[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]
Tuesday, April 8, 1997
.1610 
[English]
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger (Ottawa - Vanier, Lib.)): First, our apologies for delaying the start of the meeting, but the nation's business called and of course we responded to the bells and went to vote.
We will proceed this afternoon, if you don't mind, by hearing the ten-minute or so presentations of the three groups represented here today, one after the other. Then we will entertain questions from the members of the committee for whatever time remains, if that is okay for everyone.
.1615
We have with us Shirley-Ann George, executive director of the Canadian Advanced Technology Association; George Boynton, president of the Canadian Information Processing Society; and Mr. Georges Nydam of the West Island Business Development Council.
We are essentially looking at the notion of whether or not there are administrative ways, as opposed to legislative...or a need to streamline the immigration side with workers' permits, if you'll allow the expression...or immigration itself for skill sets that industry may require but are not currently available...to look at this for a short-term solution.
That is essentially the groundwork. I would now invite Ms George to start the proceedings.
Go ahead, please.
Ms Shirley-Ann George (Executive Director, Canadian Advanced Technology Association): Thank you very much. It's a pleasure to be here today.
CATA represents a broad base of technology organizations. We have over 450 members in Canada. Some of the names you will recognize are Canadian success stories, such as Newbridge, Corel, and Cognos, and some multinationals that have made very large investments in Canada, such as IBM and Ericsson.
Our role is to ensure that Canada remains a competitive country from which to do business. There is a very small market share for our companies in Canada, and generally over 80% of their revenues come from outside Canada.
I won't bore you with the details on CATA. If you want more information, including who's on our board of directors, there is a handout for you today.
When we look at the bigger picture, it's important to realize that we live in a world where there is a single global marketplace, one global capital market, and that we are quickly moving to a single global workforce. Canada's portion of this is a small 2% to 3%. It is our collective responsibility to be extremely proactive in fighting for our share and, if possible, getting more than it.
You can feel very comfortable that other jurisdictions are actively marketing in your backyard, trying to take your share away.
Our competitive assets are our people, our cost of doing business, and our technologies. We are passionately Canadian. We travel the world on a weekly basis. We understand far better than many Canadians that this is indeed the best place in the world to live.
We will leave Canada only if you force us out, but if the business conditions do not allow us to succeed here, we do have some very attractive options. Fortunately, the governments of Canada are working hard at getting government right. It is in response to this that most of our employment growth is in Canada.
For example, the compound annual growth rate for employment in the IT and T sector has been 11.2% over the last five years. That is far greater than that of any other sector. We now employ over 400,000 people in Canada.
We are also responsible for over 40% of all industrial research done in Canada.
At the same time, the convergence that's happening in the global marketplace could move the worldwide communications market from a $2 trillion marketplace to an $8 trillion marketplace over the next ten years. Assuming Canada maintains the same market share and the same productivity rates, this could mean a need for an additional 500,000 to 1,000,000 people.
Needless to say, our biggest challenge is finding these people tomorrow when we don't have enough today. If we can't fulfil our needs today, we don't need to worry as Canadians about tomorrow, because we will be forced to take our jobs elsewhere.
Immigration is just a small part of the solution. Although our competitive position for human resources is weak on the financial front when compared with that of the U.S., we can be a very attractive immigration site for citizens of other countries.
Just to give you an example of the types of people we are looking at to bring in through immigration and temporary work permits, one of our members is looking for a biochemist who is also a civil engineer and can write computer model applications. There are not very many of these people in the world. This example demonstrates that we're not looking to bring in new graduates or even skilled labour. Our critical need is for the highly skilled, niche-experienced, and often multi-disciplinary individual, people who have invested seven to ten years in getting into this very marketable position.
.1620
It is important to understand that once we find these few key individuals, we can hire a team of Canadians who will work with or for these individuals. So one person could potentially mean anywhere from three to twenty jobs.
After meeting with Mr. Bélanger, we went out to our members and asked if they had any recommendations on how to facilitate the temporary work or immigration process. Here, I'm speaking on the non-NAFTA countries.
We were very happy to hear, and I'm sure as government employees you'll also be very happy to hear, that generally Canadian companies are pleased with the service they're getting from Immigration Canada. They believe the people, especially those here on the ground in Canada, are very responsive. However, there is some frustration with some of the field offices. That could be just a perception as to what actually has to happen outside of the country.
Some of their recommendations included things such as placing a much higher priority on processing these applications in the embassies and consulates. This includes simple things such as the movement of the documentation. One company went to great lengths to tell me the story of how they were trying to bring somebody in from Brazil. Immigration Canada actually sent the paperwork by regular post. That's weeks and weeks of unnecessary lost time. If we could do something as simple as move these documents by courier or through electronic mail, it would make a difference.
Sometimes the delay in other countries is not caused by Immigration Canada. It is caused by the other country processing the security requirements and these types of things. It would be very helpful if companies were kept informed as to where the ball is.
The comments that have been made about the proposal to do something to help fast track the system were very warmly received by our members. Whether it be this pilot that is being suggested or another way, anything that shortens the timeframe is critically important.
You have to understand that we work in a world where the product development cycle can be longer than the product life cycle, and the product life cycle might be only six months. So if we have to wait an additional six months to bring in the key individual to get started, by the time the product comes out the end, it can be too late. The product can be totally irrelevant in the marketplace. Literally, weeks and days make a difference. Solutions taking months and years are pretty well irrelevant to us, because by the time you get them in place they're not going to work. We're big proponents of pilots. Let's try it and see.
We should also look at some more innovative suggestions. How can we get ahead of our global competition? This includes things such as allowing spouses to work. Right now, if you bring people into Canada on a temporary permit, the spouses are not allowed to work in Canada. There's also some frustration with hiring foreign students. It's extremely frustrating for companies when they can actually reach out and touch somebody who has the skills. We watch them take jobs in the United States because they are not allowed to work in Canada.
Those are just some of the suggestions that were made.
Canada is not the only country dealing with this skill shortage issue. What we are faced with today, as a country, is an incredible opportunity. Any country that can truly build an information society is guaranteed a place as a first-world country for the next century. If we work together to solve our human capital problems, we will not only fulfil our needs, but also the multinationals from around the world will be beating on our doors asking permission to bring their jobs to Canada.
The challenge is that it's a very, very short window, and the door is closing. The train is literally leaving the station. If we do not look at the bigger issues of the human resource skill shortage, and if we're not actively trying to dramatically increase the pipeline of qualified workers, it's our children and our grandchildren who will unfortunately be watching from inside Canada what's happening in other countries that have gotten it right or will, probably more realistically, be forced to leave Canada for the good jobs elsewhere.
Thank you.
.1625
[Translation]
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you, Ms George.
[English]
I'd like to turn now to Mr. Boynton, for about ten minutes.
[Translation]
Mr. George Boynton (President, Canadian Information Processing Society): Good afternoon. Contrary to what you have just said, I thought we only had two or three minutes, not ten.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): You have a maximum of ten minutes.
[English]
Mr. Boynton: It's going to be short and sweet.
First of all, I support what Shirley-Ann has just said. I'd like to state that unlike CATA or ITAC - and they're not here right now - CIPS, the Canadian Information Processing Society, represents the IT professionals as opposed to the employers.
Our association comprises 6,000 members. That's a small number when you consider the number of people who are in the IT community. Nonetheless, we are Canada's largest representative of IT workers.
We support this pilot project. Despite the high unemployment rates in Canada, the Canadian Information Processing Society supports the view that there is indeed a shortage of information technology personnel. This certainly applies to sectors that use the latest technology and to the massive millennium project commonly referred to as the year 2000 problem.
We join our partners, such as the Software Human Resource Council, and other associations, such as CATA and ITAC, in requesting regular updates to the data on this problem in order to formulate appropriate long-term action. Merely making the immigration process more effective is not a long-term solution.
How long can we rely on raiding other countries? How much harm is reliance on that practice by our neighbours doing to Canada?
A well-managed immigration policy, therefore, should be part of a total solution to the labour shortage. Why do we have the problem today? Why do we want this pilot?
The Canadian Information Processing Society encourages continuing education and develops mutual recognition agreements, which we refer to as MRAs, with other information technology associations around the world. These MRAs highlight the need for harmonization of international IT standards, which will facilitate the mobility of resources.
In addition, encouraging employers, as has the provincial government in Quebec, to invest in training is definitely another part of the total solution. I stress the words ``total solution''. Having employers who do not invest in training raid the employees of those companies that do is not a recommendable practice.
Some studies suggest that the IT professional requires at least 10 to 15 days of training per year to remain current in the profession. It would seem that employers need to budget not only 1% but maybe 3% to 5% of payroll for training. Information technology requires a continuous updating or retraining process. CIPS certainly promotes this.
I guess in short what I want you to hear from our position is that, yes, we support this pilot, but only as part of a total package that includes ongoing training, so that we don't end up having the same problem with these new immigrants two or three years down the road.
Thank you.
[Translation]
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Is that all?
Mr. Boynton: Yes.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Our next witness, Mr. George Nydam, represents the West Island Business Development Council. You have approximately ten minutes.
Mr. Georges Nydam (Industrial Commissionner, West Island Business Development Council): Mr. Chairman, I would like to make sure that you have received the two brief documents that we brought with us. These are not translations; the first document is a more complete version in French, whereas the second document summarizes the key points of our presentation in English.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Have members of the committee received these documents? Yes? All right.
Mr. Nydam: I think there is unanimity among the three Georges around this table. It seems that it was the password to get in here today.
I'm the industrial commissioner of an association that has been dealing with international recruitment for almost three years. Our member companies have described difficulties that they face in bringing in strategic workers in the technology sector. We must point out that in the Montreal region, and particularly on the West Island, we have extraordinary co-operation from officials from the Department of Human Resources Development, Immigration Quebec and Immigration Canada. Thanks to that co-operation, we were able to implement operational procedures, which are informal rather than formal, and that serves our companies well.
.1630
I would like to point out that the perception that most of these businesses have of the government's international recruitment policies is that there is an attempt to prevent them as much as possible or at least to reduce to a minimum opportunities to recruit abroad in order to supposedly keep those jobs for Canadians. Our policies are perceived as restricting international recruitment.
Moreover, businesses explained that when they recruit abroad, they do so because they must. Moving a Canadian from Toronto to Vancouver represents approximately $40 000 in expenses for a company, whereas bringing in an expert from Europe or elsewhere represents an investment of$80 000 to $120 000. The financial consequences of recruitment abroad are such that you think twice before undertaking that venture.
Ever since the Free-Trade Agreement came into force, economic barriers to the movement of goods have been eradicated. We are now attempting to reduce the barriers to the movement of human resources.
Within the business world, everyone agrees on one thing: when you bring in a specialized worker from abroad, a scientist or anyone else, one very clear result is the creation of jobs for Canadians who will support that person in his or her work.
Here are our recommendations. We welcome the proposed measures. Indeed, the fact that an attempt is being made to simplify the procedures is to our mind a sign that the Department of Human Resources Development is changing its overall attitude. However, since our industrial basis is highly diversified, we feel that it is important to extend these principles to all high- technology, i.e. the biomedical sector, aerospace or even information technology.
We also hope that the government will consider the possibility of extending this fast track approach to strategic but non- technical positions. Many of our companies now have worldwide mandates, which means that they handle a product or a range of products worldwide. They are therefore seeking candidates that have skills in merchandising and trade, among other things, in order to penetrate the world market. It's important that it be recognized that such positions are strategic positions.
We are also suggesting that the Department of Human Resources Development and Immigration Canada establish structured information and training programs on administrative procedures for recruiting officers within corporations. It's surprising to know that although we're always given very nice documents, very little is done in terms of training our people in order to ensure that procedures go smoothly.
It's also important that the Department of Human Resource Development coordinate certain policies within the various regions, which I'm suggesting because the proposal that the department is now putting on the table is already in place in Quebec. Right now, certain Quebec companies use this procedure called fast track with the Department of Human Resources Development and Immigration Quebec. They have signed agreements and explained to the authorities that there was a lack of qualified staff in their area. Among the companies that benefit from this in Montreal are Ericsson, Bombardier and many others.
The problem that we've experienced is that large corporations know how to use the system and are well looked after, but small and medium-sized companies face constraints because they may only recruit one or two people a year.
.1635
We also hope that in addition to this pilot project, Human Resources Development Canada will examine another pilot project aimed at designating certain companies within a given region, for example, Montreal, as strategic companies with an international mandate. These designated strategic companies would be prequalified and would submit a project describing their human resource needs; they could bring in candidates from abroad quickly while awaiting government approval. Naturally, the company would guarantee that if candidates do not meet government criteria, they and their families would have to leave the country.
This is another approach that we want to examine. It must be pointed out that today, companies are responsible when it comes to international recruitment. This is not a matter of recruiting what is called cheap labour. Therefore, let us target sectors and companies that can prequalify.
The last point we would like to raise involves the issue of spouses. I think that in your area, most households have two incomes. In the Western world, this is becoming increasingly common: both husband and wife work. Unfortunately, our immigration and labour force policies have not evolved in accordance with these trends, and temporary work permits are limited to one per family.
Canada currently requires reciprocity to grant work permits to spouses. In our opinion, if Canada took the lead and permitted the spouses of strategic employees who come into Canada to work, perhaps this could be considered a comparative advantage.
Let us take the issue of international investment. Foreigners who are considering investing in North America, especially in a technological field, say: If I build my research centre in the United States, I will have a labour pool of 300 million people from which I can draw the best candidates; if I settle in Canada, I will have a labour pool of 30 million people. Such an investor will naturally assume that the chances of finding the persons required in a pool of 300 million people are much larger than in a pool of 30 million people in Canada.
Canada is already smaller than the United States; its market is smaller. If Canada has an open and favourable labour force policy, we will be able to tell companies: If you build your activity or research centre in Montreal, Toronto or elsewhere, your labour pool will not be 30 million or300 million people, but rather 600 million if you combine Canada with Europe, India and other regions.
I think that this is how we should be looking at the future development of Canada. Thank you.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you very much. We'll now go on to questions by members. Mr. Nunez, you have approximately ten minutes.
Mr. Osvaldo Nunez (Bourassa, B.Q.): I will share my time with my colleague, Mr. Pierre de Savoye.
First of all, I would like to thank you very much for your three presentations, which were very interesting. I see that this is an area in which you are highly competent. I congratulate you for the work that you do, especially in the area of training.
My first question is for Mr. Nydam. Could you tell us more about the steps you must go through with Immigration Quebec? We know that work permits are always granted by the federal government. What steps are needed involving the Quebec government?
Mr. Nydam: Four years ago, the Quebec procedure became very cumbersome because we had to wait for both Quebec approval and the federal government approval to obtain temporary work permits.
There was a federal problem regarding validations and a Quebec problem. We therefore got our companies together with Human Resources Development Canada, Immigration Canada and Immigration Quebec.
.1640
We received support from our members of Parliament. For us, the leader was Mr. Lincoln, who facilitated the debate. At the provincial level, at the time, the Liberals were in power. They agreed that there would be harmonization between the federal and provincial levels. The first element of this harmonization was provincial withdrawal from the validation process. Now, Quebec approval is almost automatic. Validation is done by the federal government.
The other problem was that Human Resources Development Canada agents had a lot of difficulties validating technical jobs. When you need someone who has a specific qualification, it is difficult to put that on paper. Therefore, we began to introduce a principle of communication between federal agents and companies. The companies invited the federal agents into their plants so that they could understand their needs. The companies started to develop what we call human resource development plans in which they stated: we are going in this direction and we need this or that type of labour; we will try to find it in Canada, but if we can't, we will have to go elsewhere.
This type of communication worked very well. In a large number of cases, the companies were able to convince the agents of Human Resources Development Canada that they had to bring in foreign workers without necessarily going through the whole validation procedure.
Mr. Osvaldo Nunez: From which countries do you recruit? I think it is difficult to recruit in the United States. Salaries are higher, and so forth.
Mr. Nydam: It's easier to recruit in the United States, because with NAFTA we have agreements on the movement of experts. These movements are very easy.
Mr. Osvaldo Nunez: But salaries are higher in the United States than they are here.
Mr. Nydam: That's right. Therefore, our companies recruit mainly in Europe. There is a process in place that allows our companies to recruit in Europe. There are major corporations here that have gone to London to explain the nature of their needs to Immigration Canada so that the agent on site can understand them fully. That accelerates the procedure.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. de Savoye.
Mr. Pierre de Savoye (Portneuf, B.Q.): I think that this is a particularly interesting and worthwhile subject. I must tell you that before I entered political life, I was an international computer consultant. Therefore, I'm very familiar with CIPS and the Fédération de l'informatique du Québec, as well with all the problems you've described.
I will make a few comments and I would like you to give us the benefit of your perspective.
When we talk about qualified personnel and high technology, I get the impression that we are faced with the phenomenon of the chicken and the egg. If we don't have any high-tech companies here, we obviously cannot develop the staff or even train any for companies that don't exist. But from the point where someone wants to bring them into existence, we have to be in a position to bring in appropriate personnel. If the personnel comes here, in principle, this should generate training for our own employees because of transfer of knowledge.
At the same time, you referred to headhunting. Headhunting is not done just nationally. It is also international. There are a number of Canadian brains who, unable to find career opportunities in Canada, go to the United States, or other countries.
Therefore, you are suggesting that we adopt a policy that will allow us to provide those career opportunities in the high-tech industry and you are saying that the fact that we bring in brains from abroad may even help us keep our own brains here. But if we don't set perimeters to all this, there is a risk that some organizations will abuse the situation.
.1645
Here's my question. Should we link access by a company to the fast track system to some guarantee of investment in the training of other employees in the company? How would you react to that? I see that Ms George is saying no.
[English]
Ms George: Your comments are very valid. Look at some samples of some immigrants who have come to Canada and created jobs. Take, for example, Dr. Michael Cowpland from Corel, Dr. Terry Matthews from Newbridge, Dr. John Millard, who's now running Mitel. You have about 6,000 Canadian jobs that have been created. So definitely immigrants bringing in brains from outside of Canada in the high-tech sector can create enormous job opportunities.
There's a real challenge when you try to link two things together and somehow try to legislate. How are you going to measure this training? For example, I was at something this morning where Cowpland was speaking about how they train in Corel. They create on their servers video-based training for their next-generation products. People download this either in a module or on an as-needed basis. That's not something they actively go out and measure: Sam spent 3.2 hours on this training course while he was sitting at his desk.
The challenge is that the training measurement mechanisms don't work well for our industry because we tend to do it in other ways. So if you try to link those together, what you're doing is creating a potential barrier, a potential pitfall, for you later on.
We have to figure out what we have to do together as a community to radically increase the pipeline. Companies that don't do adequate training lose a lot of their employees. And it's an extremely poor retention policy not to invest in training. Our industry tends to invest a lot in training but often not in the traditional manner. The courses simply don't exist for one thing. Where are you going to find a course on next generation ATM? It doesn't exist.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Would anybody else care to reply quickly to this?
Mr. Boynton: I also support what Shirley said. I don't think you should tie it in necessarily to this promise to create jobs.
[Translation]
However, I find the example that we have in Canada is similar to that we used to have in the area of tourism. We don't often hear of the advantages of being a Canadian. That way, perhaps we could keep people in the high-tech industry.
I wear many hats. My role at the ITAC is as a volunteer. In real life, I'm the head of a small business. I think we have to look at the needs not only of large corporations, but also those of small and medium-size businesses.
As a small business, I have needs that I cannot fill easily here. Because of the differences in the markets in Europe, I can get people there much more easily.
Having to demonstrate that I have created other levels of employment would be an unacceptable burden to me. The fact that I have hired someone here in Canada - and I know I'm not harming other members of the information technology community - demonstrates that I'm creating employment; I presume that these people will spend money in Canada. Those are my comments.
Mr. Nydam: Your comment about headhunting is valid in one sense. Your analogy with the chicken and the egg is highly valid.
The development of high-technology companies in Canada is a relatively recent phenomenon. The result is that we may have many skilled workers at the entry level, but we are lacking in industry leaders, and senior managers. When we recruit internationally, we are looking for that type of individual who has very refined knowledge.
.1650
Remember that three years ago, there were two biotechnology companies in Montreal. Today, we have 45 and we're expecting to have 200 within two years. As you can see, the growth rate is very high.
The problem that we will have here within two years, and we are already aware of it today, is that with this rapid growth rate, our universities will not be able to provide a sufficient number of graduates. We have a propitious climate, but...
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Your time is up. We'll come back to you.
Mr. Pierre de Savoye: If I had been able to clarify my question perhaps I could have gotten an answer. I will come back to it.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Clarify quickly and I will ask Ms George to answer it quickly. I'm giving you one minute.
Mr. Pierre de Savoye: I've seen companies bringing personnel from abroad. That staff did the work and then left again without any transfer of expertise occurring. That creates two problems.
Fist of all, the company no longer has the means to progress. Earlier, we were talking about small and medium-size businesses, and that's where I'm affected. Next, we paid to obtain something with extremely limited spinoffs whereas we could have had much more significant spinoffs. That's the point of my question, Mr. Chairman. Shouldn't we require that the small and medium-size businesses insure that there are such spinoffs?
[English]
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Ms George, perhaps you could respond briefly. Then I'll go to Ms Meredith.
Ms George: I just wanted to add one comment to the last piece. One of the things you have to remember is that when you put these kinds of extra hooks into the Canadian system, we are competing for these jobs with other jurisdictions. So if I can go down and put my research team in Washington, D.C., where they don't have those kinds of extra hooks, or I put it in Canada, those are some of the factors that will be weighed upon as far as technology transfer is concerned. If you bring somebody in from offshore to do some work for you and you don't build technology transfer into that, that was just frankly a poor business proposition and you can't legislate against it.
A voice: But it happens.
Ms George: Yes, it does happen.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Ms Meredith, please.
Ms Val Meredith (Surrey - White Rock - South Langley, Ref.): Thank you,Mr. Chairman.
I have listened with interest and I've heard some catchphrases being used. I get the impression, and maybe wrongly so, that the high-tech industry is looking to government to solve its problems. I don't see a whole lot of commitment in training, in your resources going to encourage Canadians or to help Canadians meet your requirements.
I hear the term ``temporary employment authorization''. I don't know if you're aware, but temporary employment applicants get priority for permanent landed status. So we're not talking about somebody who's just coming to Canada to work for three years, we're talking about somebody who's entering our workforce and literally taking opportunities away from other individuals. When you talk about spouses being able to work, you're also talking about the same thing: you're talking about individuals who are coming from out of country, who will be taking employment potentially from Canadians.
You referred to the fact that down the road, if we want to be a first world country, we need to fulfil these requirements in the high-tech industry. I ask myself why we as a first world country have to go outside of our country to find people to fulfil these jobs. What are we neglecting to do as a country that we are unable to fulfil these jobs from within our country?
I would suggest to you that as far as your employment requirements are concerned, we're not a first world country. I look at the stats and the figures provided to us of the numbers of people coming in from out of country. We're talking last year of 1,549 people out of country. We're talking about 800-some people from the United States; we're talking about almost 300 people from India and 158 people from England. Why are we having to reach outside of Canada for these individuals? Are you as companies who need and require these resources doing something to rectify this problem yourselves?
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Who wishes to go first?
Mr. Boynton: As the representative of IT professionals, I am very sensitive to what you're saying. It was one of the questions we were asking ourselves, as I said in my opening remarks, despite this high unemployment. I'm trying to grapple with that contradiction where you say you have a10% unemployment figure and yet we apparently have all these jobs that have to be filled.
.1655
I take statistics as you people do. I'm reading from many different sources that we do have a need, probably more acute in certain parts of the country than in others, but we do have jobs. At a meeting I was at a few months ago I was told we cannot fill something like 20,000 jobs in IT. Yet we have this high unemployment. There are always going to be some people with IT qualifications who cannot find a job because they're just not sociable. They don't have the other skills that go with those technical skills. They can't communicate. They just don't fit in with the team.
If you exclude those people, you could ask yourself how many more IT people do we have, or how many other people in other sections of the economy, let's say, with Bachelor of Arts degrees do we have. I have a Bachelor of Arts degree in math with a major in economics and I'm in IT. There are a lot of people in that category whom we could retrain. We haven't done it.
A voice: Why not?
Mr. Boynton: I can't answer that particular question. It seems from the research that I've done that the schools are basically pumping out a good calibre of people but not enough of those people.
I would encourage this committee, as I said earlier, to look for a total solution where you are trying to reduce that unemployment level, where you are trying to look at some of those people who cannot find work in psychology, whatever it is, and get them retrained.
Ms Val Meredith: I've lived in an area where there were no trained people for a major oil industry that went in. The companies took some responsibility in training some of the people in the area, not all of the people. They brought in people from outside as well, but they took on a responsibility as an employer.
I'm asking you what you have done as an industry to apprentice people, to encourage people who have an aptitude to expand their knowledge. Are you depending on governments and government-funded universities to provide your workers, or are you as companies assuming some of that responsibility yourself?
Mr. Boynton: As far as talking for the industry is concerned, perhaps you want to address that.
Ms George: There's absolutely no doubt that our key workers are very highly trained and our workers need at least one university degree.
If you're suggesting that industry should go out and set up private universities, which is something that is being discussed...either we have to take jobs elsewhere, we have to get the universities to dramatically increase the pipeline, or we have to do it ourselves.
The reality is that even if we started that today, by the time we get the types of people we're looking at here for immigrants, we're looking at seven to ten years down the road. We're not going to set our businesses to one side and say, fine, we'll go out and train people for the next seven to ten years and then we'll have the right skill set.
Ms Val Meredith: Are you telling me that all these unemployed university students do not have the intelligence to be trained in the field that you're looking for employees?
Ms George: Even if they wanted to go back and get a computing science degree, would the universities be capable of taking these extra people?
Ms Val Meredith: Are you as an industry looking at a partnership with universities to increase and expand those facilities to train these people?
Ms George: I can't think of one technology company that isn't working with a university. That's a fact of life.
Ms Val Meredith: In what way? That's what I'm trying to get from you. Perhaps I'm not making it clear. I want to know what you as an industry are doing in order to see that Canadian young people and unemployed Canadians have access to your jobs.
Mr. Nydam: The situation that I think we have been faced with...we've been overwhelmed by our own success. We did not expect ten years ago that computers would develop as quickly as they did.
Ten years ago no schools had access to computers at the primary or secondary level. We are getting there now. There is a lag. This is basically the problem we have. We've been so successful that success breeds further demands and we are not able to meet them.
Ms Meredith, I want to make one point. I don't think we're asking that we be authorized to bring in entry-level, new, untrained personnel. No. We are asking to bring in under easier conditions what I would call key, strategic, qualified technical people. We're asking that because basically technology in Canada is a relatively new thing on a grand scale, and so we haven't produced our own successes, our own leaders.
.1700
So we're in this phase right now whereby we have what is called a goulot, a bottleneck. We need more, and our companies are reacting in a negative manner.
I can look just at the West Island. I can talk to you about the company called Eicon. Eicon's technology is in computer communications systems. They had difficulty bringing in candidates here. They tried bringing a whole research team from Ireland, but they didn't get approval quickly enough. They took 12 people from the Montreal research division and moved them all to Ireland. Now the Irish research division for Eicon has about 60 employees because we could not rapidly bring in about six key people.
Mitec is in microwaves. The company tried to bring into Canada some key American telecommunications engineers. They basically could not do this because of our fiscal situation. The result was that Mitec made a decision to move its research activities on the engineering side down to the States. They now have 30 jobs down there.
You've got Matrox, which is faced with the problem of getting in programmers here. They have decided to open up a complete research centre in Florida.
Let's face it. When you speak to Lorne Trottier from Matrox, he's not moving to Florida just because of the shortage. One of the reasons is the fact that his partner likes playing golf. It's also the fact that he says the number of people who are willing to move to Florida is bigger than the number of people willing to move to Canada. He says he basically can't help it because weather is weather, and we're stuck with it. But by doing his stuff in Florida, he can tap into that other pool.
So we're not asking for people to be brought in right across the board. You mentioned the figure of about 1,500 people.
Ms Val Meredith: It's 1,549, I think.
Mr. Nydam: I'm very surprised that it's so small. It is really a very, very small number that we're looking at, but the effect they have on our economic development is enormous.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you.
Ms Minna.
Ms Maria Minna (Beaches - Woodbine, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Some of the questions I was going to ask on training have been asked by my colleagues, but I just want to go back a little bit. I understand the need to bring in employees as the economy evolves and as a new industry starts growing quickly. Many of us have come from other countries at different times post-war and what have you. Jobs were created. The economy boomed because these jobs lever other jobs.
I understand that. So I don't have a problem with assisting an industry that's growing by leaps and bounds, because if it grows by leaps and bounds, so do our jobs in the end, and we can lever more and more work.
I guess my question, though, is more about the training aspect, and also preparedness. It's looking at what you would suggest and what, if anything, the industry is doing in a number of ways in liaising with colleges and universities in terms of the kind of trainees that are going through now and the kind of people who are coming out in order to get into the kinds of areas we're talking about.
What, if any, programs can be developed in conjunction with industry and maybe even government or universities and colleges to retrain those who may be retrainable in the short term without taking five to ten years, as Mr. Boynton suggested? Some individuals may have specific aptitudes. So how can we speed up the kind or group of people who are not getting work but could be plugging in within a year or two into this industry given a specifically concentrated approach to their specific training needs?
Then, of course, the third thing is the long term for labour and management in working together with universities and in governments, if you like, in maintaining the labour force and to train on an ongoing basis.
.1705
I understand, Ms George, when you say it can't be measured. However, I've done quite a lot of studies, even before my election, in the area of training, and it's been a constant aberration in this country, where regardless of the industry, training is the worst record we have in this country in terms of industry seeking responsibility. I know it's hard to measure, but we have to grapple with that at some point.
Obviously I want to create jobs, and I want to help an industry that's moving quickly. It would be stupid not to, with the high unemployment, and to miss out on this window you're talking about. On the other hand, we want to make sure the window stays open for the long term and that we do train people, and that five years from now companies haven't thrown out someone who is obsolete, a bit like we've done in the past, and treated people like computers.
I know there are a lot of questions, but those are all very tied in, if you're looking at a comprehensive approach. I guess this is to all of you.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Who wants to go first?
Ms George: You bring up some critical points. When you use traditional methods of measuring, absolutely, Canada does not train as much as our international competitors.
One of the comments I made earlier is that we're all in this up to our necks. It's not just government, it's not just education, it's not just anybody; it's everybody, including industry, who has to weigh into this problem and start to take some ownership for what they can do, and bring some solutions to the table.
There are some really interesting pilots happening. You have to look at some of the numbers. In the Ottawa-Carleton region, for example, there are about 11,300 graduates each year from the two universities and from the college. Of that number, the people who have a technical background - and I'll include in that some people like civil engineers who aren't necessarily immediately employable - the whole technical group is maybe 1,200 to 1,500 people. The number of potential programmers ready to go is maybe 700 people. So we have a tremendous number of people going through the system that we can't absorb. We can't take an English major immediately into our company. What are we going to do to retool them?
There are some interesting private companies that have set up to take people with an arts degree and put them through a nine-month course and make them into junior level people - LAN managers and that kind of thing.
There's a really good program, unfortunately just in the very initial pilot stage, that Mitel and NRC are involved in, where you take some people who have engineering degrees, have a lot of skills and a lot of the right kind of background but have just not quite tweaked right. You put those people through a six- to twelve-month course. You can take a civil engineer and maybe make them into something that is immediately applicable to the industry. That pilot is under way.
It is interesting; they advertised for three days. They had ten positions for the pilot and over 1,000 inquiries and over 400 applications. So there's a great potential there.
I was just speaking with one of the VPs of Algonquin College this morning, and they've got a few really interesting pilots going. One is... Unfortunately the pool of potential people is quite small when you get into these fast-track systems, but you can take the right kind of people and put them through a sixteen-week course. They know how to do nothing but work on the year 2000 problem, COBOL programmers. There are things like that that can be fast-tracked.
A few years ago when Newbridge was in its initial explosion of employment, they had all these young engineers they were putting into management positions who didn't have a clue about management. They developed their own course that was like a mini, condensed MBA that worked on the timeframes industry feels is relevant. There were so many people looking at what they had to offer, so many people saying ``Please, just let my guy sit in the back corner and listen'' that they actually made a business out of that, and it's been spun out of Newbridge as a separate business.
So there are lots of really good initiatives under way. The universities - look what's happening in Ottawa with both Carleton and Ottawa U. They're very interested in retooling their organizations so that they can supply us with more graduates. There are a whole bunch of funding issues and all this kind of thing.
There is work happening, but they're not short-term solutions. The human resource skills problem is a big issue. It's a long-term problem that is going to take a while to solve. We're working on it, and I think there's hope in the future.
Ms Minna: I think Mr. Nydam was trying to -
.1710
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Would anyone else care to respond briefly?
Mr. Boynton: I'd just like to remind you that the University of Waterloo, one of Canada's best-known universities, is also referred to as Microsoft U.
So we are producing some good people in our education system. It's just that the other countries are doing to us what we're trying to do right now to the Europeans.
So you're right. What CIPS supports is an immediate problem right now. I can attest to it as an employer, as a member of CIPS; there is a shortage problem. I don't know how big the shortage is or where it is in the country, but I'm sure that some centres like Toronto and Vancouver must have it. We can't fill those jobs right now, but maybe if we embark on some other programs - for example, we were talking about training - getting some of those other people into areas that are encountering worse conditions, we can get them up to speed.
As you said, some programs maintain that they can do it within 30 days, but more realistically...maybe within nine months.
So that's just another piece of the overall puzzle. We have to stop being in this mess five years from now.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Ms Brushett.
Mrs. Dianne Brushett (Cumberland - Colchester, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm sure Ms George is familiar, since she mentioned short programs of nine months... Have you heard of the company, ITI, in Halifax?
Ms George: Yes.
Mrs. Dianne Brushett: That's a company that's internationally incorporated. It's in information technology, training, and computer software programming. It is funded with a lot of money from the taxpayers of Canada. They are training computer graduates, programmers, and whatever. They have their BAs or their BScs beforehand. Seventy percent of those graduates are recruited by the United States.
So where are you guys? Why aren't you hiring them here in Canada? We're funding it from the taxpayers' point of view and they're leaving the country. So why aren't you saying, Newbridge, why aren't you down in Halifax recruiting?
Ms George: ITI has a course here in Ottawa as well. They have them in several places.
Mrs. Dianne Brushett: Exactly, but these kids have to go to the United States. They can't get jobs. So where's the problem here?
Ms George: My understanding isn't that they can't necessarily get jobs in Canada, but that job offers from the United States are more attractive.
Mrs. Dianne Brushett: No, they're up there recruiting.
Ms George: Oh, they are up there. Believe me, they are here recruiting -
Mrs. Dianne Brushett: In Halifax they're taking our doctors, our professionals, as fast as they can, because these kids want to work in Canada. I've brought résumés here to Ottawa, because I'm mad as hell about what you're trying to do. This is why, because taxpayers are funding these schools, and the kids are going abroad.
Ms George: My understanding is that ITI is a private organization. It costs $10,000 to take one of their courses.
Mrs. Dianne Brushett: HRD funds a lot of the seats.
Ms George: Maybe down there.
Mrs. Dianne Brushett: Money was set up originally to incorporate the company in Canada. Taxpayers have a lot of money at stake.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Would you let the witness answer.
Ms George: First of all, the people you're talking about, the people who are through the one-year course, are not the same people we're talking about bringing through as immigrants. There are different levels of people. So let's understand that.
As far as the ITI graduates are concerned, my understanding in talking with ITI - and I only spoke to them about Ottawa; I don't know about Halifax - is that there are opportunities for their people. They advertise that they place all of them. Not all their competitors who are doing similar things are as capable. They advertise that they get offers from both American and Canadian organizations.
Without a doubt the U.S. companies are paying higher dollars, and depending on what jurisdiction they go to, our tax differential can be anywhere from a little difference to a huge difference.
Mrs. Dianne Brushett: I can appreciate these points, but I've been in business all my life, too. I know that when you want to bring in an immigrant to do a specific job, you quite often create a sophisticated position, as you've described earlier, a biochemist who has a computer programming network, and then sophisticated biology expertise. Well, there's no program in the world that trains that person, but somebody has their finger on somebody in a foreign country they'd like to bring into this country. This is how it works. I've been in businesses where we've done it.
I guess I'm suggesting that with the high unemployment rate in Canada and with taxpayers funding so many of these programs, we should really be recruiting our own youth, rather than exporting them outward.
Ms George: Trust me, if we could find these people in Canada, we would love to fill it with Canadians.
Mrs. Dianne Brushett: Well, I hope that's printed in the news for the Halifax papers tomorrow morning.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): I go back to Mr. Nunez for five minutes, and then we'll wrap up about 5:30 p.m. We did start a half-hour later than we thought we would.
.1715
[Translation]
Mr. Osvaldo Nunez: I'd like to get back to the issue of occupational training. To my mind, this is a very serious problem in Canada. I see that in Europe, generally speaking, business and government have deployed far more efforts. Why not do the same here? As companies, you are starting a campaign to push the government to earmark more money for training workers here. For example, Quebec recently adopted legislation and we saw generalized opposition by corporations. I had a hard time understanding that, because this legislation will favour training within businesses.
After a great deal of difficulty, the bill was finally passed, but so many concessions have to be made to companies, that it will take some time before the legislation can be fully enforced.
I don't know who could answer this question.
Mr. Boynton: I was the person who mentioned a few minutes ago Quebec's initiative in changing the legislation. I agree with you that companies - and I think my colleagues would agree as well - must do more as regards training.
We talk about various levels of training. There is basic training, which would be roughly the first 16 years of school. There is also continuing training once a person has a job. There is also training for people who are not working in the computer field today, but who would like to.
Yes, there is a great deal of training to be done, and I think the government has a role to play in this area. One of the things that it should do is to establish some guidelines.
Mr. Nydam: There are two aspects to training. First, are our students willing to take courses in areas that are relevant today?
We have a challenge on the West Island. Programs in science and mathematics are recognized as being the most difficult, and there are very few students who enroll for them, who accept the challenge.
Consequently, we have a joint program involving companies and school boards which is designed to interest young people in the sciences. We even have a program to attract girls to computer science. We have found that, generally speaking, girls become interested in computer science much later than boys. In some cases, it is difficult to overcome this gap. Here too, companies are looking at various types of initiatives.
I would remind you that we are speaking here about training. When we talk about the international recruitment policy, we are not talking about entry-level candidates. We are talking about people for strategic positions, people with the knowledge to help the company play a role internationally. There is not a huge number of candidates. You say yourself that there are1 500 throughout Canada. All we are asking is that the process be made more flexible through the creation of pilot projects.
[English]
Ms Val Meredith: I appreciate what you're saying. You're not finding the quality of individuals here, because we just haven't been in the industry long enough to develop that expertise.
But I'm also hearing that if this is the number we're talking about - the 1,500 to2,000 people - and it's working with the process you seek for Canadians... You can't find them. You can argue that you can't find them. You can give very good reasons why you can't find them, and you go where you can find them. I don't think anybody has a problem with that.
The problem we're having is asking for changes where you don't even have to see if there's a Canadian who is capable of filling that job. You're opening up the parameters not only for this industry, but for others, where you can hire from out of the country before you even find out whether there's a Canadian available.
.1720
So you're changing the policy, and maybe what we should be looking at is why it is taking so long. If there's no question that this individual cannot be found in Canada, why is it taking so long that people go elsewhere? Maybe we should be looking at that process within the department, within the processing, rather than changing regulations that may have ramifications down the road in other areas, for which we do not want to set ourselves up.
I don't think we're disagreeing with your concern; it's just that perhaps the vehicle we're looking at may be the wrong vehicle. Maybe we have to be looking at regulations and processing within the guidelines and speeding those up.
Mr. Nydam: Ms Meredith, I think you've put your finger on it. What is being proposed are modifications to the procedures, the regulations, to make this more efficient.
However, there's one thing I'd like to express: you seem to have some kind of mistrust of business in making the decisions. I mentioned to you that it is more expensive to bring in somebody from the outside than hiring a Canadian.
Our Canadian technology companies may be competitors, but they do network remarkably well with each other, and they do know remarkably well what is available on the Canadian market in terms of human resources. So when a company makes a decision to go to outside expertise, they do so because they've thought it through.
I don't believe there are many companies that basically say, hey, if I can get somebody cheap, I'll do it right now, because that type of arrangement is not what really works in the long term. Companies now are into long-term strategic business decisions. So it's a reflected decision, and that's where we have to compete with others in getting those resources here.
We have to compete with them - and this is why we have the brain drain - because we have a certain level of salary. In the biotech field a person who has a doctorate in, for example, toxicology in Canada can get a salary, out of university, of between $70,000 and $80,000 per year. That same person in the States can get $100,000 U.S. per year.
There is this big differential between Canadian salary levels and U.S. salary levels. It's logical for our students and others to take those. It's also logical for our senior people who have experience to say, hey, I'm offered that much in the States; I'll take it.
The problem we have then is twofold. First, we can compete directly at the same level in terms of salaries, but then the whole incidence on us in terms of inflation and the consequences will play out.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): I'll go to Mr. McTeague for a quick question, then Mr. Pillitteri, and then we'll wrap up.
Mr. Dan McTeague (Ontario, Lib.): Mr. Nydam, you suggested that in the biotechnical field the competitiveness, certainly for salaried workers, is far greater... The attraction is the United States. In your experience, given that you're on the West Island of Montreal and you represent a number of these organizations, how many of them are foreign-owned, and how many of them are Canadian-owned? You can give me a ballpark figure, if you like.
Mr. Nydam: I would say about 50-50.
Mr. Dan McTeague: Are the biotechnical companies, particularly the pharmaceutical ones, 50-50?
Mr. Nydam: No, because, to be honest with you, the pharmaceutical field is a much more traditional field. Whereas we would say we have about 25 biotechnical firms, we would only have about 10 pharmaceutical firms, because it's a different field. Biotech is a newer field.
Mr. Dan McTeague: Yes, the pharmaceutical field is only a part of the biotechnical, which I understand.
If the biotechnical field has quite a... I could probably go back to any one of the other councils or associations here. There is probably a greater preponderance of Canadian-owned ownership in your fields. Is that correct?
Ms George: In IT&T, for example?
Mr. Dan McTeague: Yes. I raise this in the context of what you mentioned a little earlier about world mandates. I understand that in the pharmaceutical field there is only one in Canada. There are not many of these that seem to need to attract the kind of quality and calibre of person you're looking for who has some experience.
What I'm driving at is the recognition that... Among the many things the country has given as a quid pro quo, if you will, in the past has been, for instance, through the pharmaceutical patents issue that another committee is looking into right now. There was a guarantee by the pharmaceuticals, and certainly by the biotechnical industries, to provide a greater degree of training for people here within Canada.
.1725
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. McTeague, with all due respect, we're not here to deal with that. We're here to deal with... Will you get to the point? Otherwise we won't answer the question.
Mr. Dan McTeague: You've given others five minutes, Mr. Bélanger.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): No, let's keep to the topic.
Mr. Dan McTeague: Why, it is the topic, Mr. Chairman.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Let's hear it.
Mr. Dan McTeague: I think if we're dealing with the biotechnical field, it's very clear to me that pharmaceuticals are only one part of that.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): This is not a rehearing of Bill C-91.
Mr. Dan McTeague: I didn't mention Bill C-91. I mentioned the drug patents issue, sir.
I would like to find out from you, sir, if it's possible for you to estimate the number of jobs in the West Island of Montreal that have required foreign companies to draw in people from other countries. That is, of the multinationals who are operating in your region, how many have brought in people from overseas, say, over the past four or five years?
Mr. Nydam: If we look at it in terms of the new firms that have set up in the biotech field, the big Montreal success story is Phoenix, which is a Canadian-based company. Every year Phoenix brings in about four or five key scientists in new developing fields.
Another one that has been set up is Astra Pharmaceutical from Sweden. Astra set up a facility in Montreal with a world mandate on asthma. Out of a total staff of about 100 people currently Astra has so far brought in 10 to 15 people, of which about half were with the corporate division in Sweden that developed that kind of product and is working on it.
We have other firms that have set up recently, like Hyberdon. They have 40 employees, of which only two are foreign employees.
Methylgene is basically all Canadian. You have companies such as Merck Frosst. Merck Frosst does almost no recruiting internationally. They have been in place long enough. As you mentioned, they have these cooperative arrangements with different universities across Canada, where Merck Frosst effectively sponsors a certain number of students as they see them coming up.
They have brought in a few people in some very specific fields of marketing, because they have world mandates for fields and so they want to bring the marketing people here.
Mr. Dan McTeague: Just to clarify so that I understand, when you say world mandates, you say this is a product that is manufactured in Canada for distribution around the world.
Mr. Nydam: No, it is researched here and will be manufactured here for distribution around the world.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Pillitteri.
Mr. Gary Pillitteri (Niagara Falls, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have listened around the table, and just as I was listening, jokingly I thought to myself, wait a minute, I'm in an industry where I employ offshore and yet I have a problem with skilled workers too.
I recall that if an industry is looking for short-term employees in order to fill a gap, usually you don't get the best the other people have to offer. Usually when you're recruiting you're getting someone who cannot get a job in their own country, not someone just as good.
Let me put it to you in a different way. I want you to know where I'm coming from. If industry itself took the initiative in partnership - I mean partnership where you put in money, not partnership where you don't put in any money, because talk is cheap. If you need that specific worker or the specific skills, you do have to pay for it sometimes.
Let me tell you what we did as an industry. We could not get the skilled labour. We require very few, and they usually come out of Europe. We had a partnership with the university in funding a program. We fund more than 15% of it, and we're going to get the skills. This is postgraduate work we're talking about. We've thought about it, because for the last ten years that industry has evolved into quite a thing, and we have such a shortage that this is the only way we will have the workforce we need and the skills according to our needs, not the needs of others.
.1730
I've heard around this table that yes, we're working with the universities and so on. But are you willing to put money into it? Are you putting money into it in partnership with the universities, with the colleges, in order to get your skilled workers? That's where you should be looking.
Mr. Nydam: Companies do that. I can give you the example of a small company called QPS. They are in the high-technology field of bragg gratings, which is an optical communications system. There aren't many firms or specialists in the field. They have basically put aside $30,000 a year, which they share with the University of Montreal's École Polytechnique, to train post-graduate engineers who they will see coming out of the pipeline in two or three years.
Tom mentioned the experience MERC has had. Almost all companies in the technology field tend to have those kinds of arrangements with universities to train students in the specific niche they need. You don't hear it, but it's being done.
Again, I appeal to you. We're attacking an issue, an entry-level problem. I don't think companies need to open up the Canadian job market at the entry level problem. What we are looking for is a simplification of procedures for strategic positions in the technological fields. Those are people who have 10 or 15 years of experience that they've acquired elsewhere. They have world marketing experience that we have not gotten here yet. Those are the ones we need to help us attack these new markets. In 10 or 15 years we'll probably have attained our own resources there, but right now, because of the fantastic growth in technology industries in Quebec and in Canada as a whole, we have this shortfall.
Ms George: I'd just like to give you an example. I'm not sure if Nortel is going to be in to see you later in the week, but they just invested somewhere around $1 million, I think, into U of T for some telecommunications. Well, $1 million is a pretty significant investment. There are others that are making investments as well.
For the member from Halifax, I don't know if this is of any consolation at all, but there are some Ottawa companies that have every intention of going to Halifax in the very near future to do some recruiting.
Mrs. Dianne Brushett: The faster the better. Thank you very much.
Ms George: As a mother, I don't know if I'd be any happier if they were going to Ontario than if they were going to Maine, but definitely -
Mrs. Dianne Brushett: Well, the point is we pay our tax dollars to train and so on and export them, and on this hand you want to import them.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Boynton, do you have farewell remarks? We're about to wrap up.
Mr. Boynton: I hope our position is clear. We support a lot of comments that members of Parliament have made that we do have to put a lot of effort into training. I also support my colleagues in industry who are saying we have a need for some experienced, specialized, high-technology people, which my association and I as a businessman see as a short-term need. Right now that's the only commitment I'd be willing to make. I hope we will find a whole package of solutions to address our staffing problems.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): I want to thank Madam George of the Canadian Advanced Technology Association, Mr. Boynton of the Canadian Information Processing Society, and Monsieur Nydam from the West Island Business Development Council. I'm sorry Mr. Broadmore could not join us. If there's an opportunity to reschedule him, we'll try. If not, we'll have to do without the wisdom he would share with us.
I'd like to remind members of the committee that the next meeting is tomorrow at 3:30 p.m. in this room. We will have Industry Canada officials presenting on this matter.
Thank you. The meeting is adjourned.