Canada’s Top 10 Barriers to Competitiveness in 2016

Canada's Top 10 Barriers to Competitiveness in 2016

Table of Contents

  1. Public policies block small companies from becoming bigger
  2. Canada is vulnerable to cyber crime
  3. Canada’s trade agenda — new agreements are just the start
  4. Canadian resources cannot get to world markets
  5. Poor literacy, numeracy and digital skills are limiting productivity in segments of Canada’s workforce
  6. Canada needs a more aggressive and effective innovation strategy
  7. Canada is not ready for climate change
  8. Internal barriers to trade cost Canadians billions and restrict investment
  9. Lack of clarity regarding businesses’ responsibilities to Aboriginal peoples constrains investment
  10. Canada’s brand does not support business competitiveness

022216_icons

INTRODUCTION

In what has become an annual tradition, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce is presenting its list of the Top 10 Barriers to Competitiveness in 2016. The concept behind the Top 10 is simple: in a fiercely competitive world, business needs more than its own skills to win — it also needs supportive public policies. Our annual list of barriers points to economic hurdles of our own making, self-imposed limits on the growth of Canadian businesses.

This year’s edition includes many familiar topics, from internal trade barriers between provinces to the lack of clarity concerning consultations with Aboriginal peoples to the fact that we cannot efficiently get resources to world markets. This year, some new topics have emerged that deserve our attention. Canada’s vulnerability to cyber crime and its lack of preparedness for the effects of climate change are some good examples.

As you read through this report, I encourage you to keep in mind that these obstacles to success are the result of our own actions or our own failure to act. That means we are capable of eliminating these barriers. We just have to recognize how critical it is to be competitive and take the steps needed to improve our national performance.

By working together, we can give our businesses the tools they need to compete on the global stage, unhindered by unnecessary hurdles. Let’s make this the starting point to building a more competitive Canada — a Canada that wins.

 

Perrin Beatty

Hon. Perrin Beatty
President and CEO


SUMMARY

1. Public policies block small companies from becoming bigger
Canada has tax barriers and policies in place that keep its small businesses from growing into big businesses with more resources to hire, invest and innovate. Big firms are more productive, which is essential to the competitiveness of the Canadian economy. Yet, only 1.4% of mid-sized Canadian firms become big businesses. To grow Canada’s companies, the government needs to change the corporate tax rates and breaks that penalize growth.

2. Canada is vulnerable to cyber crime
Canada loses $3.12 billion to cyber crime per year, and nearly half of all small businesses have been the victim of a cyber attack because they are less equipped to handle attacks. The government has a role to in play in ensuring small businesses get help with their digital literacy and cyber resilience.

3. Canada’s trade agenda — new agreements are just the start
Canada has been aggressive in pursuing new trade agreements over the past few years but its businesses continue to face substantial barriers expanding abroad, and Canadian exporters are falling behind in key markets like China. Canada needs to help businesses scale up internationally. Canada also needs to ratify the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement with the European Union, get new deals done with China and India, and cooperate on regulations with its trade partners.

4. Canadian resources cannot get to world markets
Canada’s trade and foreign investment flows depend on natural resources and its future economic prosperity depends upon its ability to provide reliable infrastructure to allow Canadian energy resources to fuel Asian economic growth at world market prices. Yet, Canadian energy products are exported nearly exclusively to the United States because Canada lacks the infrastructure to get these products to markets abroad. Governments need to support pipelines and other infrastructure that will allow Canadians to trade with the world.

5. Poor literacy, numeracy and digital skills are limiting productivity in segments of Canada’s workforce
Robotics and artificial intelligence are changing the workplace and increasing the demand for high-skilled workers. Yet, half of Canadians do not have the levels of literacy, numeracy and digital problem solving skills they need to compete in today’s economy. Canada needs a plan to make sure people have the skills for tomorrow’s jobs.

6. Canada needs a more aggressive and effective innovation strategy
Public and private sector R&D spending is vital for exports, jobs and wealth creation. Yet, federal R&D expenditures as a proportion of GDP have fallen by a quarter in just five years. Canada needs to reinvest in an innovation ecosystem that supports the capability of business to rapidly respond to change.

7. Canada is not ready for climate change
Climate change affects all Canadian industries, from agriculture and natural resources to tourism and defence. As nations advance policies and regulations to combat greenhouse gas emissions, Canada must keep pace to maintain its competitiveness as a location for investment and a source of products. Canada needs clear federal policy on carbon regulation and a climate adaptation strategy.

8. Internal barriers to trade cost Canadians billions and restrict investment
The Canadian economy remains divided by artificial barriers to trade and labour mobility that frustrate business investment and cost consumers billions of dollars every year. To get free trade within Canada, the federal government should apply pressure on the provinces and expand the right of private parties to seek redress.

9. Lack of clarity regarding businesses’ responsibilities to Aboriginal peoples constrains investment
In the cut and thrust of global competition, Canada can no longer afford for its governments, businesses and Aboriginal peoples to work at cross-purposes. Canada needs meaningful reconciliation with its Aboriginal peoples; however, it is not clear to businesses what reconciliation means and what they need to do to do their part in achieving it. The federal government, as the primary interlocutor between Aboriginal peoples and other constituencies, needs to lead the way.

10. Canada’s brand does not support business competitiveness
The world sees Canada as a great place to live but not to do business, and Canada has not been doing a good job at changing those perceptions. A strong business brand would encourage foreign direct investment in Canada, increase awareness of Canadian export products and support Canada’s tourism industry. The government must increase its efforts to improve its business brand through tourism and investment promotion.


1. Public policies block small companies from becoming bigger

022216_1Canada’s 1.2 million small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are the backbone of its economy; they are critical to innovation and entrepreneurship, while employing nearly 70% of the Canadian workforce.

The best thing that can happen to a small business is to grow into a big business with more resources to hire, invest and innovate. A report by Baldwin and Jarmin shows that small Canadian manufacturing firms were just 46% as productive as large firms (this gap is greatest within the manufacturing sector), but productivity rises with size across most industries as companies benefit from economies of scale and increased capital investment. This report also suggests that roughly 19% of the productivity gap between Canada and the United States is because American firms tend to be so much larger.

Of deepest concern are Canada’s medium-sized firms, which represent 12% of its GDP and 18% of total export values.1 A 2013 BDC study2 identified some concerning trends, including a 17% decline in the number of Canadian mid-sized firms from 2006 to 2010. Over the same period, an average of 14% of mid-sized firms either shrank into small firms or ceased operations each year, while just 1.4% grew into large companies with more than 500 employees.

In a competitive environment, we need our small businesses to grow into big businesses. So why do we have tax barriers and policies that keep our small businesses from growing?

The tax barriers that encourage companies to remain small are:

  1. Corporate tax rates: Companies are penalized when their incomes reach $500,000. They must jump from the 11% small business rate to the 15% corporate rate. Add in provincial tax rates, and the jump is from 15% to 27%.
  2. The cost and complexity of complying with Canada’s tax laws: This is a huge, time-consuming hindrance to businesses. Mid-sized business leaders responding to a 2014 survey by QuantumShift3 frequently cited the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) review and audit process as creating considerable complexity and cost for companies, both to achieve tax compliance and to challenge or appeal agency decisions. For SMEs, dealing with the CRA can be a complicated process and many are required to make more than 30 remittances a year (GST/HST, payroll taxes and income taxes). SMEs that make errors are faced with unforgiving penalties of the same proportions as large businesses and an appeal process that is complicated and costly.
  3. Certain tax breaks that only help SMEs: The federal Scientific Research and Experimental Development (SR&ED) program provides a 35% credit for the first $3 million in expenditures for small firms but only a 15% credit for expenditures exceeding $3 million.
  4. Inheritance taxes that hurt family businesses: Canada’s tax system treats the transfer of family-owned businesses in farming and fishing favourably but not in other sectors where family members face capital gains taxes. This can discourage the transfer of family-owned businesses to the next generation where they can remain profitable and continue to provide employment.
  5. The small business deduction: The taxable capital threshold has remained at $10 million, which disadvantages larger, highly-leveraged firms.

The way forward

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce will advocate that the federal government:

  • Review relevant policies and programs that serve as a constraint to the growth of SMEs
  • Overhaul legislation and regulations to remove these barriers

2. Canada is vulnerable to cyber crime

Co-brand_Canadas_Top_10_Barriers_to_Competitiveness_in_2016.pdfThe digital marketplace is growing exponentially faster than the other sectors of the economy. The global internet economy is estimated to be valued at $4.2 trillion in 2015.4 Canada’s internet economy now accounts for 3.6%5 of its GDP (without accounting for the value of the data itself). Data that can be used for identity theft has a black market value — from $1 for a credit card number to $10 for health information.6 Cyber crime can also help thieves gain competitive advantage and compromise national security.

The risks posed by cyber theft are hindering Canada’s ability to compete globally. Denial of service attacks (botnets) are becoming more frequent as the cost of acquiring customized software to conduct these attacks is just a few hundred dollars. Yet the consequences can cost businesses, citizens and governments millions or even billions of dollars. Cyber crime extracts 15-20% of the $3 trillion global internet economy. Canada loses 0.17% of GDP ($3.12 billion) to cyber crime per year.7

In Canada, the Ponemon Institute surveyed 21 companies across all sectors for IBM and found the following:8

  • The average cost of a data breach is $5.12 million.
  • The average cost per record of a breach is $250.
  • On average, 20,459 records were breached in 2015.

The numbers for small and medium business (98% of Canada’s private economy) are particularly alarming. According to StaySafeOnline.org, 71% of data breaches happen to small businesses, and nearly half of all small businesses have been the victim of a cyber attack. Visa Inc. reports that 95% of the credit card breaches it discovers are from its smallest business customers.9

Cyber criminals are attracted to small businesses for three reasons:

  1. Due to a lack of resources, small businesses are less equipped to handle an attack.
  2. The information hackers want — credit card credentials, intellectual property, personally identifiable information — is often not as well protected as in larger organizations.
  3. Small businesses’ partnerships with larger businesses can provide back-channel access to a hacker’s true targets (i.e., those larger businesses).

The most obvious impacts of cyber crime are the direct costs to business, including financial, data recovery, customer confidence, reputation, infrastructure, training and monitoring. There is also the added potential cost of a conviction for a PIPEDA compliance failure (up to $100,000 per record). There are societal costs as well, which can be more complicated to value and include higher prices, damage to critical infrastructure and breaches of national security.

The way forward

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce will advocate that the federal government:

  • Play an important role in promoting digital literacy
  • Provide leadership (in partnership with the business community) by establishing best practices for cyber resilience
  • Contribute to building the trust of the business community by effectively punishing cyber criminals

3. Canada’s trade agenda — new agreements are just the start

Co-brand_Canadas_Top_10_Barriers_to_Competitiveness_in_2016.pdfCanada has been aggressive in pursuing new trade agreements over the past few years (highlighted recently with the signing of the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement with the European Union) but its businesses continue to face substantial barriers expanding abroad. Canadian exports fell by another 7% in 2014-2015. Though much of this is because of the fall in oil prices, it follows an already lackluster decade where trade and investment growth and diversification stagnated — all at a cost to economic growth and employment in Canada.

Trade agreements are important but they alone are not enough to expand trade and generate economic growth for Canada. Tariff and non-tariff trade barriers persist for Canadian companies while the benefits of the trade deals Canada needs to help achieve freer and fair trade, such as TPP and CETA, will take a long time to have an impact.

In the meantime, Canada must be more strategic in supporting its trade in highly sophisticated and competitive world markets, especially for new high-value services. Canada must help growing businesses scale up internationally. It must do more to engage in influencing international standards and it must ensure trade commissioners and other support remains highly competitive — they are often the key “difference makers” for Canadian firms seeking to break into new markets.

In North America, customs and border administration continues to be focused on security with little attention to facilitating the development of global supply chains. Talks with India have stagnated, and Canada is falling further behind in its relations with China, its second-largest export market and where Australia now has an agreement granting it preferential access. Canada’s exports of agri-food, forestry products and services are ever more vulnerable to regulatory barriers that are not addressed by its free trade agreements. In addition, the growth of international data flow restrictions can threaten newer forms of high-value trade that relies on cloud computing and e-commerce services, which are especially important for small- and medium-sized businesses.

The challenges and risks of operating globally are growing. Canada’s trade sanctions and export controls are in flux because of geopolitical developments, and efforts to combat corruption and bad corporate behaviour are not always coordinated or adapted to the realities of international business, which can put Canadian firms at a disadvantage.

Canada needs to follow through on its trade priorities and address the next wave of challenges.

The way forward

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce will advocate that the federal government:

  • Ratify and implement the Trans-Pacific Partnership and Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement with the European Union
  • Engage with Canadian businesses to develop more comprehensive, fair and strategic international trade strategies that accelerate economic growth for Canada
  • Expand trade and investment promotion services, increase engagement on international standards and establish a national development finance institution that helps Canadian businesses deploy technology and capital in emerging markets
  • Conduct exploratory talks on new trade initiatives with China and the Philippines
  • Implement a clear strategy to conclude foreign investment protection and free trade negotiations with India
  • Launch a new international regulatory cooperation strategy that builds on the Canada-U.S. Regulatory Cooperation Council and creates alignment with other trading partners
  • Ensure Canada’s economic sanctions stay aligned with the European Union and the United States
  • Encourage transparent and responsible business practices abroad by recognizing companies that implement internal controls and helping them adopt voluntary standards

4. Canadian resources cannot get to world markets

Co-brand_Canadas_Top_10_Barriers_to_Competitiveness_in_2016.pdfDiversified markets are critical for the efficient function of a national economy. Canada is the G8 nation whose economy is tied most tightly to trade with other nations, yet Canada sends virtually all of its petroleum energy resources to a single market where demand is falling sharply. Canada’s future economic prosperity depends upon its ability to provide reliable infrastructure to allow Canadian energy resources to fuel Asian economic growth at world market prices.

Global demand for Canadian energy resources is increasing, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region, yet Canadian energy products have limited access to markets abroad and are exported nearly exclusively to the United States. Overseas markets will be of critical economic importance to Canada in the 21st century. Not only do they represent the major source of growth for this sector, they are also the key Canadian asset sought by trade partners in Asia and other developing markets.

Canada’s energy strategies are a key diplomatic tool in trade negotiations, like bilateral negotiations with India and China. While the U.S. will remain an important export market, diversified export options would secure higher prices for Canada’s resources.

Supplying these growing markets will require new infrastructure to get the resources to market.

Since the end of 2010, new shale oil developments in the United States have exerted downward pressure on prices for North American crude and have created a gap between the prices Canadian oil earns in the United States and the world prices buyers (including eastern Canadians) pay to import oil from other sources. In 2012, CIBC estimated this gap cost the Canadian economy approximately $19 billion — more than $50 million per day.

With world oil prices declining as a result of huge new supplies of domestic energy, the gap between what Canada earns selling its oil and what it pays to import refined products is substantial.

Canada’s provinces and two of its territories hold constitutional authority over the natural resources that lie within their jurisdictions. This reality complicates the national discussion surrounding Canada’s energy export strategies. Rather than argue over the division of the jobs and revenues created by the existing situation, the federal, provincial and territorial governments need to consider options to diversify the distribution of Canada’s energy assets and should work together to develop and sign an energy strategy to secure Canada’s status as a world leader in energy production and transportation. The federal government needs to better educate the Canadian public about energy flows within the country and the broader economic implications of exporting Canadian energy resources to only one customer. Moreover, it should seek partnerships to establish a common fact base surrounding the options for market diversification so project risks can be properly and transparently evaluated.

Industry, for its part, will need to demonstrate to the Canadian public how resource developments can be undertaken in an environmentally responsible manner. Energy companies operating in Canada are held to higher environmental standards than those in much of the rest of the world and are prepared to adopt world-leading controls on their operations. This is a fact that is not generally understood in Canada and internationally.

Environmental concerns are legitimate and are increasingly urgent. Industry and government must continue to address them and expand their efforts to do so. Without progress on this issue of “social licence,” it is unlikely Canada will transition effectively from a continental supplier to a world supplier.

The way forward

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce will advocate that the federal government:

  • Increase its engagement with the Canadian public to address the economic opportunities associated with energy market diversification
  • Enhance outreach to communicate the technological advancements and safety improvements in the pipeline and maritime sectors
  • Invest and develop key energy infrastructure, including the exploration of all responsible options to enable tidewater access for Canadian energy resources
  • Use appropriate levers to facilitate west-east oil trade flows within Canada

5. Poor literacy, numeracy and digital skills are limiting productivity in segments of Canada’s workforce

Co-brand_Canadas_Top_10_Barriers_to_Competitiveness_in_2016.pdfMany Canadian workers lack adequate reading, math and digital skills, making them vulnerable to sweeping changes as robotics and artificial intelligence alter the workplace. For employers, huge opportunities to enhance productivity with technology will be a competitive advantage, but only if they can find skilled employees. Consequently, investors will have no incentive to invest in a country whose workers cannot compete.

Roughly half of the Canadian population is below the minimum desired levels of literacy and numeracy, according to the OECD’s 2013 survey of adult skills. Only half of the Canadian population has problem-solving skills at the basic level in a digital environment. Many Canadians cannot interpret graphs or fully understand instruction manuals, for example.

Worse still, a substantial portion of working-age adults scored near the bottom in assessments of literacy, numeracy and digital skills, as noted in a recent 2015 study by the IRPP. This reduces employees’ productivity on the job and leaves them ill-equipped to cope in an increasingly technology-rich environment.

Employers face a double-edged sword. On the one hand, they continue to cite access to a skilled workforce as their top barrier to doing business in cities across Canada (where chambers of commerce survey their members). On the other hand, existing workers may lack the opportunities or incentives to improve their literacy, numeracy or digital skills. As the IRPP study notes, “In a country with a population as highly educated as Canada’s, an above-average share of the workforce remains underskilled, underqualified or in need of a new career path. It is time for this to change.”

Indeed, the employment landscape is changing, and the demand for high-skilled workers is growing (up 19% since 1998, according to Statistics Canada) while the need for low-skilled workers is declining (down 11% over the same period). Digital and STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) skills, which are critical to a workplace with more robots, data and artificial intelligence, can only be acquired if the fundamentals are in place.

Improved literacy and essential skills can be the answer to better productivity and economic growth. Investing in these skills through workplace training and lifelong learning opportunities makes sound economic and social sense and may be key to ensuring Canadians thrive in an evolving and more digitized workplace.

The way forward

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce will advocate that the federal government:

  • Increase its leadership and funding of programs to improve the literacy, numeracy and digital skills of working-age Canadians with those skills shortfalls

6. Canada needs a more aggressive and effective innovation strategy

Co-brand_Canadas_Top_10_Barriers_to_Competitiveness_in_2016.pdfInnovation, invention, disruption and the creation of intellectual property and higher-value products and services are the essential ingredients that will drive future economic prosperity across Canada’s business sectors. And yet, despite countless studies, reports and recommendations, Canadian business continues to be challenged on productivity, an essential measure of Canada’s ability to compete with both advanced and emerging markets.

Canada’s public sector research is world leading but it fails to commercialize it. While Canada’s capacity to generate new ideas is competitive, its record of developing intellectual property into financial success stories trails its major trading partners. Fostering an “ideas economy-friendly” environment where ideas are protected and nurtured is essential. Canada has also yet to systematically adopt effective new partnering models that can accelerate the growth of Canadian start-ups into competitive global enterprises and take greater advantage of global supply chains to drive scale. This must change. Canada must transform.

Most of Canada’s current incentive programs are hang-overs from an earlier time. Its program investments in R&D and technology, such as IRAP, SR&ED, the Automotive Innovation Fund and various NRCan Cleantech funds, focus on product outcomes. The purchase of new technologically-advanced equipment is encouraged (or at least made easier) through an extension of the Accelerated Capital Cost Allowance. Incentives are provided to offset more competitive costing in other jurisdictions.

However, Canada’s focus should not be limited to product outcomes. Canada must also compete by generating intellectual property and engineering its future.

The ability of Canadian companies to compete globally is now being determined by their ability to innovate, adapt or disrupt old business models. Building on its leadership in traditional sectors, Canada must now generate economic growth through breakthrough ideas, processes and services. Government, academic and research institutions can be much more effective partners in this process if new Canadian companies are to grow and succeed in the new international marketplace. Streamlining the intellectual property framework between institutions is the first step.

As an example, Germany’s Siemens is committed to what it and the German government call Industrie 4.0, or the fourth industrial revolution based on the use of cyber-physical systems.

The goal is to develop (by working with manufacturers) “digital enterprises” that can adapt to market conditions and use resources efficiently. That means using technology to integrate product and production lifecycle processes. Siemens envisions a future where “engineers who plan a new product, such as a new switchgear, will use special software to simultaneously design its manufacturing process, including all associated mechanical, electronic and automation systems.”

In Canada, many of its businesses and public institutions have failed to invest or partner in innovation at the rate required to drive success. Since 2010, federal R&D expenditures have fallen by 12% (after inflation, the drop is closer to 18%). If economic forecasts are borne out, federal R&D expenditures as a proportion of GDP will have fallen 26% in just 5 years.10 Both public and private sector R&D spending is vital for exports, jobs and wealth creation. There are 28 companies in Canada that spend more than $100 million a year on R&D: 12 (five of the top 10) are in the manufacturing sector.

Manufacturing remains the nation’s largest source of commercial innovation — key to trade deficit reduction — and a disproportionately large contributor to environmental sustainability. Manufacturing adds close to $170 billion to its GDP and supplies 1.7 million jobs. But, even with a low Canadian dollar, this sector now struggles to keep pace with global trends toward lower-cost jurisdictions. Manufacturing GDP declined by 14% between 2000 and 2013 while the economy grew by 37% overall, according to a recent study by the Lawrence National Centre for Policy and Management.

Canada will need to quickly embrace a new balance of more advanced manufacturing and a much sharper focus on expanding its capacity and strength in the innovative design, engineering and technology services that create value in the new economy. While reinforcing its strength in STEM education and skills, Canada needs to foster a new innovation ecosystem that not only generates high-quality products but also competes on services like engineering, software, networking and distribution.

These changes apply equally to more traditional resource sectors. Innovation is also driving the competitiveness of Canada’s global financial services companies. Many of the world’s most innovative and successful companies now drive value through more intangible high-value services and technologies that leverage cloud computing and analytics. Canada has the skills and global supply chain partnerships to grow its economy in all these critical fields. But it needs purposeful change to succeed.

The way forward

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce will advocate and work with the federal government to foster a more innovative economy through:

  • The creation of a focused strategy to bring innovative, technology-based Canadian startups to competitive scale
  • Fostering improved partnership models between business, government, universities and public research institutions
  • Leveraging R&D investments by improving the integration into the innovation ecosystem of companies and institutions that focus on the commercial application of intellectual property
  • Streamlining institutional intellectual property frameworks
  • More effective tax or grant strategies to foster R&D for both processes and products
  • New strategies to foster Canadian patent generation and internationally competitive pools of Canadian intellectual property

7. Canada is not ready for climate change

Co-brand_Canadas_Top_10_Barriers_to_Competitiveness_in_2016.pdfStrategies to address climate change will have critically important implications for our environment, society and economic future. As world economies adopt strategies that place a value or carbon, there will be both challenges and opportunities for Canada. Governments must partner with businesses to optimize technological and economic opportunity while avoiding uncertainty or unintended consequences.

As a northern country with strong cultural and economic ties to its natural environment, Canada will be particularly affected by the impacts of climate change. Changing weather patterns will also increasingly affect industries across the nation, from agriculture and natural resources to tourism and defence. The federal government must develop and implement clear policies on greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) as well as effective adaptation strategies that defend Canada’s future international economic competitiveness.

The impacts of climate change will be increasingly challenging for industries across Canada. Changing weather patterns will lead to regional water supply difficulties for agriculture, natural resource industries and local communities. Infrastructure will be threatened in the North from melting permafrost and on the coast due to rising sea levels. Conversely, climate change will pose economic opportunities, such as increased shipping in the North and more cost effective access to natural resources in the Arctic.

As nations advance policies and regulations to combat GHGs, Canada must keep pace to maintain its competitiveness as a location for investment and a source of products. Canada is already taking this issue seriously, with some provinces implementing GHG mitigation policies, such as cap and trade systems and taxes, while some businesses are implementing shadow carbon pricing into their financial plans. Furthermore, major energy companies are calling on the federal government to lay out a plan for GHG regulation so they can make investment decisions with more certainty. A lack of a plan is discouraging investment in the Canadian economy and harming businesses’ competitiveness and ability to create jobs. A clear federal policy on GHGs will also advance social licence domestically for Canada’s natural resource industries, including critically needed energy infrastructure projects.

In order to maintai n industry competiveness, the federal government must develop and implement effective adaptation and mitigation strategies now or face much higher costs to adapt in the future.

The way forward

During 2016, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce will examine the anticipated impacts of climate change more deeply and develop more specific recommendations for the federal government moving forward.

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce will advocate that the federal government:

  • Consult carefully with businesses on technological and economic responses to climate change
  • Adopt a clear federal policy on carbon regulation
  • Conceive climate change adaptation strategies that will take into account business priorities

8. Internal barriers to trade cost Canadians billions and restrict investment

Co-brand_Canadas_Top_10_Barriers_to_Competitiveness_in_2016.pdfThe Canadian economy remains divided by artificial barriers to trade and labour mobility that frustrate business investment and cost consumers billions of dollars every year.

Highly competitive national economies are characterized by speed and flexibility. The free flow of people, goods and services throughout the country allows competition and high levels of service while helping to address skilled labour shortages. Unfortunately, the patchwork system of regulations within Canada significantly hinders its productivity and competitiveness.

The Agreement on Internal Trade (AIT) was designed to reduce and eliminate internal barriers to trade, investment and labour mobility in Canada. It is supposed to provide overarching rules designed to restrict the creation of new interprovincial/territorial trade barriers. It also contains a mechanism to reduce existing barriers in the specific economic areas covered by the agreement.

The AIT has been updated numerous times over its 20-year history, yet, significant challenges still remain. In 2014, the Council of the Federation committed to the renegotiation of the AIT, but little has been accomplished. In order to be effective, any new internal trade regime must be as ambitious and comprehensive as Canada’s international trade agreements. The business community must keep up the pressure to ensure all levels of Canadian government remain committed to the removal of the remaining barriers to trade.

The way forward

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce will advocate that the federal government:

  • Take a leadership role in moving this barrier forward through pro-liberalization pressures in procurement, regulation and direct negotiation with the provinces/territories
  • Promote stakeholder engagement throughout AIT negotiations, which is essential to
    ensuring political considerations do not frustrate the movement towards liberalization
  • Expand the right of private parties to seek redress in court; the market is the only force capable of driving reform

9. Lack of clarity regarding businesses’ responsibilities to Aboriginal peoples constrains investment

Co-brand_Canadas_Top_10_Barriers_to_Competitiveness_in_2016.pdfThe Canadian Chamber of Commerce is exploring the issue of the duty to consult Aboriginal peoples whose constitutionally-protected rights could be adversely affected as a result of governments approving private sector projects on, through or near their lands/territories. However, the duty to consult is but one of the relationships amongst government, Aboriginal peoples and businesses that lacks clarity. Others include engagement on/respect for each other’s social, economic and environmental priorities.

This lack of clarity can stall — even kill — private sector projects that have the potential to provide long-term economic (e.g., royalties for community improvements) and social benefits (e.g., employment and transferable skills training and education) to not only Aboriginal peoples but all Canadians.

In the cut and thrust of global economic competition, Canada cannot afford for its governments, businesses and Aboriginal peoples to work at cross-purposes. Canada needs meaningful reconciliation with its Aboriginal peoples — its youngest and fastest-growing population with control over vast tracts of the country — and Canada needs to get working on it soon.

The mandate letter of the Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs instructs the Minister “to implement (the) recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, starting with the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.”

One of the recommendations of 2015’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s report is a call-to-action for Canada’s businesses to:

  • “… adopt the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as a reconciliation framework … This would include, but not be limited to, the following:
  1. Commit to meaningful consultation, building respectful relationships and obtaining the free, prior and informed consent of Indigenous peoples before proceeding with economic development projects.
  2. Ensure that Aboriginal peoples have equitable access to jobs, training and education opportunities in the corporate sector and that Aboriginal communities gain long-term sustainable benefits from economic development projects.
  3. Provide education for management and staff on the history of Aboriginal peoples, including the history and legacy of residential schools, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Treaties and Aboriginal rights, Indigenous law and Aboriginal–Crown relations. This will require skills based training in intercultural competency, conflict resolution, human rights and anti-racism.”

It is clear that Canada’s Aboriginal peoples see a role for business in reconciliation, and businesses are willing to do more in the interests of moving their companies forward. However, it is not clear to businesses what “reconciliation” means and what they need to do to do their part in achieving it.

The federal government, as the primary interlocutor between Aboriginal peoples and other constituencies, needs to lead the way.

The way forward

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce will advocate that the federal government:

  • Work with business and Aboriginal peoples’ representatives to identify guideposts that all can use to ensure private sector projects can move forward to meet businesses’ competitive priorities while respecting the rights, cultures and aspirations of Canada’s Aboriginal peoples and protecting the environmental integrity of their — and all Canadians’ — lands.

10. Canada’s brand does not support business competitiveness

Co-brand_Canadas_Top_10_Barriers_to_Competitiveness_in_2016.pdfA successful brand tells a story by clearly articulating the unique qualities of a product, an organization or a nation. National brands embody the vision and mission of the society, reflecting the values and the greatest achievements (or failings) of that society.

Canada has one of the top “livability” brands in the world. It is perceived as economically stable, prosperous and safe and routinely scores very high when it comes to its social and value systems. Canadians are viewed as friendly and open-minded and have every reason to be proud of Canada’s image and of the reality which sustains it.

But from a business perspective, Canada’s image is not optimal. Measured against standards of efficiency, competitiveness and innovation, Canada drops sharply in the standings.

Moreover, persistently negative messages about Canada as a place to invest and do business remain unchallenged.

According to the University of Ottawa’s Evan H. Potter, “If a country fails to tell its own story, its image will be shaped exclusively by the perceptions of others.”11

A strong business brand would encourage foreign direct investment in Canada, increase awareness of Canadian export products and support Canada’s tourism industry. But Canada is “neither seen nor heard to the degree that it should be.”12

A recent study authored by the brand strategy firm, FutureBrand, supports this notion. When participants were asked if Canada was a good place for doing business, Canada fell in the middle of the pack, following behind countries like Germany, Singapore and Switzerland.13

Canada’s competitive business climate is undermined by a lack of global awareness, and the country’s national brand is bruised by negative messages that generate legal or regulatory actions against its exports or constrain investment. An example is the European Union’s ban on seal products. Another is the perception that Canada is a nation that is not acting to curtail greenhouse gas emissions, despite the fact that its four largest provinces (Quebec, Ontario, British Columbia and Alberta), representing 86% of its population, have carbon pricing mechanisms such as carbon taxes or cap and trade systems.

Canada is also not “top of mind” for international investors when they are considering entering new markets. Canada has the world’s soundest financial system and one of the best venture capital regimes yet it is repeatedly viewed as having a mediocre climate for doing business.

For a country that is often considered as having one of the top “livability” brands, Canada should also be perceived as a competitive nation and a great place for doing business.

The way forward

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce will advocate that the federal government:

  • Improve Canada’s investment/business brand through tourism and investment promotion
  • Better communicate Canada’s environmental laws and record

Co-brand_Canadas_Top_10_Barriers_to_Competitiveness_in_2016.pdf

ccc_logoThe Power to Shape Policy & Of Our Network

Get plugged in.

As Canada’s largest and most influential business association, we are the primary and vital connection between business and the federal government. Wtih our network of voer 450 chambers of commerce and boards of trade, representing 200,000 businesses of all sizes, in all sectors of the economy and in all regions, we help shape public policy and decision-making to the benefit of businesses, communities and families across Canada.

 


Works cited

  1. High-impact Firms: Accelerating Canadian Competitiveness, Business Development Bank of Canada, May 2015.
  2. What’s Happened to Canada’s Mid-Sized Firms, Business Development Bank of Canada, 2013.
  3. An Ice Ceiling: Overcoming the grown challenges faced by Canada’s mid-sized companies, QuantumShift, 2015.
  4. Boston Consulting Group, The Internet Economy in the G20, 2015: www.bcg.com/documents/file100409.pdf
  5. Ibid.
  6. Reuters: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/24/us-cybersecurity-hospitals-idUSKCN0HJ21I20140924
  7. Intel Security, Net Losses – Estimating the Global Cost of Cybercrime: www.mcafee.com/ca/resources/reports/rpeconomic-impact-cybercrime2.pdf
  8. Ponemon Institute for IBM: 2015 Cost of Data Breach Study: http://public.dhe.ibm.com/common/ssi/ecm/se/en/sew03065caen/SEW03065CAEN.PDF
  9. Better Business Bureau, Cyber Security Is Important for Small Businesses http://bbbpnw.org/2015/03/20/cybersecurity-is-important-for-small-businesses/
  10. http://ocufa.on.ca/blog-posts/data-check/data-check-federal-commitment-to-rd-continues-to-decline/
  11. Evan H. Potter, Branding Canada: Projecting Canada’s Soft Power Through Public Diplomacy (Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2008).
  12. 12 Ibid at 10.
  13. “Country Brand Index, 2014-15” (11 November 2014), online: FutureBrand <www.futurebrand.com/news/futurebrand-launches-the-country-brand-index-2014-15>.
Share this:

St. Catharines wants VIA rail service again

Passengers get off the last commuter train that arrived at the St. Catharines train station on Oct. 24, 2012. Julie Jocsak, St. Catharines Standard

City wants to get GO-ing

St. Catharines will ask the province to mark Niagara GO rail on its calendar.

The motion by St. Patrick’s Coun. Mat Siscoe, unanimously passed by council Monday, asks for an unequivocal timeline for the infrastructure renewal start and completion of the rail service along with a start date for daily operation.

“The reality is this has been on the table for quite some time,” Siscoe said, adding there’s been a lot of speculation about how it will fit in with St. Catharines municipal transit system.

The letter will be signed and endorsed by Niagara’s mayors, regional chair, MPPs and MPs in a show of solidarity.

“We need the government to give us a fixed timeline,” said Mayor Walter Sendzik. He said it’s important for their budgets for the next three years and they don’t know if it’s coming or not.

“It’s not about saying we want it tomorrow.”

As Niagara continues to make its case for GO train service, at least one city wants to get VIA Rail back on track, too.

St. Catharines council unanimously passed a motion Monday urging VIA Rail and the federal government to restore VIA train service in Niagara that was removed in 2012.

“The VIA option is again back on the table in a viable way,” said Port Dalhousie Coun. Bruce Williamson, who made motion.

Williamson said the request was made previously by St. Catharines but fell on deaf ears.

Council heard the timing may be better now.

Williamson said VIA officials stated they are looking at the opportunity to increase service to Niagara during an annual public meeting webcast.

The new federal government has also announced plans to make substantial investments to upgrade national passenger rail service.

Williamson said the best chance of immediate passenger service in Niagara is VIA and the municipality shouldn’t let a “no-risk” opportunity slip by.

In 2012, VIA cancelled two daily, weekday return trains and Saturday and Sunday trains which ran from Niagara Falls to Toronto. The last commuter train arrived in St. Catharines in October that year.

The change was part of a larger plan by VIA to reduce its workforce by nine per cent, or 200 full-time positions, and cut routes across the country.

Greg Gormick of Transport Action Ontario, a citizens’ group that believes Ontario needs better rail service, spoke in favour of the motion at council Monday.

“The benefits, I think, would be large. It would work with and serve as a foundation for that GO service you want to see.”

Gormick said GO and VIA are not competitors and urging action on VIA would not have a negative impact on getting GO.

“They are two different types of service,” he said, adding GO would be very locally-oriented and VIA is an express service. “The two can co-exist peacefully.”

Greater Niagara Chamber of Commerce CEO Mishka Balsom agreed, telling councillors GO and VIA work together in Hamilton and Toronto.

Balsom said the chamber has supported the Niagara GO initiative from the start but support for long-haul rail service is important, too.

“If the Government of Canada is willing to fund it, we should not stand in their way.”

Councillors adopted an amendment by Mayor Walter Sendzik that VIA be asked to present a business case to restore its service to Niagara. The city will also ask that Niagara Falls and Grimsby councils be asked to consider the motion as well.

karena.walter@sunmedia.ca


Original article: http://www.stcatharinesstandard.ca/2016/02/08/st-catharines-wants-via-rail-service-again

Share this:

Crystal Ball Report: Canada in a Volative World: Economic and Political Outlook for 2016-2017

CRYSTAL BALL REPORT CANADA IN A VOLATILE WORLD Economic and Political Outlook for 2016-2017

Table of Contents


Overview

The Crystal Ball Report examines the most significant economic, political and technological issues facing Canadian business in order to forecast critical opportunities and challenges in the years ahead. This report is the culmination of extensive research and input from businesses across Canada and from the global experts who helped us gaze into the crystal ball.

Throughout 2015, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce hosted a series of thought leadership roundtables, a unique gathering of Canadian businesses from every sector of the economy to talk about the big issues—energy and commodity prices, the digital economy, international trade, risks—and their priorities in the years ahead. In the autumn, the Canadian Chamber interviewed three outstanding economists, Peter Hall, Vice President and Chief Economist of Export Development Canada, Mark Zandi, Chief Economist at Moody’s Analytics, and Barry Eichengreen, George C. Pardee and Helen N. Pardee Professor of Economics and Professor of Political Science at the University of California Berkeley and author of dozens of books. At the end of the year, the Canadian Chamber hosted its Crystal Ball Symposium, inviting global thought leaders to join with Canadian businesses and public servants to talk about two important issues: the future of work in an era of rapid technological progress and the future of the world in the face of political instability and terrorism.

Armed with the insights and commentaries of business experts and top public servants, the Canadian Chamber has prepared its annual forecast report.

Thought Leadership Across Canada

Date

City

Topic

January 15, 2015 Calgary Economic Outlook
April 14, 2015 Ottawa Industry Association Roundtable
May 20, 2015 Calgary Election 2015
July 6, 2015 Vancouver Access to World Markets
September 21, 2015 Saskatoon Access to World Markets
September 23, 2015 Toronto The Future of Data Privacy in the Digital Economy
September 28, 2015 Ottawa Industry Association Roundtable
October 27, 2015 Vancouver Duty to Consult
November 3, 2015 Calgary Post Federal Election and Outlook for Canada
November 10, 2015 Toronto Getting Immigration Right
November 12, 2015 Yellowknife Duty to Consult
November 24, 2015 Winnipeg Trade-enabling Infrastructure and Access to Markets
November 30, 2015 Ottawa Crystal Ball Symposium: The Future of Work and
Technology, Global Migration and Terrorism

Executive Summary

Crystal Ball Graphic

The Canadian business community is deeply divided in its outlook for 2016-2017 between optimism in sectors that are experiencing rapid growth, such as forestry, automotive and technology, and gloom in the mining and energy sectors stricken by low commodity prices. On the global economy, business expressed enthusiasm for prospects in the U.S., where the economy is poised for impressive growth in 2016, and in Europe, which is accelerating. However, there are continued worries about emerging markets, particularly China, which are likely to disappoint this year. As a result, commodity prices will remain weak at least until 2017. Lastly, there was a great deal of apprehension about Canada’s domestic economy.

A participant at one of the roundtables commented, “Where is growth going to come from? Not consumption—the consumer is tapped out. Government spending can’t provide much lift. Although the feds can spend more, the provinces are mostly in cut-back mode. We can’t rely on natural resources anymore and housing is overbuilt. That leaves exporting goods and services. So we’d better start exporting like crazy.”

Canada must compete and succeed in a challenging global economy with huge gyrations in commodity prices, currencies and stock markets happening around the world. Competitiveness has become even more critical to our growth and prosperity. According to the business leaders we consulted, in order to improve Canada’s competitiveness, the following issues must be addressed in 2016-2017:

  • Skills and labour: Canadian business is facing skills gaps and mismatches right across the board. There is an urgent need for new immigrants and for skills and education that are aligned with the needs of employers.
  • Infrastructure: Strategic investments in infrastructure can make Canada more competitive, bring down costs and help get our goods to market. Business leaders emphasized that the priority has to be placed on trade-enabling infrastructure that will improve productivity.
  • Environment and consultations: For years, Canadian business and the Canadian Chamber have called for a coherent plan to improve the environment and reduce green house gases without damaging Canada’s competitive position. There is a recognition that improved energy efficiency and green technology can be a source of competitive advantage. In addition, a stronger federal role is needed in consultations and outreach with First Nations and local communities.
  • Innovation and the digital economy: Canada must support more start-ups, attract more venture capital and provide more incentives to commercialize new technologies right here at home.
  • Trade and regulatory harmonization: Canada must move quickly to ratify the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Canada-Europe Trade Agreement. For many industries in the knowledge economy, regulations, ownership requirements and restrictions on data fl ows can be the most difficult barriers to success. This issue must be a global priority for the Canadian government and for the G20.

The Canadian Economy Is Being Pulled in Two Directions


CANADA’S ECONOMY: ONE STEP FORWARD, TWO STEPS BACK

The Canadian economy is facing significant challenges in the years ahead. We emerged from recession in the third quarter of 2015 with a healthy growth of 2.3%, but many of the headwinds will worsen as we move into 2016.

The main reason for moderating growth is a slowdown on the consumer side. Consumption is 70% of Canada’s GDP, so it matters very much how Canadians are feeling and whether they are spending. Job and wage growth will be very soft in 2016 as weakness in the oil patch and natural resource industries offsets rosier growth in manufacturing and services.

Worse, Canadians are struggling with high levels of debt, now at a record high of 164% of disposable income. The CD Howe Institute reports that 11% of Canadian households have mortgage debt that is more than 500% of their disposable income and will experience financial distress when interest rates rise. This same study shows how vulnerable we are: 20% of households have less than $5,000 available to deal with a job loss or an emergency, and 10% of households have less than $1,500.

The following graph shows that despite increased borrowing, the debt-to-asset ratio continues to fall, a sign of rising wealth in Canada. Asset values continued to increase faster than liabilities despite a weak performance by Canadian stocks.

 

Rising Debt

 

“Smart companies should consider moves into new markets now while competitors are still sitting on the fence, particularly in the U.S., and ahead of the new competition that will be coming in a few years’ time from free trade agreements with the European Union and Pacific Rim countries.”

Peter Hall,
Vice President and Chief Economist,
Export Development Canada

However, the bulk of growth in asset prices is in real estate. The Bank of Canada warns that homes are 10-30% overvalued, while the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation warns that 15 out of Canada’s 17 largest cities are showing signs of bubbly prices. This is so alarming to the government that one of the first actions of the new Finance Minister was to raise the down payment required for mortgage amounts exceeding $500,000 from 5% to 10%. Consumer vulnerability is a significant risk to the Canadian economy.

With consumer confidence weak in many parts of Canada, retail sales will be softer in 2016. More than in the past, Canadian businesses told us that they have to look outside of Canada if they want to achieve rapid growth.

economy graphic


Featured Economists

Peter G. HallPeter G. Hall
Vice President and Chief Economist, Export Development Canada

Peter Hall joined Export Development Canada (EDC) in November 2004. With over 25 years of experience in economic analysis and forecasting, Mr. Hall is responsible for overseeing EDC’s economic and political risk analysis, special research and the corporate library. In addition to advising senior management at EDC, Mr. Hall is a featured speaker at conferences, international roundtables and policy fora and regularly appears in television, radio and print media commenting on the international economy.

Prior to joining EDC, Mr. Hall directed the economic forecasting activities of the Conference Board of Canada. Mr. Hall serves on the boards of the Canadian Association for Business Economics and its local Ottawa chapter.

Mr. Hall is the immediate past president of the Canadian Association for Business Economics, a 600-member national association of professional economists, and actively participates in its local Ottawa chapter. Mr. Hall has degrees in economics from Carleton University and the University of Toronto.

Barry EichengreenBarry Eichengreen
George C. Pardee and Helen N. Pardee Professor of Economics and Political Science, University of California, Berkeley

Barry Eichengreen is the George C. Pardee and Helen N. Pardee Professor of Economics and Professor of Political Science at the University of California, Berkeley, where he has taught since 1987. He is a Research Associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research (Cambridge, Massachusetts) and Research Fellow of the Centre for Economic Policy Research (London, England). In 1997-98 he was Senior Policy Advisor at the International Monetary Fund. He is a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (class of 1997). Professor Eichengreen is the convener of the Bellagio Group of academics and economic officials and Chair of the Academic Advisory Committee of the Peterson Institute of International Economics. He has held Guggenheim and Fulbright Fellowships and has been a fellow of the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences (Palo Alto) and the Institute for Advanced Study (Berlin).

Professor Eichengreen is a regular monthly columnist for Project Syndicate and is the author of many books on the global economy.

Professor Eichengreen was awarded the Economic History Association’s Jonathan R.T. Hughes Prize for Excellence in Teaching in 2002 and the University of California at Berkeley Social Science Division’s Distinguished Teaching Award in 2004. He is also the recipient of a doctor honoris causa from the American University in Paris.

Mark ZandiMark Zandi
Chief Economist, Moody’s Analytics

Mark M. Zandi is Chief Economist of Moody’s Analytics, where he directs economic research. Moody’s Analytics, a subsidiary of Moody’s Corp., is a leading provider of economic research, data and analytical tools. Dr. Zandi is a cofounder of Economy.com, which Moody’s purchased in 2005.

Dr. Zandi’s broad research interests encompass macroeconomics, financial markets and public policy. His recent research has focused on mortgage finance reform and the determinants of mortgage foreclosure and personal bankruptcy. He has analyzed the economic impact of various tax and government spending policies and assessed the appropriate monetary policy response to bubbles in asset markets.

A trusted adviser to policymakers and an influential source of economic analysis for businesses, journalists and the public, Dr. Zandi frequently testifies before Congress on topics including the economic outlook, the nation’s daunting fiscal challenges, the merits of fiscal stimulus, financial regulatory reform and foreclosure mitigation.

Dr. Zandi conducts regular briefings on the economy for corporate boards, trade associations and policymakers at all levels. He is on the board of directors of MGIC, the nation’s largest private mortgage insurance company, and The Reinvestment Fund, a large CDFI that makes investments in disadvantaged neighbourhoods. He is often quoted in national and global publications and interviewed by major news media outlets. He is a frequent guest on CNBC, NPR, Meet the Press, CNN, and various other national networks and news programs.

Dr. Zandi is the author of Paying the Price: Ending the Great Recession and Beginning a New American Century, which provides an assessment of the monetary and fiscal policy response to the great recession. His other book, Financial Shock: A 360° Look at the Subprime Mortgage Implosion, and How to Avoid the Next Financial Crisis, is described by the New York Times as the “clearest guide” to the nancial crisis.

Dr. Zandi earned his B.S. from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania and his PhD at the University of Pennsylvania. He lives with his wife and three children in the suburbs of Philadelphia.

 


 

“American consumers are sturdy thanks to solid job growth, rising real wages, restored confidence, better-managed household budgets and a $100 billion bonus from lower gasoline prices.”

Peter Hall,
Vice President and Chief Economist,
Export Development Canada

Seven years after the great recession, the world’s richest countries are finally getting back to a position of strength. The U.S. economy is expected to grow 3.1% in 2016 and 2.7% in 2017, strong enough that the U.S. Federal Reserve felt it had no choice but to raise interest rates.

The U.S. consumer is back with a vengeance, spending and borrowing with enthusiasm not seen since before the great recession. With unemployment down to just 5%, the majority of Americans feel more secure in their jobs.

 

 

 

The U.S. Consumer is Back! University of Michigan Consumer Confi dence

 

“The U.S. economy is performing well. Corporate profits are solid, and the job market is booming. The economy will be running at full capacity by mid-2016, and, at that point, wages will really start to pick up.”

Mark Zandi,
Chief Economist, Moody’s Analytics

The business sector is also performing well. Corporate profits have weakened slightly, a consequence of a higher U.S. dollar squeezing profits and competitiveness. However, businesses are also holding around $6 trillion of cash, the most liquid balance sheets since the 1950s.

U.S. capacity utilization is almost back to its pre-crisis peak, and productivity gains are trailing off. If a business wants to increase production, it has little choice but to invest in new equipment and hiring. U.S. business investment has been picking up impressively, and corporations have enormous resources to deploy, so we can look forward to rising trends in business investment. The economies of Europe are also gaining strength and are expected to grow 1.5% in 2016. We estimate that Europe’s fastest growing economy will be either Spain or Ireland, as the south finally gets back on track. At the same time, Japan will grow by 1.5% as deflation is averted thanks to aggressive action from the government.

This means our largest trading partners are gaining strength while the Canadian dollar will hit record lows. The Canadian dollar is expected to average $0.71 in 2016—a healthy boost for exporters.

 

Rich Country GDP Growth Improving

 


COMMODITY PRICES: OIL IS HEADED LOWER IN 2016

One of the biggest concerns of Canadian business is the outlook for oil and commodity prices. The research and interviews we have undertaken have led us to believe that the biggest drag on the Canadian economy will be low commodity prices, which are expected to persist through 2016 and 2017.

Oil markets are in turmoil: there is excess production of approximately 1.5 million barrels per day; the price of oil is fluctuating in the $30 range; the U.S. is poised to end its 40-year-old export ban and the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) cartel has essentially given up on controlling production.

By the end of 2015, global oil markets had about the same level of excess supply as at the end of 2014, which was a surprise to most oil analysts. The expectation was that oil markets would return to balance because of the big demand response following a 60% fall in price. Indeed, the International Energy Agency (IEA) points out that global oil demand rose by 1.8 million barrels per day, which is signicant, but still well below the 2.5-3 million barrels per day growth seen in past years. The trouble is that emerging markets, the sources of the biggest demand growth, have been disappointingly weak, and the IEA expects global demand growth to fall to 1.2 million barrels per day in 2016.

 

Global Oil Demand and Supply

 

“It’s difficult to see why oil prices would pick up in 2016. There is just not enough demand to absorb the production oversupply.”

Mark Zandi, Chief Economist,
Moody’s Analytics

At the same time that demand growth is slowing, oil markets will be afflicted by oversupply thanks to rising production from OPEC. At its meeting in November, OPEC abandoned its (soft) cap of 30 million barrels per day.

In 2016, Iran by itself could add 500,000 barrels per day once sanctions are lifted. The prospects of future OPEC agreements to restrict production are poor. Countries like Iraq, Venezuela and Nigeria are in such dire financial straits that they simply cannot afford reductions and will be selling as much as possible.

This is why we are forecasting that oil prices will average $35 through 2016 before rising to the $55 range in 2017. The biggest challenge in oil forecasting is the unprecedented volatility as oil is behaving more like nancial markets than a commodity. The chart below shows that for decades, oil moved in modest ranges with large fluctuations only occurring in case of war or OPEC embargo. Over the past decade, oil has seen movements in the 10- 20% range just on minor news. This means when oil demand eventually catches up with production, there is a high likelihood that markets will react violently, pushing oil well above our forecasted targets.

Oil Price (WTI)


CHINA: SLOWDOWN TO CONTINUE, BUT NO HARD LANDING

012816_china

China’s rate of growth will decline to 6.5% in 2016, down from 10.4% in 2010, but it will remain among the largest contributors to global growth. Every year, 30 million people are added to China’s middle class, increasing demand on cities, roads and power grids, all of which require enormous infrastructure spending. Last year, China consumed more coal than the rest of the world combined and imported 70% of the world’s seaborne iron ore. In 2012, China accounted for half of the global growth in oil demand. That is why a slowdown in the world’s biggest commodity consumer will have a great impact worldwide.

“China has financial weaknesses, to be sure, […] but there is little reason to question the government’s capacity to intervene if something goes seriously wrong, particularly given the country’s nearly $3.5 trillion in foreign exchange reserves.”

Barry Eichengreen,
George C. Pardee and Helen N. Pardee Professor of Economics and Political Science, University of California, Berkeley

China faces three challenges. First, growth has historically been led by exports. With a slower global economy and rising wages making China less competitive, the 10% per annum annual rise in exports is not sustainable.

Second, China’s property market shows signs of massive oversupply. The country’s unsold home inventory hit a record of 686 million square metres at the end of October, which is almost 70 million homes, up 17.8% from the previous year. Property prices fell for 18 months straight before stabilizing as the government took steps to stimulate the mortgage market.

“The big challenge for China is that it has to reform everything at the same time. From an export-led economy to a consumer-driven one. From state-owned enterprises dominating to the private sector taking over. From a state-controlled nancial system to market-driven banks. From a pegged currency to an open capital account. This is a tall order.”

Mark Zandi,
Chief Economist, Moody’s Analytics

Third, China’s growth has been fuelled by astonishing growth in credit. McKinsey estimates that China’s total debt has nearly quadrupled, reaching $28 trillion in 2014, up from $7 trillion in 2007. China’s debt is 282% of GDP and is larger than that of the United States or Germany. Half of all loans in China are linked to its overheated real estate market.

China’s economy has signicant vulnerabilities but incredible potential, particularly as the consumer gains strength and confidence. China’s household savings rate is a staggering 32%, with many consumers saving more than half their income. This sounds quite alien to Canadians, where the savings rate is barely 2%. But, as China’s government builds up the social safety net and consumers gain confidence, that savings rate can come down. If just a small portion of the current savings were channelled into spending, the economic boost from consumption would be enormous.

Based on our research, we are forecasting that China’s GDP will grow 6.5% this year and 6% in 2017. This represents a slowing but not a crash. In part, this is because China’s government still has various tools to enable it to stimulate the economy. We expect China will continue to lower interest rates in 2016 and that it will see modest depreciation of the renminbi. While the RMB is loosely pegged to the U.S. dollar, currently one of the world’s strongest currencies, a 10% depreciation would push China all the way back to where it was in 2011.

During the Crystal Ball Symposium, Robert Fowler (left) and Martin Ford addressed two important issues to Canadians: the future of work in an era of rapid technological progress and the future of the world in the face of political instability and terrorism. Nov. 30, 2015, Ottawa.


THE CANADIAN DOLLAR: WEAKER IN 2016, BUT PICKING UP IN 2017

The loonie is expected to average $0.71 in 2016 before rising to $0.74 next year, as continued weakness in oil prices and other commodities will put downward pressure on the currency.

More importantly, the gap in interest rate expectations between Canada and the United States will expand in 2016. The U.S. Federal Reserve raised interest rates by 0.25% on December 16, 2015, and we expect three more 0.25% increases to take place this year, bringing U.S. interest rates up to 1% by the end of 2016.

In stark contrast, the market does not expect any interest rate increases in Canada this year. In fact, the Governor of the Bank of Canada spoke in December about negative interest rates and other unconventional monetary policies, explaining that these could be an option if needed. As a consequence, investors foresee rising returns in the United States compared with a fl at or a negative outlook in Canada. This, combined with a rising awareness of Canadian vulnerabilities in housing and consumer debt, has led to market pessimism about the loonie.

Canadian Dollar Heading Lower in 2016


THE BOTTOM LINE FOR CANADIAN BUSINESS

Canadian exports fell by only 1% in 2015 despite the gaping hole left by the fall in energy prices. The oil and gas sectors amount to 24% of Canadian exports, and, with prices falling by half, this amounts to a 12% hit to Canada’s international sales. In addition, there are suppliers and service providers all across Canada that depend on the energy industry and many of them are struggling.

“Far from a warning of danger, recent volatility is a clear sign that growth is back and on a broader base. Canada is already capitalizing and is expected to build on 2015’s success into 2016 and through the medium term.”

Peter Hall,
Vice President and Chief Economist,
Export Development Canada

However, our members told us that there are enormous opportunities in the resurgent U.S. economy and with Europe’s recovery gaining traction. With the dollar at the lowest level in 11 years, Canadian export prices are highly competitive and translating into stronger margins for many products.

In fact, we have already seen astonishing growth in Canada’s manufactured exports and services. The auto sector grew by a booming 14% in 2015, and technology exports gained 13% while aerospace soared by a whopping 29%. Export Development Canada, the institution with the best track record in forecasting Canada’s international sales, expects that export growth will reach 7% next year, a healthy gain.

Overall, the Canadian economy grew by a paltry 0.9% in 2015, and we are forecasting a 1.5% rise in 2016 followed by a 1.8% gain next year. In the midst of a soft domestic economy with weakness in consumption and housing, the most important source of growth will come from exports. Indeed, the forecast is predicated on strong export performance by Canadian companies. However, for growth to continue, Canada must improve its productivity and competitiveness.

EDC Export Forecast

Sector

C$ billion % of total exports Export growth (%)
2014 2014 2014 2015 2016
Agri-food 56.2 9.6 12.0 8 3
Energy 142.3 24.2 14.9 -31 17
Forestry 32.5 5.5 9.1 6 4
Chemical and Plastics 41.6 7.1 12.5 8 7
Fertilizers 6.9 1.2 -11.4 36 2
Metals, Ores and Other Industrial Products 73.2 12.5 8.0 4 7
Industrial Machinery and Equipment 30.6 5.2 9.6 10 5
Aircraft and Parts 14.5 2.5 28.7 29 17
Advanced Technology 14.6 2.5 5.5 13 5
Motor Vehicles and Parts 67.9 11.6 8.7 14 5
Consumer Goods 7.7 1.3 -3.8 27 4
Total Goods 492.1 83.8 11.0 -2 8
Total Services 95.4 16.2 3.0 2 4
Total Exports 587.5 100.0 9.6 -1 7

For details, please go to www.edc.ca/EN/Knowledge-Centre/Economic-Analysis-and-Research/Pages/globalexport-forecast.aspx


THE CRYSTAL BALL SYMPOSIUM: The Biggest Challenges Facing Canada and the Global Economy

On November 30, 2015 in Ottawa, our second annual Crystal Ball Symposium brought together corporate and government leaders to delve into the big trends that are affecting Canadian business.

In a remarkable evening of presentations and debate, experts addressed two of the biggest challenges facing Canada and the global economy. The rst presentation was on technology and the future of work and featured Martin Ford, the founder of a Silicon Valley-based software development firm and the author of the best-selling Rise of the Robots: Technology and the Threat of a Jobless Future. The second presentation was an analysis of the political risks of terrorism and mass migration by Robert Fowler, a distinguished retired Canadian diplomat and public servant.

In the presence of Canada’s top public servants and the leadership of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, our expert guests sketched the challenges in the years ahead, which are perilous but also hopeful.

 

Crystal Ball Symposium, Nov. 30, 2015, Ottawa.

 

Featured Speakers

012816_fordMartin Ford
Author, Rise of the Robots: Technology and the Threat of a Jobless Future

Martin Ford is the founder of a Silicon Valley-based software development firm and the author of two books: New York Times bestselling Rise of the Robots: Technology and the Threat of a Jobless Future and The Lights in the Tunnel: Automation, Accelerating Technology and the Economy of the Future. In Rise of the Robots, Martin Ford looks at how the accelerating pace of new technologies will change, for better and worse, the economy, the job market, the education system and society at large.

Mr. Ford has over 25 years of experience in computer design and software development and holds a computer engineering degree from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor and a graduate business degree from UCLA. He has written for publications including Fortune, Forbes, The Atlantic, The Washington Post, Project Syndicate, The Hufngton Post and The Fiscal Times. He has also appeared on numerous radio and television shows, including programs on NPR and CNBC.

012816_fowlerRobert R. Fowler, O.C.
Distinguished diplomat and public servant

During his 38 year public service career, Robert Fowler was Foreign Policy Advisor to Prime Ministers Trudeau (Pierre), Turner and Mulroney, Deputy Minister of National Defence and Canada’s longest serving ambassador to the United Nations. He was ambassador to Italy and three UN food agencies, sherpa for the Kananaskis G8 Summit and the personal representative for Africa of Prime Ministers Chrétien, Martin and Harper. He retired from the federal public service in 2006 and is now a senior fellow at the University of Ottawa’s Graduate School of Public and International Affairs. He was appointed special envoy to Niger in 2008. While acquitting his UN mission, Mr. Fowler was captured by al Qaeda and held hostage in the Sahara Desert for 130 days. To this day, he remains an outspoken advocate of the importance of foreign policy and Canada’s engagement with Africa.


CRITICAL ISSUES IN THE YEARS AHEAD: ARE ROBOTS A REAL THREAT TO EMPLOYMENT?

012816_chip

The middle class has always depended on job creation and rising wages in order to improve its standard of living. More than ever, astonishing advances in articial intelligence (AI) and robotics have the potential to threaten that prosperity by displacing large parts of the labour force. The debate focuses on how large a problem this may become for the labour market and whether workers can adapt. Moreover, it is no longer just the lowest skilled jobs that can be automated (e.g. cashiers replaced by kiosks or drivers replaced by autonomous vehicles). Software is able to do tasks previously reserved for the middle class with programs doing the work of bookkeepers, lawyers and journalists. Estimates suggest between one-third to one-half of all jobs might be automated over the next decade in the U.S.

However, many are sceptical about such predictions because so many alarms have been raised in the past. Indeed, the one constant of economic growth in the past two centuries is that creative destruction has replaced countless less efficient industries with new technology, yet massive disruptions have failed to occur. Labour markets have adjusted so there is no need to lament the candle makers who lost out to the light bulb or the typists who were shunted aside by desktop computing.

However, there is now an emerging consensus that we are headed into a new era that we have not seen before. Technological advancement is accelerating, and there is evidence that “this time is different” because of the decrease in the number of hours worked in the U.S. Over the 15-year period between 1998 and 2013, there was no growth at all in that number even though output grew and the U.S. population grew by 40 million people, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

While the intersection of technology in the economy is historically the source of productivity gains, Martin Ford argues that three technological trends are creating a scenario for far fewer jobs in the future.

First, Moore’s Law regarding the doubling of computer processing power every two years has not abated. In fact, there seems to be a sustained exponential acceleration of processing power for which we may not be prepared.

Second, machines are now taking on cognitive tasks. They can think and solve problems and, most importantly, they can learn. With machine learning and smart algorithms, they can make predictions. Since large numbers of people do relatively predictable actions in their jobs, this implies that large numbers of jobs are susceptible to replacement by machines.

The third trend is that information technology (IT) is now truly general purpose in nature. It is ubiquitous, and there is no safe haven for workers. Across the entire economy, IT will make everything less labour-intensive. Equally signicant is the fact that new industries are not nearly as labour-intensive as traditional industries. As a result of technology, business is producing more with fewer workers, and U.S. statistics show that every decade produces fewer jobs than the previous one.

Major changes in the numbers and types of jobs means that the skills mismatch will exacerbate. The kinds of jobs that will be created will not be accessible to the average worker with a typical education and skills. Education and training by themselves will no longer be a solution, according to Mr. Ford. While post-secondary graduates do better than those who only finished high school, that is true because the job situation is in collapse for those without a degree or credential, he explained.

Robots have been around for a long time, replacing rote and repetitive jobs in manufacturing, for example. More recently, however, automation is extending beyond blue collar jobs to white collar jobs in finance and law. It is predicted to encroach on more knowledge jobs in the future.

AI’s and robotics’ impact on jobs has important ramications for the economy and for the capitalist system where it is critically important for people to have purchasing power. If jobs go away or if they do not provide sufficient income, there is a risk of a deflationary scenario in our economy. Meanwhile, profits are coming from efficiency improvements, but protability is not coming from selling more items. Eventually, that will have to change and sales of more items will be necessary.

The evaporation of many jobs may demand a decoupling of jobs from income. Today, you have an income if you have a job, but, in the future, we may want people to have access to some income even if they do not have a job. Mr. Ford believes we need to begin to debate potential solutions to this evolution of innovation and much weaker job creation.

New Industries Are Less Labour Intensive

General Motors (1979) Employees 840,000
Revenue $11 billion (Infl ation adj. 2012$)
Google (2012) Employees 38,000
Revenue $14 billion

RISING POLITICAL RISK: MIGRATION, TERRORISM AND THE BUSINESS RISK CALCULUS

Canadian businesses have succeeded in diversifying globally, penetrating new markets and expanding their export orientation. But for international businesses and governments alike, the political risks have never been greater. The world is in a perilous state, and there is no shortage of daunting challenges.

Robert Fowler argues that threats from political instability, massive migration and terrorism, together, pose a greater threat to our society than economic weakness.

European politics are in turmoil as a result. Mr. Fowler believes that migration alone could well destroy the European project. This migrant crisis was in the cards for decades but only the scale was unpredictable. The numbers are staggering: between January and early December 2015, 868,000 migrants arrived by sea in Europe, compared to 23,000 who arrived in 2012. Ten years ago, there were 38 million displaced people globally, but, today, the number is about 60 million due to the wars of the Middle East.

Massive migration will continue unabated, in Mr. Fowler’s view, as “one billion Africans will not watch their children starve if there are alternatives.” Many international observers are seeing migration and jihadi terrorism as the new normal. The juxtaposition of these two crises is daunting nonetheless.

“The scale of migration is utterly unprecedented and it is occurring at a time of more aggressive strength of jihadi terrorism.”

Robert Fowler,
distinguished Canadian diplomat and public servant

This is not just a Syrian and Middle Eastern issue. It is an issue that is poisoning European politics, and, when one considers the Republican Party dialogue, it is also poisoning American politics. “What we are experiencing now will change our country,” says Mr. Fowler. “We want that change to be positive.”

Where is the good news in this bleak outlook? Our world is healthier, safer and richer, and Mr. Fowler believes we ought to make that work for us. He cautions that in the business community as well as in government, it will mean that if you cannot take the long view and take the big risk, you will not want to be in the game.


Crystal Ball Sponsors


Co-brand_Canadas_Top_10_Barriers_to_Competitiveness_in_2016.pdf

The Power to Shape Policy & Of Our Network

Get plugged in.

As Canada’s largest and most influential business association, we are the primary and vital connection between business and the federal government. Wtih our network of over 450 chambers of commerce and boards of trade, representing 200,000 businesses of all sizes, in all sectors of the economy and in all regions, we help shape public policy and decision-making to the benefit of businesses, communities and families across Canada.


For more information, please contact:
Hendrik Brakel | Senior Director, Economic, Financial & Tax Policy | 613.238.4000 (284) | hbrakel@chamber.ca
Chamber.ca | CanadianChamberofCommerce | @CdnChamberofCom

Share this:

Immigration for a Competitive Canada: Why Highly Skilled International Talent is At Risk

IMMIGRATION FOR A COMPETITIVE CANADA: Why Highly Skilled International Talent Is at Risk

Table of Contents


Introduction: The Promise and the Missteps of Express Entry

“We must aggressively court skilled immigrants who, now more than ever, are being sought after by our competitor countries.”

– Liberal Party of Canada’s reply to the Canadian Chamber of Commerce in September 2015 during the election campaign

A total of 70% of major Canadian companies surveyed recently said that changes to the LMIA process have had a negative impact on their ability to recruit skilled workers through the economic immigration system.

– Survey findings, Canadian Employee Relocation Council, November 2015

As the world’s most welcoming destination for newcomers (as a proportion of our population), Canada is truly an immigrant nation. Two-thirds of newcomers are invited through the economic streams of the immigration system. With forecasts of low GDP growth, persistently negligible productivity growth and a declining ratio of workers-to-retirees, Canada must take more interest in the economic potential of new immigrants.

Immigrants can help boost Canada’s innovation performance, which has lagged behind many
other developed countries.1 “Skilled and highly educated immigrants can also make important contributions to innovation in Canada,” according to the latest State of the Nation report of the Science, Technology and Innovation Council.2 “U.S.-based research has shown that immigrants are overrepresented as business owners, founders of high-tech start-ups, patent holders, Nobel Prize winners and exporters.”3

Recently, “Canada’s talent performance (in innovation) has showed mild signs of erosion against competitors,” according to the Science, Technology and Innovation Council.4

 

2015 Immigration Levels Plan (Maximum Admissions per Category)

 

In the global competition for highly skilled talent, the government sought to improve the economic immigration system with the launch of the Express Entry application management system in January 2015. Yet, in an atmosphere of hyper-political reaction over temporary foreign workers, the government made policy choices that ultimately sacrificed the effectiveness of Express Entry. All the resources that were dedicated to the new system had a negative impact on the processing of temporary foreign workers. Express Entry became preoccupied with putting Canadians into jobs instead of bringing much needed highly skilled talent to Canada to contribute to job creation.

As a result, Canada appears to have invited far fewer highly skilled workers to work here on a temporary basis. There has been a 40% drop in higher-skilled work permit holders between 2013 and 2014 and a 45% drop in positive labour market impact assessments (LMIAs), which are required for work permits in the year, since June 2014.5,6

The original intent of Express Entry was lost, and, as captured in this report, the resulting problems, along with the solutions put forward by the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, highlight the need to return to the system’s real purpose and opportunity.

 

2015 Admissions by Economic Type (Maximums)

 

One year after the launch of Express Entry, Canada risks losing its economic and competitive advantage when it comes to attracting highly skilled international talent. Fortunately, there are simple and efficient ways to mitigate and avoid that risk and undo the damaging impacts.

For the Canadian Chamber and its members who employ highly skilled international talent, the situation has become untenable and dismaying. The actual design of the system has had negative effects across high-value growth sectors, from high tech to financial services to academic research. Policy approaches that were born of suspicion, negativity and reprisal were applied to the Temporary Foreign Worker Program (TFWP) and then similarly and inappropriately applied to Express Entry. For all the good work of government officials, the programs are falling short of their goals and creating inefficiencies within departments.

Chief among the missteps was the de facto requirement that a job offer be validated with a positive LMIA in order to achieve any certainty or predictability as to whether or when a foreign national will be permitted to apply for permanent residency.7 Not only is the LMIA a test of whether there are Canadians available to fill a position, but the compliance, enforcement and penalty regime for employers with LMIAs is daunting and overbearing.

The “Canada first” strategy for immigration has been subsumed by the “Canadians first” policy of the TFWP. The concept of attracting “the best and the brightest” is missing in action as the competitive model of Express Entry is currently undermined by the protectionist policy embodied in the LMIA tool.

IMMIGRATION FOR A COMPETITIVE CANADA: Why Highly Skilled International Talent Is at Risk

This report explores the experiences of employers who are attempting to bring in highly skilled international talent. It reveals that the employer’s role in selecting the most qualified and skilled talent, and thereby sending signals on labour market demand, has been thwarted. Immigrants’ economic outcomes will suffer if they do not arrive with job offers. The impacts of the roadblocks and delays that have resulted from the changes within the past two years are accompanied by suggestions for improvements in the short-term.

“Express Entry is the most progressive system anywhere in the world, but it is only fantastic if it meets its goal,” says Rohail Khan, President of Skills International, a company that is working with employers and communities to attract international talent.

The new government can simply and effectively adjust the system to reinstate the demand-driven competitive focus that employers bring to immigrant selection.

Express Entry: Notable advantages of the new system

The Express Entry system is a most promising reform of selecting and processing applicants for economic immigration. The original objectives of the system, such as giving employers, provinces and territories a role in immigrant selection and speeding up the processing times of applications, are ones the Canadian Chamber and its members embrace. These are among the positive features of Express Entry:

  • Processing of permanent resident applications (those that are fully completed following an invitation to apply) is much faster.
    • 80% of complete applications (by candidates who received an invitation to apply) will be processed within six months.
  • Applications are now fully electronic.
  • Candidate selection is intended to be demand-driven based on scores on human capital factors as well as either a job offer or a provincial nomination.
  • No list of in-demand occupations and no caps on the numbers of applicants by occupation.
  • No charge for an applicant to enter a profile in the system.

Now is the time for a sober, thoughtful review of what Canada can accomplish through economic immigration. Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada’s (IRCC) role in “fostering Canada’s economic development” and improving the immigration system to “benefit Canada by targeting skills Canadian employers need” is laudable.8 The Canadian Chamber and its members welcome the opportunity to work with the government to ensure immigration enables Canada’s prosperity and immigrants’ success.


Major misstep: Requiring (in effect) a labour market test in Express Entry

Giving employers a role in the selection of immigrants is generally considered the best way to ensure an immigration system is “demand-driven.” The Express Entry system was intended to address the relatively poor labour market outcomes of immigrants to Canada by addressing what researchers have agreed is one of the key causes: a lack of arranged employment on arrival.9

For close to two years prior to the launch of Express Entry in January 2015, the government consulted with employers, businesses and industry associations, among others, and developed a system predicated on those ideas. Then, after overhauling the TFWP, the government undermined the whole “convergence of supply and demand” through Express Entry by introducing an LMIA requirement to validate employers’ job offers.

It was a misstep that has reverberated throughout every constituency that relies on the immigration system to bring in sought-after talent to Canada. From highly skilled video game developers to top-flight researchers and skilled trades workers, a wide range of talent is finding it extremely challenging to come Canada for work and to apply for permanent residency.

Unfortunately, for temporary high-skilled workers seeking to transition to remain in Canada, Express Entry does not alleviate the many obstacles in their path. “Applying for permanent residence entails challenges such as navigating existing immigration programs and intransigent decisions by some immigration officers,” say the authors of a new IRPP report, Temporary or Transitional?, which offers new insights into the lived experience and human toll of coping with a frustrating, risky and opaque system.10

Recommendations

The Express Entry system should provide points:

  • For a job offer, without requiring an LMIA to validate it.
    • Instead, IRCC should create a test for employers to demonstrate they are a legitimate employer, using criteria similar to those in the Ontario Immigrant Nominee Program, for example. The test could also build on the Arranged Employment Opinion approach that was previously used in the Federal Skilled Worker Program until May 2013.
    • Alternatively, IRCC should consider a permanent employment contract as a valid job offer for an employee who has been working for the employer for one or more years.
  • To a foreign national who is in Canada in an LMIA-exempt category within the International Mobility Program (IMP).

Canadian Chamber members report that the LMIA process to support temporary workers’ entry is almost unusable for most employers, especially small businesses. Worse, it is now a requirement for job offers for permanent residency applicants who wish to compete successfully to come to Canada.

“The LMIA requirement is a tool that is ill-suited to the selection of permanent residents because its logic is based on the protection of certain temporary jobs,” says Carl Dholandas, Counsel at Baker and McKenzie LLP. “It is not designed to measure long-term labour market demand. Express Entry and the Federal Skilled Worker Program are recruitment tools to add the best people for years to come,” he adds.

It is always easier and less expensive for companies to recruit and hire locally than internationally. They recruit from abroad when they cannot find qualified workers in Canada. Industry and skills shortages drive employers in some sectors to look abroad.

Two competing policy principles are at play, according to Ilia Burtman, a former director of the immigration selection branch of the Ontario Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration and now, Managing Director of InsightEdge Inc. On the one hand, IRCC wants to facilitate employers’ access to a pool of international talent and on the other hand, it does not want employers to look at international candidates because the government wants Canadians first in the jobs, he says.

The two processes—the LMIA and the Express Entry system—are also intended to serve two different functions, say other commentators. The LMIA function is to protect Canadian workers, whereas the Express Entry system is to maximize the labour market outcomes of immigrants. Neither facilitates the attraction of the “best and the brightest.” While the Express Entry is a competitive model, by incorporating the LMIA, it adds a minimum threshold philosophy, not an excellence philosophy, to the model.

“Economic needs should become an even larger factor in the selection of immigrants.”

– Don Drummond, Evan Capeluck and Matthew Calver, The Key Challenge for Canadian Public Policy: Generating Inclusive and Sustainable Economic Growth, Centre of the Study of Living Standards, September 2015

“The federal government’s Temporary Foreign Worker program and accompanying so-called ‘Express Entry’ system is mired in red-tape impediments. Long-time employers of immigrants seeking permanent Canadian residency must post those jobs. That’s something employers are loath to do, as it signals upheaval in the ranks of their key personnel. These programs need to be revised to expedite permanent residency applications for immigrants who have worked in Canada for more than a year.”

– David Olive, “Why immigration is a chequebook issue.” Toronto Star. Oct. 16, 2015

With the threat of punitive fines imposed at the discretion of public servants and with no quasijudicial appeal process available to employers, the LMIA enforcement and penalty regime has created a chill among employers. “Based on my experience, I don’t think any company today is going to allow someone to submit an LMIA and open itself up to the rigidity and severity of compliance reviews, especially when the rules for compliance have not been clearly defined,” says an HR executive with global recruiting responsibility. His company’s legal department no longer supports using LMIAs for hiring international employees.

The irony of the LMIA requirement is that, while Express Entry is intended to increase the percentage of newcomers who are employed, the system does not recognize newcomers who are already employed in Canada and who are already contributing to the economy, but doing so without an LMIA.

“We would be losing valuable talent if we got rid of these employees when they have already been contributing to Canada for several years,” says Dholandas. “At that advanced stage, they have already integrated well and have a strong case for permanent residency.”

For employees who cannot get permit renewals in time, their Canadian employers may end up sending them home or relocating them to the U.S. or to other countries to do their jobs.

Employers suggest that if the government needs a test of genuineness of the job offer, the fact that an individual has been working for a while in a highly skilled job at above the prevailing wage should be rewarded. An LMIA is not an appropriate test for the validity of a job offer or of the legitimacy of an employer; an LMIA is a labour market test.

IRCC officials believe candidates will be selected on the basis of human capital alone and without a job offer backed by an LMIA. However, if a proportionately high number of candidates are admitted to Canada without job offers in hand, as has occurred prior to Express Entry, then the prospect for improved labour market integration of immigrants is reduced.

Express Entry: Notable advantages of the new system

Express Entry’s policy objectives are to address Canada’s economic needs and the relatively poor income and employment outcomes of immigrants compared to Canadian-born workers.

“We don’t necessarily need a sea-change in policy objectives, which are to increase economic immigration and to make sure we are bringing people with better language skills in one of our official languages and with educational credentials that can be recognized,” says Carl Dholandas.

Employers in certain high-value sectors, such as information technology and the video game sector, however, are experiencing a conflict between federal immigration policies and provincial economic development objectives.

One example is the investments in the video gaming industry in provinces such as Ontario, Quebec and British Columbia. There is an understanding that the industry will require talent from outside of Canada in order to develop and grow, but then the federal government creates roadblocks through its immigration policies.

IMMIGRATION FOR A COMPETITIVE CANADA: Why Highly Skilled International Talent Is at Risk

 

Recommendations

The government should:

  • Dedicate a number of Service Canada officers for specialized knowledge of certain industries that are high-value and high users of the programs within Express Entry.
  • Explore reintroducing a dedicated track for the assessment of applicants in the digital technology sector, along the lines of the Tech Nation Visa Scheme in the U.K.11

Ubisoft’s circumstance exemplifies the conflict that can arise, threatening to undermine the economic benefits for Canada flowing from international talent. The multinational company has two jobcreation objectives—totalling 800 positions in Ontario and 600 additional positions in Quebec. Both objectives are tied to provincial contracts and programs. Provincial governments have made strategic decisions to improve their economy and design programs to stimulate investment by companies and industries that are expected to generate positive economic impacts. The colleges and universities and the ecosystem surrounding these industries plan and make decisions based on these objectives and on the strategic choices made by the provincial governments.

All of these efforts and the economic growth that comes with them are undermined when the highly skilled workers—who are attracting projects, generating innovation and training local talent—cannot work in Canada or cannot come to Canada because the system is too slow, too incoherent or just not focused on strategic economic objectives.

Misstep: Older senior executives are not valued

Recommendations

The Express Entry system should provide extra points to senior experienced individuals in positions at the executive level in NOC O.

Youth is rewarded significantly in the Express Entry system. Candidates between the ages of 20 and 29 received the maximum 100 points for age, whereas anyone aged 45 and over received no points at all. Given the way the points are allocated in Express Entry, there is a tendency to undervalue, to a much greater extent, the older mid-career executive with substantial senior work experience. “If their experience is foreign and they are over the age of 40 or 45, they have a much slimmer chance of qualifying under Express Entry’s current scoring system,” says Dholandas.

In fact, employers note that relatively new graduates with degrees in Canada may score well, but people with degrees and five to 10 years of work experience are scoring very low without an LMIA—and many employers refuse to submit an LMIA.

 

Temporary Foreign Worker Program Work Permit Holders with a Valid Permit on December 31 by Program, 2009 to 2014

 


Highly Skilled Talent and the Temporary-to-permanent Path

“Two-step immigration”—the process whereby international talent arrives in Canada to work on a temporary basis and then applies for permanent residency—is declining. In the first quarter of 2015, there was a 37% drop in the numbers of visas issued to TFWs compared to the first quarter of 2014. Although the data by category are not yet available, it would be wrong to assume the entire decrease was among low-skilled workers. Highskilled workers have comprised at least half of the TFWs in recent years across the four categories of high-skilled, low-skilled, live-in caregivers and seasonal agricultural workers.

There has been a 45% drop in the number of positive LMIAs issued in the year following June 20, 2014, when the major changes to the TFWP were announced.

These data give rise to questions such as: Are the LMIAs being inappropriately denied without valid reason? Are employers not attempting to get LMIAs because of the threat of a punitive compliance and enforcement regime?

Based on members’ experiences, this impact has hit highly skilled talent. Yet historically, the TFWP has always been focused on highly skilled talent; it was only opened up to lower-skilled workers in 2002 (although the Seasonal Agricultural Worker Program has existed in some form since the 1960s).

 

LMIAs Issued by Decision Status, Annually between June 20 - June 19

 

Before the new rules in 2014, talent with an economic multiplier impact could come to Canada with far fewer obstacles than they and their would-be employers now face. One employer mentions the kind of talent who has created brands for a company—with one brand now employing 150 people based on the idea of one foreign national.

“Robust immigration and multiculturalism policies were also cited as strong assets that have led multinational enterprises (MNEs) to enhance their presence in Canada. The ability to bring talent to new jurisdictions quickly and efficiently is essential for large companies with global operations. Moreover, a country’s openness to other cultures is a crucial factor for MNEs that routinely move talent across international borders.”

– Excerpt from the report Winning Global Mandates: Lessons from Canadian Leaders, Public Policy Forum, May 2015

Think of the even greater impacts that a single skilled goalie in a professional hockey league can have. When the goalie’s team heads to the playoffs, the team’s success has positive economic spin-offs in terms of employment and spending in the team’s community. And it stems partly from the entry of one talented individual into Canada, like former Canuck player Eddie Läck from Sweden.

Call it the trickle-down effect of highly skilled talent. The positions may be few in number at a firm like Google Canada, but they can have an important impact on the opportunities and amount of work here in Canada, says Colin McKay, Head of Public Policy and Government Relations at Google Canada.

Senior people train local talent who can then increase the impact of the industry in the economy, says one employer. “It is good for local talent to have these senior people from other countries. These foreign nationals create the senior people of tomorrow,” says Nathalie Verge, Director, Corporate Affairs at Ubisoft.

Government should focus on the skills sets with global impact and allow firms to become stronger by working on international projects and breaking out of the Canadian branch plant mentality, says Google’s McKay. “It’s about people working on international teams, trying to get into the country and to work,” he adds.

The recent lament of a Canadian start-up entrepreneur reflects what is at stake through our immigration policy. When he found the best candidate for a position was an American, he was disappointed that her LMIA application was turned down, and she could not work in Canada. As an alternative to bringing her into Canada, he hired her and let her set up shop and hire staff in the U.S.12 By refusing a foreign national to grow a Canadian firm, the firm ended up adding jobs in the U.S. rather than at home.

With all the changes since June 2014, employers are highlighting the inconsistencies and the lack of certainty in processing and decisionmaking, which is ultimately having an impact on companies’ plans for growth. Employers face applications being rejected for relatively minor errors in how they were completed. In fact, Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) issued an internal bulletin to TFWP officers on June 20, 2014 on “How to Handle Incomplete Applications,” which states that “Applications for Priority Processing with any incomplete elements, even if it is a quick call (to the employer), should be placed in regular processing.”13

IMMIGRATION FOR A COMPETITIVE CANADA: Why Highly Skilled International Talent Is at Risk

One immigration lawyer believes that fear has gripped ESDC and Service Canada officers who are “compelled to follow policy direction as if it was legislation.”

This results in inefficiency, a waste of the department’s resources and a duplication of effort. It is a costly and opaque process for the employer, for the foreign national seeking to work in Canada and for government employees who will look at the same file another time when the employer re-applies. It would be more effective and respectful of the time and effort put into the first application if such errors could be addressed directly and expeditiously with the employer or applicant.

“With all the bureaucracy and the internal guidelines, we don’t know enough and, often, we do not find out (about rules or errors) until after we are processing TFW or PR (permanent residency) requests,” said one employer. “This is really having an impact. But it can be fixed without much of a burden for government.”

IRCC and ESDC could change the way they communicate the rules and ensure they are applied as consistently as possible across the country.

Recommendations

The government should:

  1. Encourage IRCC and Service Canada officers to improve the level of service; for example, Service Canada officers should be urged to call employers to make modest corrections or additions to complete their applications.
  2. Allow employers seeking highly skilled talent to shield salary information from their job postings, or post broad salary ranges, to achieve non-disclosure of competitive salary information.

Members report it is almost impossible to speak with visa officers at IRCC; there is virtually no contact at all. This matters particularly when a project in Canada depends on the arrival of international talent, and the employer has time-sensitive commitments to meet.

In addition, ESDC should allow Service Canada officers to be flexible and use judgment, even as they apply the rules consistently.

“At least if we know what we need to do to get one person in Canada in a few months, we can proceed accordingly,” said one employer. “If the criteria are more restrictive, at least we will know what they really are and that they are going to be applied consistently.”

Misstep: The occupations list is out of sync with reality

Employers of high-skilled talent are finding themselves challenged through the LMIA and the IMP process. For many positions, it starts with the National Occupation Classification (NOC) codes and the fact that Service Canada officers may not be identifying the roles correctly or the codes may be too outdated for an appropriate match. The match matters because the choice of NOC code or occupation then determines the prevailing wage that the officer will use to assess the LMIA request.

Recommendations

The government should:

  • Remove the NOC code requirement wherever feasible in order to recognize the changing nature of occupations and to avoid confusion and unnecessary and costly errors by government officials.
  • Update the listed occupations (NOC codes) to actually match the industry occupations.
  • Improve the labour market information to reflect industry reality.

“It’s like a seek-and-search mission,” says Rohail Khan, President of Skills International. “Employers cannot figure out a NOC code that an employee fits in, and that is the cause of a lot of mistakes.”

“LMIAs cannot handle the analysis of the skills set in the marketplace,” says one employer. “You are asking people to assess LMIAs for traditional roles when the actual role is often very different.”

“Why do we even have the NOC codes?” asks an employer, who suggests looking at the way Australia and the U.K. are operating using a minimum salary level approach. “How simple would that be to get rid of the complexity?”

Misstep: The compliance regime worsens the impact of discretionary decisions

A massive over-reaction by the government in 2014 regarding the integrity of the TFWP and the need to punish bad actors resulted in a punitive set of policy and operational changes that have essentially thrown the other 95% of employers into a tailspin, says an immigration lawyer.

As of December 1, 2015, a highly restrictive compliance, enforcement and penalty regime came into force, affecting all employers of temporary foreign workers, including those who did not require an LMIA and those with LMIAs. There are fines of up to $100,000 per worker per violation, with a maximum of $1 million in fines per employer per year, as well as the potential for permanent bans from the program and public naming and shaming by being listed on the government’s website of violators.

The penalties would not be an issue if there was a clear, transparent and fair system in place. Unfortunately, employers and lawyers report that the system is so unpredictable that many employers are likely to be punished inappropriately or inadvertently. Trust goes both ways: the government officials need to trust the employers who use the system, and the employers, equally, must be able to trust the system they are relying on.

Recommendation

To be transparent, the government should release the results of its compliance audits and enforcement on an annual basis and evaluate whether the rate of non-compliance warrants the high ratio of inspections.

One in four employers will be inspected each year as a result of the government allocating additional resources for Service Canada and CBSA. The cost of the compliance and enforcement regime is paid for by employers through fees for LMIAs and compliance fees.

“Why create increased regulatory burden across the board and increased anxiety for everybody if most employers are law-abiding?” asks Burtman. “Because of that approach, the government is also unintentionally generating outcomes that are counterproductive to what it wants.”

Additionally, with LMIA-exempt work permits, there is no proper channel for employers to communicate to IRCC any minor condition changes, such as a title change in the same NOC code or a salary increase. This creates a discomforting risk for employers when one of the conditions placed on all employers of TFWs in Canada is to:

  • Provide the foreign national with employment in the same occupation and substantially the same, but not less favourable, wages and working conditions as outlined in the foreign national’s offer of employment.14

Misstep: Lack of fairness and transparency

Recommendation

The government should develop a fully transparent set of guidelines and criteria regarding the LMIA and the TFWP so that everyone is following the same playbook.

The principles of fairness, objectivity and transparency should be central to the government’s administration of programs governed by legislative statute.

When the enhanced compliance regime for the TFWP and LMIAs was proposed in the fall of 2014, the Canadian Chamber urged the government to balance the discretion of civil servants, who can impose severe fines and program bans, with procedural fairness, starting with transparency. Both elements are still lacking from the current regime.

Discretionary decisions made by administrative decision-makers should be relevant, reasonable and consistent, with the process free of any abuse. Unfortunately, this has not been the case with past LMIAs. It is imperative to the overall success and economic well-being of Canadian businesses that the administrative decision-makers of the LMIAs and the TFWP be subject to the standards outlined under Canadian administrative law.IMMIGRATION FOR A COMPETITIVE CANADA: Why Highly Skilled International Talent Is at Risk

Given the inconsistent and contradictory information that employers receive from Service Canada officers handling these applications, including those in the same office and those in different provincial offices, the Canadian Chamber is concerned that employers trying to follow the rules will nevertheless be subject to incorrect decisions or, during compliance audits, subject to unwarranted and harmful fines and bans.

Under the newly enhanced compliance framework, further powers are vested in public servants, who will use it in a discretionary manner, and that power will lead to pecuniary sanctions that are easy to impose and difficult to challenge—notwithstanding the training of the inspectors.

Misstep: Lack of an appeal process

Recommendations

The government should adhere to the principles of fairness and due process under administrative law and take the following steps with regard to the compliance regime for the TFWP:

  • Place all of the enforcement power into the hands of an administrative body, such as a quasi-judicial body or tribunal.
  • Establish an appeal process for the compliance regime under a quasi-judicial body or tribunal; the Social Security Tribunal is one such option to consider, in light of its multi-faceted role.

Considering the severe and disproportionately punitive nature of the penalties that employers are subject to, there should be judicial oversight. The power to issue administrative monetary penalties (AMPs) usually resides with a tribunal. If a quasijudicial body is not in place, there may be due process concerns. Decision-making on major fines and potential bans from the program should not be decided by public servants outside a judicial body, as it is now.

Another serious criticism of the new compliance regime is that it lacks an appeal process as one would expect with discretionary decision-making under administrative law. While the regulations issued in July 2015 give employers 30 days to respond in writing before a final determination is issued regarding non-compliance, there is no appeal process.

Misstep: Processing, resources and IT issues

With the government’s promise to process Express Entry applications for permanent residency within six months, there seems to have been a shift in resources away from other processing priorities, such as the Case Processing Centre in Vegreville, Alberta which processes work permit, study permit and visitor extensions. Based on members’ experience, there are now serious and impactful delays in processing temporary work permit renewals through Vegreville, with current processing times reported by IRCC at 110 days or higher.

Recommendations

The government should improve processing times and act on its commitment to create new performance standards for services, including streamlining applications, reducing wait times and providing money-back guarantees.

IRCC and ESDC should create forums for ongoing dialogue (via webcast, for example) with representatives of key stakeholders of Express Entry, the TFWP and the IMP in order to communicate information and concerns amongst interested parties and with government officials.

There are human impacts resulting from these delays: immediately after the expiry of a work permit, a foreign national loses his or her provincial health coverage. To mitigate these risks, some employers are preparing work permit renewals almost five months in advance.

Additionally, the computer system is manifesting errors and inconsistencies that may be the result of glitches early in its deployment. According to immigration lawyers, two people that file almost identical applications can have two different experiences at almost every stage. There is a lack of predictability, resulting in a lot of frustration. As one lawyer noted, “The IT system is not what it should be, and IRCC needs that feedback.”

The system is resulting in a lot of rejections and refusals that seem either inadvertent or certainly unnecessary. “If you don’t do it exactly the way they want, the application will be rejected,” says one employer who had an application rejected because the word “permanent” was not in the job offer.

For the best chance at accuracy, many law firms with immigration practices advise clients to sit with lawyers and allow them to complete the application on their behalf.


Education Sector Issues

IMMIGRATION FOR A COMPETITIVE CANADA: Why Highly Skilled International Talent Is at Risk

Delays in students’ applications

International education is a microcosm of the global competition for talent. It is a competition that is fought on the basis of a country’s educational reputation, the opportunity to immigrate and the timeliness of entry. In 2014, Canada was ranked as the seventh most popular destination for foreign students.15

According to 2013 data, of the 293,505 international students studying in Canada, 55% were attending universities, 26% were at another post-secondary institution or at a trade school and 16% were at secondary schools.16

The federal government’s International Education Strategy has a goal of doubling the number of fulltime international students to more than 450,000 by 2022.17 Approximately 50% of international post-secondary students in Canada are interested in exploring permanent residency.18

Yet, academic administrators believe that in the past couple of years, either government resources have been shifted away from processing some types of visa permits or new funding may have been devoted to the Express Entry system, leaving visa processing without sufficient funding or resources to support the growth in demand.

“Students want to know how quickly they will get their visas,” says Andrew Ness, Director, International Service at Sheridan College. “The American system can turn a visa around in 10 days, and Canada takes months, sometimes as long as four months. Co-op work permits (which are separate from study permits and are required for all international students in co-op programs) are taking over 100 days, which is ludicrous.”

Recommendations

  • Reduce the processing time for study permits and visas to compete with other international markets such as the U.S. and Australia.
  • Allow a study permit to incorporate a co-op work permit, rather than require international students to apply for each permit separately.
  • Act on its commitment to credit the time spent in Canada for post-secondary education toward international students’ residency time for citizenship purposes.

Additionally, post-secondary education administrators are discouraged from playing a critical role in leveraging international students’ interest in staying in Canada and potentially immigrating. To allow them to play that role, a new credentialing regime for immigrant consultants on campus is being introduced.

In the meantime, post-secondary education employees are all required to attain certification from the Immigration Consultants of Canada Regulatory Council (ICCRC) before advising or assisting international students on immigration matters. “Students come in every day to ask for advice for their Post-graduate Work Permits, but staff members cannot help them if they are not certified,” says Ness, who would favour an easier step for his staff to be regulated than the new system.

“If Canada wants an aggressive pursuit of really skilled young people, how do we maintain the trajectory toward the goal?” asks Ness.

Compliance chill for academic researchers and faculty

IMMIGRATION FOR A COMPETITIVE CANADA: Why Highly Skilled International Talent Is at Risk

In another unfortunate twist, employers of foreign nationals in Canada on a temporary LMIA-exempt basis under the IMP have become subject to a compliance and penalty regime that was developed for employer-employee contractual relationships that do not always exist for permitholders under IMP categories.

  • When an inspection finds that an employer is non-compliant, the employer could face an administrative monetary penalty, a ban from hiring foreign workers and, in serious cases, a criminal investigation and prosecution. The adoption of this system will mean that all employers, whether they are hiring LMIA-exempt foreign nationals or temporary foreign workers through the LMIA process that has determined that there are no Canadians available for the job, will face the same level of scrutiny in their hiring and treatment of foreign workers.
  • Source: CIC. Notice – Changes to strengthen employer accountability under the International Mobility Program. Feb. 9, 2015.

The new compliance regime and the employer portal for the IMP create a more formal legal obligation between employers and employees. However, not all foreign researchers are viewed as employees by the universities. Universities are losing visiting researchers because some legal departments are not allowing the universities to go forward with offers, says Gail Bowkett, Director, Research, Policy and International Relations at Universities Canada.

“On the one hand, the federal government is supportive of universities’ role in bringing highly skilled talent to Canada and the necessity of being engaged in international research collaboration,” says Bowkett. “On the other hand, the new employer compliance regime and the employer-employee relationship required by the IMP create challenges in bringing in visiting professors, researchers and students who do not necessarily fall into the category of employees.”

Transition challenges for faculty, researchers, and students at post-secondary institutions

Foreign nationals who have been hired to fill Canada Research Chairs at universities typically come to Canada under an exemption code through the IMP. Tenure-track faculty positions may be filled via the TFWP. In either instance, challenges arise if the individuals seek to transition to permanent residency status. Canada Research Chairs are typically older and will not score any points for age (i.e. youth) in the Comprehensive Ranking System. For tenure-track faculty, the challenge is that IRCC requires job offers to be for permanent positions. Since tenure-track appointments often have an “end date,” which specifies the duration of time that a faculty member can remain untenured, IRCC does not view these job offers as permanent. However, this stipulation is part of the normal probationary process for new tenure-track faculty and does not signify that the offer is being made on a temporary basis only.

There are several other concerns, as outlined by the University of Calgary:

  • Lack of communication and consistency in the interpretation of regulatory changes and/or IRCC practices.
  • Lack of ability for LMIA-exempt academic employees (such as CRC and CERC Chairs and NAFTA Professionals) to successfully apply for permanent residency under the Express Entry system as they are not awarded points for having a permanent job offer.
  • Express Entry denials for tenure-track faculty. Although LMIA-based, these appointments are viewed as “non-permanent” by IRCC officers.
  • Lack of ability for employers to communicate with IRCC on issues related to their foreign employees.
  • Extremely long processing times of inland work permit extension applications.

The University of Calgary has lost some very good candidates due to delays or inabilities to navigate the system. “A number of our institutions, especially research-based universities, have lost world-class senior administrative candidates—in positions such deans—because of the delays in immigration timing and the uncertainty in results,” says Elizabeth Cannon, President of the University of Calgary. At one institution, there are currently several tenure-track and contingent term (medicine) appointees whose permanent residency applications are currently in progress through the Express Entry system, but they fear they may eventually be refused by IRCC as their appointments may be interpreted as “non-permanent.”

Prior to Express Entry, most students applied for immigration through Canadian Experience Class (CEC). When they met the requirements in CEC, they were more likely to be successful than not, according to several post-secondary education administrators. There was some certainty and confidence among the students then about their candidacy for immigration.

Now the invitations to apply for permanent residency are based on where candidates sit in a comprehensive ranking system based on points. Students face uncertainty and competition from people who have never spent any time working or studying in Canada but who could attain more points due to a job offer.

Recommendation

IRCC should consider awarding comprehensive ranking system points to international students who have completed full-time post-secondary studies in Canada.

Another drawback to Express Entry is the lack of transparency. When invitations to apply are issued, IRCC does not publish how many were issued for CEC or for particular sector. In addition, IRCC displays only the lowest score for each draw, not the numbers at points in the range.

“It is still quite challenging for students to get an LMIA or a PNP (Provincial Nominee Program),” says John Porter, Director, International Admissions and Student Services at George Brown College. As LMIAs are meant to test the Canadian labour market to ensure there are not similarly qualified Canadians available for the role, Service Canada officials will only infrequently approve an LMIA application for a position to be filled by a recent university graduate.


Summary of Employers’ Issues Regarding Express Entry and the TFWP

  • LMIA process is unusable for many employers and is very challenging for others.
  • Transition plan requirement and tracking is onerous under the LMIA.
  • Threat of compliance audits and penalties scares off many potential LMIA applicants.
  • Advertising requirements for LMIAs for permanent residencies are inappropriate.
  • Point scores create issues, especially for older experienced workers.
  • Uncertainty for those in the Express Entry pool with a job offer that is not supported by an LMIA.
  • Permit renewals/expiration and timing issues.
  • Specific situations vis-à-vis the officers only speaking at a high level or hypothetically.
  • Technology and process issues; e.g., inadvertent or minor errors, which could cause the rejection of an application.
  • Processing issues and timelines varying by location of visa office or Service Canada office.
  • Concerns about the discretion of CBSA officers at border points of entry.

IMMIGRATION FOR A COMPETITIVE CANADA: Why Highly Skilled International Talent Is at Risk

 


Conclusion

Immigration for Canada’s economic competitiveness

Canada’s ability to recruit and integrate international talent into its labour force will increasingly affect its chances to fully realize its economic prosperity. Express Entry was designed and intended to contribute to that goal, but the government thwarted its own efforts with policy decisions taken in a politically overheated atmosphere.

The government can now take a step back and reclaim the opportunity for a truly competitive and effective immigrant selection model. It can adjust instructions and regulations underpinning Express Entry and also address key issues affecting high-skilled talent in the TFWP and the IMP as candidates for Express Entry.

“The evidence is clear that well-managed immigration can contribute to economic growth, generate jobs, promote innovation, increase competitiveness and help address the effects of aging and declining populations,” according to a report of the World Economic Forum.19

Workforce planning is becoming more strategic and demanding for employers. Part of their response to fill skills gaps should be to tap into every source of talent, including internationally trained individuals who are either here in Canada or are eligible to immigrate here.

Immigration matters too much to Canada’s labour market for business not to be engaged in the system. With employers’ involvement, Canada can better align immigrant talent with labour market needs and future economic prosperity. Through gainful employment that fully capitalizes on their skills, immigrants will also enjoy both economic and social prosperity here.

It will be a win-win-win for immigrants, business and Canada.


Recommendations in this Report

The government should:

  1. Provide points in Express Entry for a job offer, without requiring an LMIA to validate it. Instead, IRCC should create a test for employers to demonstrate they are a legitimate employer, using criteria similar to those in the Ontario Immigrant Nominee Program, for example. The test could also build on the Arranged Employment Opinion approach that was previously used in the Federal Skilled Worker Program until May 2013.
  2. Provide points in Express Entry to a foreign national who is in Canada in an LMIA-exempt category within the International Mobility Program.
  3. Dedicate a number of Service Canada officers for specialized knowledge of certain industries that are high-value and high users of the programs within Express Entry.
  4. Explore reintroducing a dedicated track for the assessment of applicants in the digital technology sector, along the lines of the Tech Nation Visa Scheme in the U.K.
  5. Provide extra points in the Express Entry system to senior experienced individuals in positions at the executive level.
  6. Encourage IRCC and Service Canada officers to improve the level of service; for example, Service Canada officers should be urged to call employers to make modest corrections or additions to complete their applications.
  7. Allow employers seeking highly skilled talent to shield salary information from their job postings, or post broad salary ranges, to achieve non-disclosure of competitive salary information.
  8. Remove the National Occupation Classification (NOC) code requirement wherever feasible in order to recognize the changing nature of occupations and to avoid confusion and unnecessary and costly errors by government officials.
  9. Update the listed occupations (NOC codes) to actually match the industry occupations.
  10. Improve the labour market information to reflect industry reality.
  11. Release the results of its compliance audits and enforcement on an annual basis and evaluate whether the rate of non-compliance warrants the high ratio of inspections.
  12. Develop a fully transparent set of guidelines and criteria regarding the LMIA and the TFWP so that everyone is following the same playbook.
  13. Place all of the enforcement power into the hands of an administrative body, such as a quasi-judicial body or tribunal.
  14. Establish an appeal process for the compliance regime under a quasi-judicial body or tribunal; the Social Security Tribunal is one such option to consider, in light of its multi-faceted role.
  15. Improve processing times and act on its commitment to create new performance standards for services, including streamlining applications, reducing wait times, and providing money-back guarantees.
  16. Create forums at IRCC and ESDC for ongoing dialogue (via webcast, for example) with representatives of key stakeholders of Express Entry, the TFWP and the IMP, in order to communicate information and concerns amongst interested parties and with government officials.
  17. Reduce the processing time for study permits and visas to compete with other international markets such as the U.S. and Australia.
  18. Allow a study permit to incorporate a co-op work permit, rather than require international students to apply for each permit separately.
  19. Act on its commitment to credit the time spent in Canada for post-secondary education toward international students’ residency time for citizenship purposes.
  20. Consider awarding comprehensive ranking system points to international students who have completed full-time post-secondary studies in Canada.

Appendix

Canada – Temporary Foreign Worker Program Work Permit Holders by Program and Year in which Permit(s) Became Effective, Q1 2010 to Q1 201520

Programs 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Q1 Total unique persons Q1 Total unique persons Q1 Total unique persons Q1 Total unique persons Q1 Total unique persons Q1 Total unique persons
Live-in caregivers 5,281 17,117 4,261 16,670 4,129 12,672 3,088 11,079 3,243 11,964 2,513 2,513
Agricultural workers 8,327 31,731 8,737 33,657 9,330 35,098 9,352 37,595 9,895 39,550 10,184 10,184
Other Temporary Foreign Worker Program work permit holders 15,684 56,896 14,504 61,687 17,899 69,209 21,493 69,553 13,526 43,709 6,076 6,076
Other higher-skilled 10,767 40,550 9,760 41,927 11,767 46,801 14,066 44,740 8,026 26,652 4,384 4,384
Other lower-skilled 4,885 16,419 4,669 19,976 6,081 22,753 7,391 25,483 5,428 16,882 1,649 1,649
Other occupations21 56 349 102 558 103 516 117 536 101 368 47 47
Total unique22 persons 29,291 105,647 27,493 111,833 31,339 116,781 33,918 117,996 26,653 95,086 18,772 18,772

Source: Citizenship & Immigration Canada, RDM, June 8, 2015

Note: The table on temporary residents has been revised to reflect the June 20, 2014 changes to the Temporary Foreign Worker Program (TFWP). The reporting methodology has also been revised to count temporary residents (TR) based on the type of permit held by a TR (effective from the date that the permit was signed). As a result of the changes above, the reports for each permit holder type have been separated by permit type in order to enhance clarity. For further information, please refer to the Facts and Figures 2014 – Immigration overview: Temporary residents overview and the glossary of terms and concepts.


 

Crystal Ball Sponsors

 


Works Cited

  1. Conference Board of Canada. Immigrants as Innovators: Boosting Canada’s Global Competitiveness. 2010.
  2. Science, Technology and Innovation Council. State of the Nation 2014 – Canada’s Science, Technology and Innovation System: Canada’s Innovation Challenges and Opportunities. Ottawa. 2015.
  3. Ibid, p. 39
  4. Ibid.
  5. See the Appendix for a table of data on the Temporary Foreign Worker Program work permit holders by program.
  6. The LMIA data are displayed elsewhere in this report. These data do not distinguish between LMIAs for high-skilled versus low-skilled positions, and not every positive LMIAs results in the issuance of a work permit.
  7. Note: it is not a requirement that a job offer be validated with a positive LMIA. In fact, with most of the Express Entry draws having a cut-off of less than 600 points, which shows that LMIAs (which attract 600 points for a candidate) are not a requirement to receive an invitation to apply. The issue is that if a person is not the beneficiary of an LMIA or a provincial/territorial nomination certificate, there is no way to know when or whether a person will be invited to apply for permanent residency. Business and skilled foreign nationals both seek predictability more than anything. Skilled foreign nationals have personal lives and families to consider, and the unpredictability is highly problematic.
  8. Citizenship and Immigration Canada. Report on Plans and Priorities 2015-2016. Available at: www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/publications/rpp/2015-2016/index.asp
  9. Drummond, Don, Evan Capeluck and Matthew Calver. The Key Challenge for Canadian Public Policy: Generating Inclusive and Sustainable Economic Growth. Centre for the Study of Living Standards. Ottawa. September 2015. p. 161.
  10. Nakache, Delphine and Leanne Dixon-Perera. Temporary or Transitional? Migrant Workers’ Experiences with Permanent Residence in Canada. IRPP. Montreal. October 2015.
  11. For details, see the U.K. government’s news release: www.gov.uk/government/news/tech-city-uk-unveils-tech-nation-visascheme
  12. Levey, Gregory. “A sustainable tech company can’t hire just Canadians.” The Globe and Mail. Sept. 8, 2015.
  13. The internal bulletin is among the documents in a release package in response to Access to Information Act request number A-2015-00182: Copy of the New Training Manuel (sic) used by Service Canada Employees to Process Labour Market Impact Assessments, available by request at: http://open.canada.ca
  14. See Table 1 – Employer Conditions in Schedule 2 in the Regulations Amending the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, dated July 1, 2015. Available at: http://gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2015/2015-07-01/html/sor-dors144-eng.php
  15. The Canadian Bureau for International Education. “Facts and Figures.” Online at: www.cbie.ca/about-ie/facts-and-figures
  16. Ibid.
  17. CBC News. “Canada wants to double its international student body.” Jan. 15, 2014. Online at: www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/canada-wants-to-double-its-international-student-body-1.2497819
  18. CBIE. Ibid.
  19. World Economic Forum. The Business Case for Migration. 2013.
  20. Data for 2015 are preliminary estimates and are subject to change. For 2010-2013, these are updated numbers and different from those of Facts and Figures 2014.
  21. Includes permit holders who hold permits with a not stated occupation and permits with a CIC synthetic occupation that is not included in ESDC’s National Occupational Classification.
  22. The total unique count may not equal to the sum of permit holders in each program as an individual may hold more than one type of permit over a given period.

Co-brand_Canadas_Top_10_Barriers_to_Competitiveness_in_2016.pdf

The Power to Shape Policy & Of Our Network

Get plugged in.

As Canada’s largest and most influential business association, we are the primary and vital connection between business and the federal government. Wtih our network of over 450 chambers of commerce and boards of trade, representing 200,000 businesses of all sizes, in all sectors of the economy and in all regions, we help shape public policy and decision-making to the benefit of businesses, communities and families across Canada.


Chamber.ca | CanadianChamberofCommerce | @CdnChamberofCom

Share this:

More job seekers skew Niagara stats

Niagara’s unemployment rate is continuing a five-month rise that began in August.

But the numbers aren’t as dire as it might seem.

Statistics Canada’s Labour Force Survey, released Friday, has December’s unemployment rate in St. Catharines-Niagara at 8.0 per cent.

West of the Atlantic provinces, only Montreal (8.7 per cent) and Windsor (9.7 per cent) fared worse last month, of major jurisdictions surveyed.

And while job numbers are disproportionately represented by seasonal employment in Niagara, the statistics show a monthly track up from 6.5 per cent in August.

However, Statistics Canada analyst Vincent Ferrao cautions the recent seasonally-adjusted unemployment numbers can be misleading.

Other employment statistics paint a not-so-bleak picture.

While unemployment was up a full percent from a year ago, another force is at play — higher labour force participation.

Over a year — from December to December – there were 13,700 more in the labour force but only 10,500 more people were working, Ferrao said. The majority of those were represented by working age men.

“Although there were more people working, not enough jobs were created for everybody who came into the labour force looking for work,” he said. “That’s why your unemployment rate went up by a full point.

“There’s more activity in the labour market, so you’ll need more (jobs) to bump that unemployment rate down,” he said. “Over the year, you actually had employment growth.”

Ferrao said the proportion of working people aged 15 and over was also 60.3 per cent. That’s up almost three percentage points from a year ago.

Statistics Canada’s census metropolitan area for St. Catharines-Niagara does not include Grimsby or West Lincoln.

Ontario as a whole was the only province with a growth in employment in December, reporting a net gain of 35,000 jobs to help lower the province’s unemployment rate from 6.9 to 6.7 per cent.

The news for Niagara comes on the heels of a major economic report released December that painted a bright picture for the region.

December’s Ontario Economic Update said employment in the “Hamilton-Niagara Peninsula Economic Region” expanded at a faster pace in 2015 than in previous years.

The St. Catharines-Niagara census metro area led with a near five per cent rise in employment – while employment growth in the Brantford census area is at a 1.5 per cent pace this year and Hamilton has growth of around one per cent per year.

It also says service-producing industries, including tourism and health have been sources of employment growth regionally. Closures in the manufacturing sector have been subsiding.

The report was created by the Ontario Chamber of Commerce and the Credit Unions of Ontario, with support from the Greater Niagara Chamber of Commerce.

Niagara Region economic director Bob Seguin said market and labour force participation rates are factors in the latest jobs data.

“There has (also) been recent evidence, through individual firm reports, of sizeable hiring by a number of manufacturing small to medium enterprises throughout Niagara,” Seguin said.

“I would agree that the … manufacturing outlook is positive, (but) with some challenges,” he said.

“And that’s particularly for those whose operations service the energy sector.”

Mishka Balsom, CEO of the Greater Niagara Chamber of Commerce, said summer unemployment rate was lower this year than last but winter was higher.

“However, the participation rate is also higher than it was in summer and much higher than it was last year,” Balsom said. “And the employment rate is significantly higher than it was last year and still higher in November to December than it has been all summer.

That more people are in the workforce than before is a “good thing,” she said.

“The employment rate is also trending up – that’s also good. Basically, what’s happening is more people are entering the workforce and most of them are finding jobs.

“Of course we need to be creating more jobs here,” Balsom said.

“Every region with a unemployment rate greater than six per cent needs to be creating more jobs.”

don.fraser@sunmedia.ca
Twitter: @don_standard


Original article: http://www.stcatharinesstandard.ca/2016/01/08/more-job-seekers-skew-niagara-stats

Share this:

Report shows Niagara and area powering up

A new study suggests Hamilton-Niagara is growing some economic muscle.

The Ontario Economic Update 2016 released this week, says employment in the “Hamilton-Niagara Peninsula Economic Region” expanded at a faster pace in 2015 than in previous years.

In that greater region, the St. Catharines-Niagara census metro area led with a near five per cent rise — while employment growth in the Brantford census area is at a 1.5 per cent pace this year and Hamilton has growth of around one per cent a year.

It also says service-producing industries, including tourism and health have been sources of employment growth regionally, with closures in the manufacturing sector subsiding.

The report was created by the Ontario Chamber of Commerce and the Credit Unions of Ontario, with support from the Greater Niagara Chamber of Commerce.

It said St. Catharines-Niagara overall unemployment is forecast to fall below seven per cent this year, the lowest since 2008. That regional CMA does not include Grimsby or West Lincoln.

Statistics Canada most recently had St. Catharines-Niagara’s November unemployment rate at 7.8 per cent, seasonally adjusted— that’s in the bottom half of large census metro areas in the province.

However, this was during a period of seasonal high unemployment for the region. October’s was 7.3 per cent.

Meanwhile, job growth is forecast at 1.7 percent during 2016 in the Hamilton-Niagara region, slightly lower than the 2.2 per cent expected in 2015, but higher than every other year since recession.

“Looking ahead, manufacturing, tourism, and transportation services stand to benefit from more favourable external conditions,” said the update summary released by the Niagara chamber. It said domestic sectors such as construction, real estate, and retail trade will gain from low interest rates and an improvement in economic conditions.

A major manufacturing decline — which has hammered Niagara and southwest Ontario — appears to have reversed.

Most of the major restructuring in the manufacturing sector appears to be over,” said Liam McGuinty, director of policy at the Ontario Chamber. “That’s not unique to (Niagara), it’s something we’re seeing across southwestern Ontario and the GTA.”

According to province-wide data, most areas will enjoy improving economic conditions in the coming year.

Growth will be driven in part by a rise in exports, a stronger U.S. economy and a low Canadian dollar. Government fiscal policy will also be a key driver, with federal and provincial infrastructure commitments to stimulate growth.

Across Ontario, regional growth performances during 2015 will be led by the Toronto and Hamilton-Niagara regions, with the Kitchener-Waterloo-Barrie and London regions close behind.

McGuinty said a lot of the optimistic forecast has to do with “Ontario’s rising fortunes, generally.”

In the greater Niagara-Hamilton-GTA, McGuinty said there’s been an “uptick in not just service sector, but also manufacturing and it’s on the back of a weakening Canadian dollar and growing American consumer demand.”

Corrina Carson, interim executive director of the Niagara Workforce Planning Board, said her group supports the accuracy of the study findings.

“It’s encouraging in its forecasts of an improving outlook on the future growth of the Hamilton-Niagara CMA using (key) indicators,” Carson said, adding the study focuses on projected forecasts for our larger economic region.

The board’s own labour market report, released last month, shows St. Catharines-Niagara has seen growth across all industries by employment, with the exception of information, culture and recreation.

“While manufacturing experienced significant loss between 2009-2014, it has held steady between 2009-2014 (and) better than that of Ontario,” Carson said.

Niagara chamber CEO Mishka Balsom explains that one big factor behind the declining unemployment rates noted in the update, is a lower rate of participation in the labour force, especially since the recession.

“Had the labour force participation roughly remained the same as in 2009 and employment growth was unchanged, the region’s unemployment rate would be closer to nine per cent, rather than six,” Balsom said.

As for manufacturing Balsom says despite the overall decline of that sector over the last few decades, “local manufacturing job numbers have been stable for years now.”

“In fact, we’ve actually increased employment in manufacturing over the last five years, even while Ontario as a whole lost manufacturing jobs,” she said

“There’s every indication that manufacturers in Niagara have found a way to make it work and that this sector can be a source of future job growth.”

 

Ontario Economic Update for the Hamilton-Niagara Peninsula economic region

  • it spans census metropolitan areas of Hamilton, St. Catharines-Niagara, and Brantford, and also covers Haldimand-Norfolk.
  • region grew more rapidly in 2015 than 2014. Unlike last year, most of this year’s employment growth was outside the Hamilton CMA. The St. Catharines-Niagara CMA led with a near five percent rise, followed by a substantial employment gain outside the three CMAs in the region.
  • full-time employment in the region is well above trend growth for the second year in a row.
  • Most of the gains are centered in the Hamilton and St. Catharines-Niagara. Part-time employment down and full-time is up, and total hours worked is higher.
  • unemployment at six per cent is the lowest in years. Hamilton’s rate will approach an average of 5.6 per cent in 2015 and in St. Catharines-Niagara it will fall below seven per cent, the lowest since 2008.
  • the employment share of service industries in the regions is 77 per cent, compared to 63 per cent in 1987 and 70 per cent in 1996. The highest share is in St. Catharines-Niagara, due to its major tourist industry.

Source: Update synopsis from Ontario Chamber of Commerce 

don.fraser@sunmedia.ca
Twitter @don_standard

 


Original article: http://www.stcatharinesstandard.ca/2015/12/10/report-shows-niagara-and-area-powering-up

Share this:

What Business Needs to Know About the TPP

After more than five years of hard work, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations have come to a successful end. Landing in the midst of a federal election campaign, there are a lot of questions and debate about what this historic deal means for Canadian businesses, jobs and the economy. Business has heard the talking points from all sides, but the reality is always more nuanced. Here’s what we know so far.

How does business benefit from trade agreements?

The main objective of trade agreements is to make it cheaper and easier for Canadian companies to do business across borders. Most countries levy tariffs or import duties on foreign products that are bought or sold in their market. They may also limit the sectors where foreign companies can invest, or how much of an operation they can own. It might be hard for companies to get the visas or permits they need to move people and data in and out of markets. Customs procedures can be cumbersome or unpredictable. By signing an agreement, both Canada and our trading partners commit to reduce these types of barriers.

But agreements are also about creating a level playing field on which Canadian companies can compete. They commit governments to regulate and tax Canadian companies and products in the same way they do their own, and to do so transparently. They promise to protect Canadian investments and intellectual property from expropriation and theft. Agreements also provide mechanisms for Canadian companies to seek relief from unfairly subsidized or artificially cheap imports.

What is the TPP and why is it so special?

The TPP is a trade agreement between 12 countries that sit along the Pacific Rim: Canada, the United States, Japan, Mexico, Vietnam, Malaysia, Australia, Chile, Peru, New Zealand, Singapore and Brunei. It will create an integrated market covering nearly 800 million consumers and 40% of the global economy.

Canada already has access to several of these countries, including through the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). But Asia is quickly becoming the centre of the global economy and the only agreement we have there today is with South Korea. In one step, the TPP will give Canadian companies new access to Japan—the world’s third largest economy—as well as to over 120 million consumers in Vietnam and Malaysia. Eventually, the TPP could include Taiwan, Indonesia and the Philippines, or even China and India—basically anyone willing to sign up to the TPP’s conditions.

“The Asia Pacific region is increasingly a key market for Canadian companies. To be successful in this market, Canadian companies require a level playing field and a consistent set of rules governing trade.”

– John Chen, Executive Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Blackberry

And the TPP isn’t any old trade agreement. It’s a template that reflects lessons from the past and the challenges facing international business today. There are new rules around e-commerce, trade in services, innovative medicines and state-owned enterprises. It is the first agreement to take into account the needs of small- and medium-sized businesses, and the first with fully-enforceable labour standards and environmental protections.

By modernizing trade rules across major economies, the TPP has accomplished something the World Trade Organization has failed to do since it was founded in 1994. It will be a ‘living agreement,’ supported by intergovernmental committees and a central Commission, positioning the trade bloc to play a leading role in the future of the multilateral trading system.

Which industries have the most to gain?

On paper, Canadian companies selling to Japan, Vietnam and Malaysia are the big winners. They will save hundreds of millions of dollars as import tariffs fall on a wide range of Canadian products: from agri-food, seafood and wood to chemicals, aerospace and industrial equipment. The TPP will also help companies in these markets manage regulatory challenges related to food safety, building codes, pest management and conformity with technical standards. For some, the TPP could transform their industry. Beef producers and processors, for instance, expect to double or triple their exports to Japan alone.

There will be some new access to the American market. Canada pushed hard in the negotiations to end ‘Buy American’ policies that exclude Canadian suppliers from major infrastructure projects. The TPP won’t change those, but it will open up procurement opportunities with six major regional power authorities, which together spend around $4 billion on construction every year. Many Canadian companies have experience supplying these types of projects

Canadian importers will benefit too. Every year, retailers pay duties on over $10 billion in consumer goods from TPP markets where Canada doesn’t have trade agreements. Nearly all these duties will be eliminated, lowering costs and giving companies more flexible sourcing options. Similarly, Canadian extractives companies that operate in the region will save money when they import equipment and other materials from Canada and other TPP markets.

Companies in the services sector—banking, insurance, IT, managing consulting, architecture and engineering—also see big potential in the TPP. These firms account for a rapidly growing share of Canada’s trade with Asia, and many have set up extensive local operations there. The TPP will protect their investments, ensure more even-handed regulation, and make it easier to bring in the technicians and managers they need to run their business.

Should we be worried about Canadian manufacturing?

Though many manufacturers will benefit from new market access, some worry these gains will be offset by losses in other places. But such an outcome is far from inevitable, especially if those affected have enough time and support to adapt and take advantage of the TPP’s upside potential.

“We had no choice but to be at the negotiating table with the big players. When you decide to join the major leagues and decide the rules of the game, the next step is to understand what you need to do to compete.”

– Ray Tanguay, Automotive Advisor to Ontario and Canada, Former Chairman of Toyota Canada

The main concern is the automotive industry, now that Canada will remove a long-standing 6.1% import tariff on passenger vehicles from Japan, and allow more foreign content in parts and vehicles. The fear is that more competition will hurt the business case for locating in Canada at a time when we’re already losing production to Mexico and the southern United States.

But the TPP also presents an opportunity for the industry to broaden its horizons. Canada’s advantages in research and design could be combined with competitively priced inputs from around the world and access to customers across the Pacific and Atlantic. Some local carmakers already have plans to use Canada’s upcoming trade agreement with the European Union to produce for that market, while others are investing locally in new technologies for self-driving or ‘connected’ cars. In any case, the TPP is a wake-up call for the sector. Industry and governments at all levels will need to use the agreement’s transition period to take stock of the situation and come up with a long-term plan.

Though many companies will face new challenges, the TPP has safeguards to make sure the game isn’t rigged against them. Canada negotiated the right to raise tariffs on Japanese vehicles if there’s a surge in imports. And TPP members are discussing a mechanism to monitor and prevent countries from devaluing their currency to give their exporters an edge.

The TPP will also prevent state-owned enterprises from undercutting Canadian companies. Canada’s steel industry, for example, has been struggling in recent years under a barrage of low-priced imports from countries like China and Vietnam. Government-backed steelmakers there have used subsidized loans to expand their production capacity, despite a slowdown in market demand. The TPP will require them to compete on a commercial basis and without special financial or regulatory advantages.

What does it mean for technology and innovation?

For decades, trade agreements have failed to keep pace with advances in technology that have changed the way international business is done. The TPP provides several much-needed updates.

It creates a new framework to promote e-commerce and the digital economy. Governments will no longer be able to arbitrarily restrict the free flow of information across borders, or require that businesses store their data on local servers. It will also prevent them from demanding access to a company’s software source code. The use of such measures by a growing number of jurisdictions around the world is a real threat to thousands of Canadian companies that depend on cross-border data flows to sell their products online, manage customer relationships or take advantage of the low-cost storage and processing power offered by cloud computing.

“The TPP trade agreement will help Canadian companies, including those who are world leaders in the services sector, have greater access to the growing pacific market while ensuring appropriate safeguards are in place in the areas of digital commerce and privacy protection.”

– Rupert Duchesne, Group Chief Executive, Aimia

Although recent reforms have brought Canada’s intellectual property laws in line with most of agreement’s requirements, Canadian trademarks, copyright and patent protections stand to receive improved protection in other TPP markets. Some countries, for instance, don’t offer adequate remedies to combat trade in counterfeit and pirated goods. Others will need to lengthen the period of time that companies have to recoup investments in new medicines.

There are concerns, however, that the TPP has fallen short in this area, especially when it comes to biologics—an innovative type of drug that is hard to protect under traditional pharmaceutical patents. Nonetheless, the TPP should make Canadian companies more confident to develop and license their intellectual property in the Pacific region.

What stays the same?

The TPP may be one of biggest trade agreements in history, but it’s important to remember that Canada’s unique economic and social model will remain intact.

As in past agreements, Canada has carved out a number of areas from the TPP’s scope. Our foreign investment rules in telecommunications and cultural industries will be preserved. Nothing in the agreement will prevent the federal or provincial governments from building public infrastructure, funding research and development or continuing to provide health care, education and other social services to Canadians. Neither will the TPP affect crown corporations such as the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Canada Post, Export Development Canada and port authorities.

Canada’s dairy, poultry and egg industries will continue to operate under a system of supply management, though there will be a small increase in imports from TPP countries. The new dairy import quota will be equal to 3.25% of the national market, most of which is expected to be filled by American producers. Canada’s Trade Minister has proposed a $4.3 billion package to compensate farmers and help them adjust to new circumstances.

How will companies use the TPP?

All Canadian companies doing business with TPP markets are covered by the agreement, though they may have to take steps to qualify for the benefits. To pay lower import duties, for instance, companies will have to certify that their goods contain a minimum level of value-added from the TPP region.

If a foreign government fails to honour its commitments under the agreement, affected companies can petition the Canadian government to file a formal dispute. If the matter involves an investment or intellectual property issue, the company may be able to bring a direct case against the foreign government in a process called investor-state dispute settlement, which could result in financial compensation for damages.

What happens if Canada doesn’t join?

“Canadian participation in international agreements such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership is absolutely vital to the sustainability of the livestock and meat sector. They create an environment that allows farmers and processors to remain competitive in both the domestic and foreign markets.”

– Hendry Mizrahi, President, Lester Foods Limited

Not only will we miss out on new business opportunities, many companies will find themselves worse off than under the status quo. They will lose key export markets to firms from TPP countries that will no longer be subject to the same import duties or other trade barriers. Canada’s canola industry, for instance, estimates they will lose $14 billion over 10 years if the TPP goes ahead without us.

Canadian companies may get pushed out of their traditional North American supply chains. Even though NAFTA will remain in force alongside the TPP, global firms will become more reluctant to invest here or source Canadian products if the content won’t qualify for access to the broader Pacific region.

Perhaps most importantly, we will lose our influence over global trade rules. As a mid-sized economy, Canada is always better served through regional and multilateral institutions, where we can work with others to set the terms of our trade and investment relationships with established and emerging trade powers.

When will the TPP come into effect?

There are a number of steps that need to be taken before the TPP will enter into force. Countries reached an agreement-in-principle on October 5, marking the end of formal negotiations. They are preparing the final text for public release and signing. It must then be ratified. In most of the countries, this means getting national parliaments to approve the deal and make any necessary changes to local laws.

If all parties ratify the agreement within two years of signing, it will take effect 60 days after the final notification. If not all countries ratify within this time period, the agreement can still go forward using a different formula.

The TPP may face some political hurdles. Canada’s opposition parties say they will have to review the text before they can support it. The United States, Japan and Australia will also have elections next year and some of their leaders have already spoken out against the deal.

For more information, please contact Cam Vidler at cvidler@chamber.ca or 613-238-4000 x230

Share this:

Economic summit start of bigger things

In geography, a summit is a peak. We want the Niagara Economic Summit to be the start of our climb.

We intended to identify the key issues we needed to tackle in Niagara and to establish a broad base of ideas upon which we would build our solutions. We were privileged to have so many leaders, experts and thinkers involved.

The speakers were leading figures in policy, research and economic development from the provincial, national and even international stages, but they still had that local connection to Niagara.

Judging by the dozens of questions and comments from the audience and over social media, the talks and the panels evidently struck a chord.

According to a post-event survey, the two issues foremost in the minds of the audience were the integration of our public transit systems and youth attraction and retention. Nine out of every 10 attendees rated these issues as very important to Niagara.

We have talked about these issues before, though.

Amalgamating public transit is something that has been on — and then off — regional and municipal agendas for years, and for years the Greater Niagara Chamber of Commerce has advocated for it.

Brock Dickinson, CEO of MDB Insight, gave a remarkable keynote speech in which he showed us how Vancouver had already done this, and how they could provide a viable model for Niagara.

On the discussion panel, we heard of the cost in lost hours and productivity when journeys from not far outside the region can take more than two hours to complete, due mostly to Niagara’s labyrinthine transit system.

The big transit-and-infrastructure issue on everyone’s minds is year-round GO train service, but capitalizing on that investment means ironing out the kinks in Niagara’s local public transit. If we are to make good use of this new artery to the GTA and Hamilton, we are going to need excellent feeder services to get Niagara’s residents to the GO stations and get our visitors out to their destinations once they arrive.

At the very least, that will require increased co-operation and co-ordination between Niagara’s many transit authorities, and a good model of how potential game-changers like Uber or self-driving cars can fit into the picture would help.

Kyle Rose, president of the Brock University students’ union, told us about the huge impact public transit in Niagara has on students, and it’s easy to guess what sort of effect that has on youth attraction and retention.

That topic has also been on agendas for years, and it’s not one Niagara alone faces — many or even most regions in Ontario struggle with the same problem.

At the GNCC, we see this issue predominantly as one of job creation. People did not flock to Fort McMurray, Alta. for a vibrant cultural scene, natural beauty or quality of life — they went there for the jobs. If Niagara can offer good jobs for young people, they will move here and stay here.

But good jobs need a good business climate. Another key issue attendees identified was red tape for businesses looking to trade, expand or start up in Niagara. While prudent regulation helps promote a sound economy, over-regulation can strangle it.

While governance reform is on many minds, simpler solutions might get results faster, such as the idea to create a government concierge service where businesses could deal with all their government and regulatory requirements in one place.

Whatever those solutions are, Ontario Chamber of Commerce vice-president Karl Baldauf told us Niagara has to “pick a lane and put its foot on the gas.” That is sound advice.

Of the issues raised at the summit, virtually none were completely new, but all were in need of decisive action.

Panellist Brent Porter of local digital design firm Form & Affect said the last thing he wanted was to come to next year’s summit and talk about all the same issues all over again because we had made no progress in the interim.

At the GNCC, we want to see the summit as the start of a process, not the end of it. This should be the beginning of many conversations and collaborations throughout the region.

We are committed to working with any and every organization, businessperson, decision-maker and leader in Niagara to advance the goals of prosperity and growth, and we invite anyone who shares those goals to work with us.

Finally, we shouldn’t become so mired in thinking about our problems that we fail to capitalize on our strengths.

Niagara Region’s Paul Connor, who delivered one of the panel summaries, remarked that he never heard a single negative thing about Niagara until he moved to Niagara.

We are a powerful region in tourism, agriculture, and energy, uniquely situated on the border crossing of a prosperous and innovative mega-region. We have fantastic educational institutions that are drivers of research and innovation. We have a wealth of natural beauty and a quality of life envied by many.

The question is, how can we do even better?

Mishka Balsom is the CEO and president of the Greater Niagara Chamber of Commerce


Original article: http://www.stcatharinesstandard.ca/2015/11/06/balsom-economic-summit-start-of-bigger-things

Share this:

The politics of gender and elections

During the Niagara Leadership Summit for Women, a panel discussion was held featuring local female leaders, from left, Allie Hughes, owner of Hughes & Co.; Debbie Zimmerman, CEO of Grape Growers of Ontario and former regional chair; Mishka Balsom, CEO of Greater Niagara Chamber of Commerce; and Tami Jeanneret, 105.7 EZ Rock news anchor and Niagara College instructor. The panel was held on Saturday, Oct. 24, 2015, in St. Catharines, Ont. Maryanne Firth, St. Catharines Standard.

There has been a lot of talk since the federal election ended about Prime Minister-designate Justin Trudeau’s desire to bring a degree of gender balance to his cabinet.

For those of you who are about to cry “Oh, no, not more political correctness,” what Trudeau is talking about is addressing the very real and, in 2015, disgraceful gender imbalance in our political life.

Even in an era when electing a female premier is about as controversial as saying the snow is cold, the reality is politics in Canada is still dominated by men.

Consider the candidates who ran for a Niagara seat in the 2015 federal election for the major parities.

Twelve candidates ran in four Niagara ridings representing the Liberals, the Conservatives and the NDP. Of these candidates, only three were women.

Sue Erskine-Fournier ran for the NDP in St. Catharines, Carolynn Ioannoni was the NDP candidate in Niagara Falls and Leanna Villella was the Tory hopeful in Niagara Centre.

This trio of candidates, given the state of the polls then, looked to have a half-way decent shot at winning. But things change, and none of them did.

The individual campaigns were problematic. Erksine-Fournier allowed her Tory and Liberal opponents to dominate candidates debates. Villella couldn’t answer questions about key Conservative foreign policy decisions and despite being an established a political figure Niagara Falls, Ioannoni couldn’t get the traction needed to unseat the Tory incumbent.

Mind you, all of that has nothing to do with gender. You could say similar things about all the losing – and even the winning – campaigns .

It is absolutely not the case that Niagara is bereft of female political talent. Consider Jennifer Mooradian for instance, who once ran for the Green Party in St. Catharines. She was without a doubt the best candidate the Greens have ever fielded in St. Catharines, out gunning opponents in candidates debates. She ultimately lost, however, because she hitched her wagon to a party on the fringes.

She isn’t alone. If you look around the region, there are talented women in leadership positions in many sectors. But very few will run for federal office.

When you step back from the election, and look at the political gender break down in the region — discussed last week at the Niagara Leadership Summit for Women — the situation becomes even more clear and may explain why only three women chose to dive into into the federal election meat grinder

A mere 13% of Niagara Region councillors are women. That proportion is only slightly better at the House of Commons, with 26% of MPs being women.

This data is reflective of a broader trend that should come as no surprise to anyone who has paid the least bit of attention to our culture in the last 40 years.

Women make up about 48% of the total work force, but they only 5% of the top jobs. While the wage gap has improved, women on the whole still get paid less than their male counterparts doing the same job.

We have several female premiers but they govern cabinets mostly made up of men.

I’m certain this is a gross simplification, but these stats do bespeak the cultural road-blocks preventing women from running for high office. Lack of respect and not being taken seriously, the wage gap, and outmoded ideas of where a woman’s “place” ought to be, all likely play a role.

(The sad bit here is that men who hold office have marriages and kids, and yet no one questions when they want to put much of their lives on hold to run.)

As manifestly unbalanced as that is, these culturally assigned gender roles exist. They won’t change just by saying “that’s unfair.”

Women will often carry more responsibility when it comes to caring for a home or children. And our political infrastructure isn’t really set up to help women manage that while that while taking on the extra and stressful duties of a politician.

That has to change.

Because the thing is if we don’t change it, we are overtly rejecting half the population — and the intelligence, creativity and ideas they could bring to bear on a host of issues the nation faces — as essentially unfit for office.

Which seems like a colossally bad idea.

Grant LaFleche


Original article: http://www.niagarafallsreview.ca/2015/10/26/lafleche-the-politics-of-gender-and-elections

 

Share this: