio Di Matteo
2020-12-11 13:54
Well, that's a function of two things. In terms of the rapid paydown, first, there was a large demobilization after the war effort, so expenditures, of course, came down very quickly. There was also, in the immediate period right after the war, essentially a very large economic boom. I mean, in terms of the demographic factors at the time, there was the baby boom. There was a natural resource boom with natural resource exports.
The growth rate of the economy, moving into the end of the 1940s and into the 1950s, saw economic growth, in real terms annually, in easily the 4% to 5% to 6% range some years. You have—
View Pierre Poilievre Profile
CPC (ON)
Do you see that kind of growth repeating itself to pay for all of this new spending?
Livio Di Matteo
View Livio Di Matteo Profile
Livio Di Matteo
2020-12-11 13:55
You're asking me to conduct a forecast, and I don't really want to make weather forecasters look good.
Essentially, the factors for that type of rebound don't seem to be there. However, the one thing I would offer is that in the wake of the pandemic, if you want to think about human psychology, there might be a lot of consumer spending to make up for lost time, given the restrictions that have been faced. Again, I don't see the signs there—
View Pierre Poilievre Profile
CPC (ON)
Consumer spending is interesting. It increases demand, but in the absence of supply, in fact with a possible supply reduction that has occurred over the last year while supply chains have been downed, there could be faster growth in consumption than there is in production. We know that historically this has led to inflation. None of the experts believe that's going to happen, but the experts are often wrong. In 1978 there was high unemployment and high inflation at the same time, leading interest rates to move from 8% to 22% in 24 months, with no prediction of that from the experts and without the Bank of Canada ever anticipating it.
Is it possible that interest rates could rise faster than all of the experts are predicting, based on your knowledge of history?
Livio Di Matteo
View Livio Di Matteo Profile
Livio Di Matteo
2020-12-11 13:57
Let me answer that in two ways. Unpredicted changes can happen. No one predicted the pandemic and its effect on the economy. The other thing you have to keep in mind is what's happened over the last 20 years. Inflation has been low. Part of that has to do with internationally integrated supply chains.
Basically, the aggregate supply curve, if you want to think of it that way, has stayed flat in response to demand. There's been disruption to that process. There's been a lot more protectionism. If that aggregate supply curve, because of all these disruptions in productions internationally, starts to go upward, at some point, with increased demand, prices will go up. Once prices start to go up, you're going to have to see a response in terms of interest rates if there seems to be any possibility of inflation taking off.
I mean, ninety—
View Sean Fraser Profile
Lib. (NS)
View Sean Fraser Profile
2020-12-11 13:58
I expect I'll have fairly limited time, so I'll start with one question and see if we get beyond that.
Mr. Stratton, thank you for being here. One thing you mentioned during your testimony was that the success of our response in the long term may depend on ensuring that some of the emergency measures we put in place are temporary. Though they may be necessary now, we don't want to create a structural deficit more than is essential to float households and businesses through this pandemic.
While in many respects I think that's sensible, I have some questions about certain programs we're taking on that I'm supportive of. In particular, I'm thinking of something that will set the stage for long-term productivity growth, such as an early learning and national child care strategy. Would you consider a measure or investment of that nature—one that has the potential to pay for itself, or at least make a significant contribution to it, and set the stage for greater labour force participation, particularly by women—worthwhile, though it may create a permanent expense, given the productivity gains that it could set the stage for?
Trevin Stratton
View Trevin Stratton Profile
Trevin Stratton
2020-12-11 13:59
I think it would depend on what it looks like. If we're talking about child care, for instance, I know we've certainly been advocating for the funding, if there is funding, going directly to day cares or going directly to families, as opposed to creating some sort of national child care program.
We certainly appreciate what the government has done in the last fall economic statement in approaching these issues. I think one of the important things is the urgency of it as well. Creating a plan to create a plan.... There are a lot of women in the workforce who need this support right now, so being able to do that as quickly as possible, I think, is maybe what's important. That's why I think it's very important about the details as opposed to.... We're certainly on board when it comes to the larger issue that needs to be resolved.
View Sean Fraser Profile
Lib. (NS)
View Sean Fraser Profile
2020-12-11 14:00
I think there are certain measures we've adopted over the past few years, and even as recently as the fall economic statement, to give a boost to the Canada child benefit to get cash directly to the people who are going to be using it for child care.
When you're dealing with a supply problem, it's not as though you can simply create one more space when it's needed. Do you not think an umbrella approach that brings the provinces together to set some sort of a national strategy to ensure that we actually have both the supply that will meet the demand and the financial resources for families so they can afford that care at the end of the day is really what's important?
Trevin Stratton
View Trevin Stratton Profile
Trevin Stratton
2020-12-11 14:00
A national strategy is very good because we need to have all the provinces on board when it comes to this. Obviously, there are jurisdictional issues when it comes to that. I would certainly advocate that, when we're putting together that national strategy, it very much focuses on any funding going directly to child care providers and also that it is not creating a federal program for it but looking at jurisdictional issues and implementing it in that way.
View Peter Fragiskatos Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you very much, Chair.
Thank you to the witnesses.
Mr. Wildeman, there are a lot of interesting things put on the table, and as these pre-budget deliberations will continue over the next few weeks we will hear many recommendations from a variety of stakeholders across the country.
If you were to go back to your testimony, what is the key insight, the key recommendation, that you want to give to the federal government?
Scott Wildeman
View Scott Wildeman Profile
Scott Wildeman
2020-12-11 14:01
Messaging supporting Canadians to be proactive with their health care and rewarding their initiatives with allowing them to write off or deduct their expenses against their income tax would be the number one priority.
View Peter Fragiskatos Profile
Lib. (ON)
Point taken there.
How does supporting fitness businesses fit into that? I'll tell you why I'm asking. I have a number of your members in the community here in London, Ontario, including GoodLife, that have reached out to me to make the case for federal funding. There are different ways to look at an ask like that. I have constituents who would, I think, rightly say—maybe critically but still it's a fair question to ask—why would a company like GoodLife, which is an enormous Canadian company and is very successful, with deep pockets it would seem, need federal support? What does your industry council have to say about that? I'm not speaking specifically about GoodLife, but about fitness businesses in that general vein.
Scott Wildeman
View Scott Wildeman Profile
Scott Wildeman
2020-12-11 14:02
That's a great question.
If you look at the rent subsidy, it's been really well received with the amendments by many of the smaller players, the unique boutique studios. A company the size of GoodLife would be capped at $300,000 for that rent support. They have well over 500 locations. The scope of the rent subsidy really doesn't help a company that size. There are other regional players, like Movati or GYMVMT, that are too small to be big and too big to be small, almost.
As an association, we have been lobbying for amendments to the rent support. Many of those amendments were actually completed, and we're very appreciative of that, but for the mid-sized to larger companies, it still misses the mark to an extent.
Having said that, as an industry association we're focused on the recovery and how we can help. The tax incentives, as well as the positive messaging, will get more people started, which will obviously impact facilities in the long term and impact professionals across the country.
Jeff Morrison
View Jeff Morrison Profile
Jeff Morrison
2020-12-11 14:09
Thank you, esteemed Chair, and good afternoon to you and the committee members. Thank you for the invitation to appear today.
For those of you who are unfamiliar with our organization, CHRA represents the social, non-profit and affordable housing sector throughout Canada. Our sector manages approximately 600,000 units of affordable housing, which collectively house approximately over a million people in Canada.
As this committee deliberates on the contents of the next federal budget, which of course will be heavily influenced by the COVID pandemic, I want to remind committee members of the very first public health directive issued to Canadians when COVID hit, which was to stay home.
Mr. Chair, staying home isn't possible if you don't have a home, or if you don't have a home that you can afford or that meets your needs. This year has proven that housing is health care. That's why, as your committee examines the question of how we can build back better through the next budget, we would urge you to put housing at the core of a pandemic and post-pandemic recovery package.
In recent years, a number of programs have been launched under the national housing strategy to strengthen the social and non-profit housing sector. Those programs have provided a solid foundation to build on. In addition to the existing programs, CHRA would recommend expanding the national housing strategy in four key areas.
First, the most obvious gap in the national housing strategy is the absence of a dedicated urban, rural and northern indigenous housing strategy. With 80% of indigenous people living in these settings, and with indigenous people facing much higher rates of core housing need and homelessness, a dedicated urban, rural and northern strategy is a must. A commitment to develop this urban, rural and northern strategy that is developed and governed by indigenous peoples themselves was actually contained in several ministerial mandate letters. We would urge the federal government and this committee to make that commitment a reality in budget 2021.
Second, in September, the government announced $1 billion for a new rapid housing initiative, which, I should add, was a recommendation that we put in our original pre-budget submission issued this summer, so we thank the government for acknowledging our advice in their announcement. We know from CMHC officials and from speaking to our members that this program is receiving a significant number of applications; therefore, $1 billion is simply not enough. We would call for a minimum of $5 billion in additional funding to meet the demand and increase housing supply, and also that the federal government enter into discussions with provinces and territories to provide the necessary social supports that are required for people who will be housed in these new units.
Third, a program within the national housing strategy with significant untapped potential is the federal lands initiative. This is currently a $20-million-a-year program that transfers surplus federal lands to housing providers to build affordable housing. This program could be significantly expanded to allow federal acquisition of provincial, territorial, municipal and even private sector lands, so that they too can be transferred to affordable housing providers. All housing projects start with land, so this would be a significant shot in the arm to accelerating affordable housing development.
Finally, the national housing co-investment fund is one of the tools CMHC has at its disposal to increase the supply of affordable housing. The fund has $13 billion over 10 years and provides grants and loans to renovate existing housing units and build new affordable ones.
Access to this program is very challenging in terms of administration and timeliness, and the grant-to-loan ratio is very low. We think enhancing the program would help increase the overall supply, but only if administrative and operational improvements are made to the fund.
We know that CMHC has begun the work, and we hope to see a streamlined and simplified process, especially if the fund can be expanded.
Mr. Chair, to conclude, in 2019, Parliament—all of you—recognized housing as a human right through legislation. This year has underscored the importance of housing to health and, of course, to well-being. The question isn't “Should we put housing at the core of a post-pandemic recovery package?” The question is “Can we, as a country, afford not to?”
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I look forward to your questions.
Margaret Eaton
View Margaret Eaton Profile
Margaret Eaton
2020-12-11 14:15
Good afternoon. Thank you so much for having me here to speak with you today.
I'm Margaret Eaton. I'm the national CEO of the CMHA. We are a nationwide federation of 87 community mental health providers that deliver critical mental health promotion, prevention and care to over one million Canadians across 330 locations annually.
As you know, Canadians have been living through an unprecedented time of extreme national anxiety. A CMHA and UBC survey found that the pandemic has widened persistent mental health inequities, especially among those who were already vulnerable. The most recent wave of these results showed alarming levels of despair, suicidal thoughts and hopelessness in the Canadian population.
In an average year, for example, 2.5% of Canadians experience suicidal thoughts. Our research shows that, this September, 10% of Canadians reported thoughts or feelings of suicide. That means that if you have a bubble of 10 people, that's you or one of your loved ones in crisis. Forty per cent of Canadians say that their health has deteriorated since March, with many more people in certain groups saying that their mental health has deteriorated, especially those who are unemployed, those with pre-existing mental health conditions, younger people, indigenous people and people who identify as LGBTQ2S+. Their mental health has worsened dramatically.
Based on evidence from other pandemics and disasters, we know that mental health issues will persist potentially for years after a vaccine is widely deployed. Further, good mental health is key to economic recovery. To ensure a mentally healthy workforce, we must put mental health supports in place for those who are returning to work or who have been working through stressful and hazardous circumstances.
The government should be commended for its Wellness Together portal, for its funding for mental health and substance use programs and research, for its investments in indigenous mental health, and for the new funds announced in the fall economic statement.
However, we already know that this won't be enough. Even before the pandemic, an estimated 1.6 million Canadians had mental health issues go untreated every year, and 87% of Canadians have told us that they don't have access to the mental health supports they need. However, with proper funding from the government and the right system of supports in place, CMHA believes that we can meet the overwhelming need for care, help Canadians recover, and ultimately save lives.
In our pre-budget submission, we make four recommendations.
First, we need a national mental health recovery plan in order to ensure a mentally and physically healthy population, ready to work and contribute to the national recovery. This plan should be long-term, well funded and focused on mental health promotion, prevention and care efforts at the community level. It must be implemented in a way that reaches out to our most vulnerable, especially in remote communities.
Second, we are asking for a $13.5-million investment to expand our evidence-based cognitive behavioural therapy program, BounceBack, to serve more people experiencing mild to moderate worry, stress and depression. With more funding, we could deliver this cost-effective program to many more Canadians. The program is evidence-based, and it works.
Third, we recommend that the government invest $9 million in CMHA's Resilient Minds peer support program to expand the initiative to provide support to front-line workers. Our health care workers are experiencing unbelievable strain, and CMHA can provide the resources to help them to respond to trauma, deal with psychological stress, and build healthier front-line teams.
Last, we recommend that the government substantially increase funding for indigenous-led mental health care to continue closing gaps in health outcomes between indigenous and non-indigenous communities. Indigenous people have historically high rates of suicide and are a particularly vulnerable population. Their mental health is further compromised by racism. We encourage the government to take the first nations mental wellness continuum framework as its guide and substantially increase funding to the many indigenous-led mental health care organizations.
Let's not wait until our mental health system is in the ICU on a ventilator. Let's invest now. People are struggling, and they can't afford to wait. If we fund community interventions, this will alleviate the pressure on an acute care system already hit hard by COVID-19 and it will get people the help they need sooner.
Full economic recovery requires a mentally healthy populace. We urge you to provide the long-term recovery strategy that will ensure all of our success as a nation.
Thank you. I look forward to your questions.
Results: 46 - 60 of 1884 | Page: 4 of 126

|<
<
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data