Finance Committee on April 29th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

I call the 14th meeting of the Standing Committee on Finance to order. We're continuing our study of Bill C-9, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 4, 2010, and other measures.

Colleagues, as you know, we are going through Bill C-9 part by part, and we were still on part 6 at our last meeting. In the interest of time, perhaps we can try to be as brief as possible in our questions. I'm going to recommend that we do rounds of five minutes maximum. If people still have questions beyond that, I'll perhaps put them at the bottom of the list.

We will try to get through this section and as many parts as we can today. We have two hours, until 5:30. Mr. McGirr is back with us again.

Thank you for coming back, Mr. McGirr.

[Tom McGirr, Chief, Equalization and Policy Development, Department of Finance]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Are there any further questions on part 6?

Mr. McGirr.

[Tom McGirr]

One question was left over from the last session. I was asked the number of crown corporations that were involved in hydro generation.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Sorry, is there a problem?

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Are we going to part 7?

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

I called for questions on part 6. I didn't hear anyone ask....

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

That's because we didn't hear you call for questions on part 6. None of us could hear you.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Okay.

Mr. McGirr, you wanted to clarify something on part 6.

[Tom McGirr]

I just want to respond to a question that I wasn't able to respond to at the last session. Someone asked me the number of crown corporations that were involved in the generation of hydroelectricity.

There are eight: Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, New Brunswick Power, Hydro-Québec, Ontario Power Generation, Manitoba Hydro, SaskPower, B.C. Hydro, and Columbia Power.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you for that information.

We have two colleagues with questions.

Monsieur Mulcair.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you for coming back, Mr. McGirr. Thank you for providing the complete list of Crown corporations involved in the generation of hydroelectricity throughout Canada.

We had the pleasure of having a discussion earlier this week. I would like to return to your statement regarding the wish to set up corporate entities, in other words distinct corporations — this not an attempt at a play on words about distinct society. I would like you to clarify your thinking on this. There exists within Hydro-Québec such an impervious separation between its different businesses, whether it be the production of...

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Mr. Menzies.

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, we are not talking about Hydro-Québec or Ontario Hydro. We're here talking about Bill C-9. If the honourable member can point out those two items for me somewhere in this piece of legislation I will tolerate this, but he had an entire meeting to talk about what wasn't even in Bill C-9. I request that we move on.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Okay, on the same point of order, Mr. Mulcair.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

I recognize the customary and bothersome tactic used by my friend and colleague Mr. Menzies. But I will take the liberty of telling him that he comes too late since he just shot a hole under the water line of the ship of his own reasoning. Since the Chair just ruled quite correctly to allow this important discussion on equalization, which is indeed the subject of Chapter 6 which we are considering, we have opened a discussion that is entirely in order.

Whether Mr. Menzies likes it or not, members of Parliament, even those from Quebec, are entitled to ask questions in this committee and I will let no one on the government side dictate what questions I can ask.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Mr. Mulcair, how do your questions relate to Bill C-9? Please explain that to the chair.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Absolutely. As you allowed the day before yesterday, Mr. Chairman, you know as well as I do that Bill C-9 implements a number of provisions, including measures related to equalization. These clauses deal directly, as we have seen earlier, with the social transfer and with equalization payments in general.

And we had a question for the officials responsible for calculating equalization payments about a difference in the way the federal government treats provinces. In the case of Quebec, they say that they are not allowed to take into account the wall that exists between the different functions within Hydro-Québec. They say that Hydro-Québec should be considered as a whole, and he said that several times, because they find it too difficult. Mr. McGirr told us...

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

What--

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Menzies, how can you have the gall to interrupt me while I am answering the Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Order.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Stop interrupting colleagues. Show some courtesy. At least try.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Order.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Chairman, here is what I was trying to say to you. Mr. McGirr gave us clear answers earlier this week. I am focussing on one of his specific explanations where he said that it is too cumbersome for them to examine each Crown corporation that is also engaged in the generation of hydroelectricity. Let us remember that he said that hydroelectric generation is treated just like any other form of energy production and that it could not be taken into account for the purpose of determining the revenue of a province.

But in our view, Hydro-Québec, because of this separation of functions, should be considered a special case, especially since Mr. McGirr told us that it could be done if separate corporate entities were set up. Last time, we were left dangling with the following question: why does he not accept as valid the figures provided by Hydro-Québec? He answered that it was because they are coming from Quebec. I find this explanation somewhat lacking and I want to return today to this matter.

Since we discussed this for several hours earlier this week, I will not tolerate being told today that what was relevant two days ago is no longer relevant today.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

I have Monsieur Carrier on the same point of order.

I gave a lot of leeway last time about questions on this section. As the chair, I understand there is some concern about that issue. I understand what your concern is, Mr. Mulcair, but I don't understand how that concern relates to Bill C-9.

We have clauses 1646, 1647, and 1648. I understand this was with respect to clause 1647. But as far as the different treatment of crown corporations, I don't see how that relates to clause 1647.

Maybe Monsieur Carrier can clarify this, but how does that concern--which may be a very valid concern, and I'm not saying it isn't--relate to clause 1647 or another clause within Bill C-9?