Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 36
View Anju Dhillon Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you so much.
My next question is for Ms. Lalande. You spoke very eloquently about the need for immigrants and the importance of immigrants. I'd like to cite a few statistics. There are currently four Canadian workers for every retired Canadian, but by 2035, there will be only two workers for every retiree. Without immigrants to help support the needs of an aging population, younger Canadians will end up paying more per person to provide the same benefits.
Could you speak to this a bit, please?
Lisa Lalande
View Lisa Lalande Profile
Lisa Lalande
2021-06-07 16:59
It is at the heart of why Century Initiative was established as a charity. It was to raise awareness of the connection of population growth and immigration with our long-term prosperity.
I'm going to let my colleague, Jon Medow, speak on that point a bit more.
Jon Medow
View Jon Medow Profile
Jon Medow
2021-06-07 16:59
Thank you very much.
The dependency ratio, which you referred to, is something we speak about a lot, that is, the number of working people in Canada supporting each person who is retired. Immigration is very critical to address that issue. The topic we're speaking about today, the retention of immigrants in rural communities, is even more significant. What we see is that an aging population and a population in decline is advancing much more significantly in many smaller and rural communities. In fact, there's a divide that's growing between smaller and rural communities and Canada's large cities.
One of the things that's quite important and this committee is addressing is how do we make sure that immigration is really going to benefit the whole country? How do we make sure that the growth in the workforce that we need across the whole country will not just be occurring in Canada's large cities?
We've had a great opportunity today to hear about the implementation of the rural and northern pilot project in Thunder Bay, and I'm really grateful to the CEDC representatives who have walked us through that.
One thing that is good to point out is that these kinds of programs are quite unique in Canada. Internationally, there aren't that many national governments that want to share responsibility for selecting immigrants. Canada's really out ahead in involving communities in the selection of immigrants, and Century Initiative believes that this is a really important trajectory to continue and keep building upon. The opportunity to hear from those who are on the ground doing it is extremely valuable.
View Anju Dhillon Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you for that.
I'd like to continue with your organization, Ms. Lalande or Mr. Medow. I have less than a minute to ask you this question. There are some people out there who say, “There's too much immigration; they're taking jobs away.” According to statistics, 26% of people in Canada are immigrants.
Could you please talk to us a bit about this?
Jon Medow
View Jon Medow Profile
Jon Medow
2021-06-07 17:01
Public opinion and public sentiment research that Century Initiative has commissioned has shown a consistent increase in support for immigration. There is an understanding among Canadians of how critical immigration is to the country's future.
Similarly, an analysis conducted by organizations like the Conference Board of Canada is consistently showing the effects of immigration on GDP growth and government revenues, including that critical measure of the dependency ratio, which you highlighted initially. Those are very much supported by immigration. We think there's a recognition of the facts by Canadians.
View Dean Allison Profile
CPC (ON)
The minister said that he'll stay.
Minister, thanks for being here.
Obviously you know about the study we are doing on temporary foreign workers, and agriculture has been raised over and over again in that context—food processing. Food security I think should be key for our country in many ways. COVID just showed us how vulnerable we are when it comes to our food security and our food supply chains.
I met with a group of farmers this week, and I hear over and over again about access to temporary foreign workers, when it comes to the program. My question is not on that. If I had five minutes, that would be the second part.
When we look at 400,000 permanent residents coming in, one of the things I'd like to ask is whether we could get you to champion a national economic immigration program. I believe we need strategies for our critical sectors, and food is one of them. I'm talking to farmers who say, “Listen, we need three people. We're getting one. It's not happening quickly enough.” If we don't plant the food, we can't possibly harvest the food.
I guess my question to you is whether there is any way, when we talk about permanent residence of 400,000, that we could be looking at economic streams. I know we have pilot projects, but I am talking about working specifically with sectors. There are a number of sectors that have said they need strategies so they can make this happen. I would like to know your thoughts on that.
View Marco Mendicino Profile
Lib. (ON)
Madam Chair, I think there is much merit in what my colleague has put by the way of a question, and I thank him for his advocacy.
What I would say is that we do indeed work very closely, not only with the agricultural sector and farmers—I just recently met with a number of them in Quebec—but right across the economy to create those opportunities, those pathways. Yes, there are some pilots like the agri-food pilot. However, I would also point to the essential workers pathway, which offers an opportunity for many essential workers, in the sectors that my friend referred to, who may otherwise have a harder time staying here.
Of course, we embrace that. We believe that immigration drives the economy forward. It does create jobs. It does create opportunity.
I'm always happy to collaborate with my friend to talk to any of the leaders in his community.
View Dean Allison Profile
CPC (ON)
My final thoughts are on the temporary foreign worker program—and this will come out in our committee report—which has been difficult, challenging and not always timely. I mentioned to the minister that any way we can simplify that to help our ag workers—as has been mentioned today by my colleagues from Quebec—would be greatly appreciated.
I'll leave it there.
Stephen S. Poloz
View Stephen S. Poloz Profile
Stephen S. Poloz
2021-05-18 12:58
Thank you very much, Chair.
Good afternoon to you and to the committee. Thanks for asking me to participate in this study of Bill C-30.
I would offer three points by way of introduction. The first point concerns the context in which we find ourselves. The impact of COVID-19 on people and our economy has been massive. There will be some permanent damage. However, the damage has been mostly limited to sectors that have been shut down. In a typical recession, bad news in one sector usually infects the other sectors through lower confidence. This has not happened this time. I think this is the main reason that the economy has significantly outperformed most forecasts during the past year.
This economic strength has generated a debate around the appropriateness of fiscal stimulus. It has given the government far more fiscal room to manoeuvre than previously expected. However, any major economic trauma will scar the economy. These scars will run deeper the longer it takes for the economy to heal. Scarring manifests itself as a level of national income that would be lower than it otherwise could be—literally forever—and so I therefore subscribe to the view that it makes sense to push the economy harder during the early stages of recovery, because this will encourage business investment and create new economic growth.
My second point concerns fiscal sustainability. A credible fiscal plan in which the level of government debt relative to national income stops rising and debt service costs are manageable meets the minimum—or, we should say, perhaps technical—standard of sustainability. I draw your attention to the table on page 328 of the budget, which shows that these criteria are met. By the way, comparing this table with a similar one from the 2019 budget two years ago demonstrates that this budget does not represent a sharp turn toward big government, as many have said. The planned budgetary expenditure trend line returns to about 15% of national income, just as it was pre-COVID. The budgetary revenue trend line does exactly the same.
There is a legitimate concern that this minimum standard of fiscal sustainability would leave the economy vulnerable to future shocks. Well, that issue is for broader political debate, a debate that I think should acknowledge the challenging fiscal situation in our provinces. When we combine federal and provincial debt together, as we should when considering Canada's future resilience, our fiscal picture is not very different from that of other major economies.
My third point is that there are many ways to build future resilience without government austerity or higher taxes. If we put our minds to it, we can grow out from under our COVID debt burden, just like we grew out from under our World War II debt when I was young. There are many ways in which we could boost our long-term economic growth rate and grow our way out of our indebtedness.
First of all, immigration is Canada's most important economic growth engine, just as it was in the 1950s and 1960s. Anything we can do to make that process more efficient will be a good investment in future growth.
Second, a national child care program, as announced, can also help boost labour force growth. I do hope it can be deployed without delay. This is the sort of program that can literally pay for itself. If we can boost the level of national income by a mere 2% in this way, which amounts to $40 billion to $50 billion more national income every year, then $6 billion to $8 billion will automatically land in government coffers, also every year.
Third, as I've argued before in this committee, one of our biggest untapped sources of future economic growth is to harmonize provincial regulations across the country to reduce interprovincial business frictions. This initiative has about twice as much economic growth potential as the child care proposal, and in fact would cost nothing to implement. It seems to me that finding innovative ways to boost economic growth and avoid raising taxes should be at the top of our list, at this most precarious time, at both the federal and provincial levels.
Thank you, Chair.
View Julie Dzerowicz Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you so much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Ms. Dwivedi, for your great presentation.
You have already mentioned that the amendment would enable funds to be used for infrastructure and economic development purposes.
Are you able to speak a little bit more about how this amendment would help with economic growth and creating jobs?
Garima Dwivedi
View Garima Dwivedi Profile
Garima Dwivedi
2021-05-17 14:44
For example, if a first nation wanted to build, let's say, a gas station or some other economic development type of activity, it could build that using the revenues from FNGST or FNST, and it could get a loan to build that through the First Nations Finance Authority and through the capital markets at reduced rates.
That would generate economic activity.
View Julie Dzerowicz Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you so much, Mr. Chair.
I want to thank Mr. Watton for his patience and for answering all of our very detailed questions.
My question relates to the intention of this program and these amendments, as it relates to to economic growth and creating jobs. Can you speak to that, please?
Steve Watton
View Steve Watton Profile
Steve Watton
2021-05-17 15:28
Yes, this program is designed to increase access to financing for small business owners who would not otherwise be able to get this sort of financing. A lot of these small businesses are modernizing. We're in a bit of a digital economy. It is a knowledge-based economy, and a lot of the assets and financing, if you will, are softer sorts of costs like intangible assets, start-up costs, inventories, marketing, promotion and websites; those sorts of things. In the past, this program has been used for real property, equipment, leaseholds and improvements.
We're trying to modernize the program and make it possible for more small business owners to access the types of financing in the amounts they require to start up, scale up and modernize. As a result of these changes alone, the expectation is that we would facilitate an additional $560 million and help on the order of an additional 2,900 businesses over and above the $1 billion, and the 5,000 to 6,000 small businesses, that we already do. As a result of that, you would get additional employment, additional economic impacts, etc., and additional positive benefits to society.
View Ed Fast Profile
CPC (BC)
View Ed Fast Profile
2021-05-11 16:39
Minister, I do not want to rain on your parade, but many of us had hoped this would be a historic growth budget.
I sent a letter to you, suggesting that we needed comprehensive regulatory and tax reform. We asked you to address the flight of foreign direct investment from Canada. We needed a new comprehensive innovation strategy, not just the same old, same old.
As you know, many economists have lamented the fact that this budget is more about short-term benefit than positioning our economy for long-term success.
I am glad you referred to outside validators, because I have a few of those.
For example, Mark Carney, someone you know well, a former Bank of Canada governor, said, “What we’re seeing in some other jurisdictions is that the focus is more squarely on the growth.” David Dodge, also a former Bank of Canada governor, highlighted “a lack of growth-focused initiatives in the budget.” Robert Asselin, a former top economic adviser to your government, described the new spending as “unfocused and unimaginative.”
Finally, today, a former Clerk of the Privy Council, the highly respected Kevin Lynch, made so many different points. I will just summarize a few of them. He said that the budget “misses an urgent opportunity to rebuild our longer-term growth post-pandemic.” He added that “It does not set a clear fiscal anchor.” Furthermore, “Despite the extraordinary emphasis on stimulus, there is little focus and few measures to rebuild Canada’s longer-term growth.” He went on to say, “Our potential growth will drop...due to weak productivity, tanking competitiveness, and labour force challenges.” He ended by saying, “This budget’s intergenerational transfer of debt and risk is unprecedented.”
Minister, your own fall economic statement and budget betray the reality that as you raise more money through tax revenues and otherwise, you're simply going to spend more and borrow more, but there is nothing to position our economy for long-term growth.
This is a huge let down. Why?
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Fast, as you know, I have a great deal of respect for you, as a person, and as a former minister, but I have to very respectfully say that I disagree very strongly with all of your contentions just now.
Let me take them in turn. First of all, when it comes to outside validation of the budget and of the fact that our budget is on a sustainable and responsible fiscal track, from my perspective, there is no better judge than the credit rating agencies, which are paid to assess the credit worthiness of borrowers.
For me, it is therefore really important to underscore for Canadians that S&P, a week after the budget, came out with a very strong endorsement, reaffirming Canada's AAA credit rating, and reaffirming that the outlook for Canada was stable. It really doesn't get better than that.
I would also like to refer members of this committee, and you, Mr. Fast, to the comments of the former governor of the Bank of Canada, Stephen Poloz, who was appointed by former Prime Minister Harper. He gave an interview, published today, in which he talked about the budget as being sustainable. He spoke about the conservatism in the numbers that he saw in the budget, and he spoke about the fact that this sustainable plan was put together without a meaningful increase in taxes of any kind. I couldn't agree more strongly.
When it comes to growth and innovation, let me point to three elements in the budget that, to my mind, are absolutely critical.
One is early learning and child care. We have heard from the IMF, Bank of Montreal, Scotiabank, TD, and from economists across Canada and around the world that investing in early learning and child care is a powerful long-term driver of jobs and growth. That is what this budget does. I think that is well understood across the country.
A second really important investment in long-term growth in this budget is the Canada workers benefit. In fact, BMO picked up on how that investment, which supports the lowest paid Canadians, is going to increase labour force participation.
Finally, I want to mention a third really important element, the unprecedented investments this budget makes in Canadian small businesses, allowing them to invest in themselves and giving them support to become more innovative.
Results: 1 - 15 of 36 | Page: 1 of 3

1
2
3
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data