Finance Committee on March 14th, 2022

[Dustin Walper]

Blair made an excellent point earlier about a lot of the illicit flow of funds, the majority of which is in the traditional banking sector. The market cap of cryptocurrency does not really allow for the volume of flow that you'd need to hide. It would be very visible and transparent because of the transparency of the blockchain and because of the fact that it's a public ledger.

We're required to abide by any sanctions that are imposed on individuals or nations, and it's something that is part of our program. There's always room for improvement in communication between us, law enforcement and intelligence agencies, and improving that sort of virtuous circle. Right now, it feels a bit like we're operating in isolation and we get handed information after the fact, so that would be one area.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

I appreciate that.

What I want to do is clarify what I heard in my last series of questions to you about this topic. I'm learning a lot, so I really appreciate the time you're spending with us.

In my last series of questions, I asked how we protect against those negative outcomes and if that can be facilitated by cryptocurrency. What I've heard so far—and I don't mean to put words in your mouth, because this is just what I've understood—is that there's the potential for greater transparency in the use of cryptocurrency, but what I haven't heard about is the enforcement piece. It's one thing to know that money is flowing, but it's another thing to be able to do something about it if it's causing harm. I'm taking Russia's invasion of Ukraine as an example, because it is so consequential and we're putting so much into trying to apply pressure.

Are there mechanisms to prevent those flows? We've recently seen the international community cut off Russian banks from SWIFT. Is there something equivalent to that for cryptocurrency?

[Blair Wiley]

There is not an equivalent to SWIFT for cryptocurrency, but if you have a regulated industry with the gatekeepers, as Stéphane referred to, and the centralized platform to enable the exchange of crypto for fiat currency, you have incredible levers to prevent money from being moved via cryptocurrency and then exchanged for dollars. You need to have international co-operation, consistent regulatory frameworks and strong court systems that can bring about seizures of assets.

I would also remark that one of the things that's getting a lot of attention right now is Russian oligarchs who own soccer teams in the Premier League and $500-million yachts. On those $500 million yachts sitting in the Mediterranean, there are a number of very conventional means by which wealthy Russians have moved money out of Russia that are far more visible and yet continue to happen. There needs to be a continued, concerted effort across a range of asset classes, including crypto, to snuff out the ability of Russians to fund themselves and the current invasion.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, MP Baker.

To the witnesses, on behalf of all of the members, the clerk, the staff and the interpreters from this committee, I do want to thank you for informing our Emergencies Act study. I know we learned a lot from many of you. I can just see the interest you've piqued among many of our members for maybe future studies. I heard a lot of questions from members from perhaps other angles and who were asking for a lot of information.

Thank you for being with us for this marathon session of three hours, for your remarks and your many answers to our questions.

We'll now thank the witnesses and let them go at this time.

[Blair Wiley]

Thank you.

[Dustin Walper]

Thank you.

[National Chief RoseAnne Archibald]

Meegwetch.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Members, you would have received an email from the clerk for this Thursday's session. It looks like the three witnesses we'll have will be available for only 90 minutes.

Is that correct, Clerk, that they will be available for 90 minutes? Yes.

The analysts have informed us that it would be worth noting that we may take 30 minutes or an hour to consider draft recommendations as adopted by the subcommittee. If members are good with that, and I'll look to the members on it, we've asked that you submit to the analysts, in both official languages by 5 p.m. on Wednesday, March 16, for your recommendations to be considered.

I will look to members to see if everyone is okay with that and if there are any questions.

Go ahead, MP Albas.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Could you please repeat that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Sure.

We were informed, and you would have received an email, that the three witnesses we have for this Thursday are able to join us for only 90 minutes. We had allocated three hours of time. The analysts have informed us that it would be worth noting that we could use 30 minutes to an hour of that time to consider draft recommendations as adopted by our subcommittee.

If members are good with that, then after the witnesses we'll continue with those recommendations. The analysts would also require those recommendations to be submitted in both official languages by 5 p.m. on Wednesday, March 16, which would be the day before, to be considered.

Go ahead, Mr. Albas.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Mr. Chair, I always appreciate your canvassing the room and whatnot, but I think it's a little bit early to be asking for recommendations when we haven't heard all of the testimony. I would simply ask that maybe we could make Friday the last day for recommendations, and then those could be brought forward to a subsequent meeting.

We should really be coming up with recommendations only after we've had a chance to hear everyone, or else some people will feel that their testimony didn't matter.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Are you speaking to that last hour and a half of testimony that we will receive from those three witnesses, MP Albas?

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Yes. Well, again, I think if we're going to have a full report with good recommendations, we should be able to look back at the tapes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, MP Albas.

Next is MP Ste-Marie. Then we will go to MP Blaikie.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to make sure that we're talking about the recommendations pertaining to the current study of the Emergencies Act. If so, I agree with Mr. Albas. It would be better to provide our recommendations after we've heard from all the witnesses.

I imagine that it's also possible to provide ahead of time the recommendations that are already prepared, to make the analysts' tremendous work easier.

I agree that we should have until the end of the day on Friday to provide our recommendations.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, MP Ste-Marie.

Go ahead, MP Blaikie.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

First of all, I would largely echo Mr. Ste-Marie's comments, including his support for the Friday deadline for recommendations that was suggested by our colleague Mr. Albas.

You made reference, Mr. Chair, to subcommittee recommendations. I'm just wondering which subcommittee meeting those recommendations came from.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

I believe it would have come out of our subcommittee when we met and put together the schedule for the various studies, the Emergencies Act study, the inflation study, Bill C-8 and the PBC.

Clerk, maybe you can inform me?

[The Clerk]

In the subcommittee report to the main committee, it was mentioned that we would put aside half an hour to an hour for drafting recommendations to the analysts during the meeting on Thursday. That's all that was.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Okay.

Perhaps, Mr. Clerk, you could—

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Maybe the analysts can give us their understanding of how this would help, because the idea of using that 30 minutes to an hour did come from the analysts.

[Brett Capwell, Committee Researcher]

Yes, that's correct. We're just trying to keep to the original schedule that was proposed at that subcommittee meeting. The subcommittee report that was adopted on February 22—in case you want to look it up—stated that the original deadline for recommendations for this study was last Friday, so Friday, March 11. My understanding is that we haven't received any recommendations for that study yet.

Originally, the time this Thursday would have been to consider those recommendations. If we still want to consider recommendations this week, we just need to receive them prior to that meeting. It sounds as if that's not the case.

I also note that originally we had planned in this motion to table this report on March 28.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

That's correct.

[Brett Capwell]

So if we want to push back the consideration of the recommendations, then we would likely also need to push back the tabling of that report.