Finance Committee on March 14th, 2022

[Stéphane Bisson]

Given the circumstances, many people have decided to move on to new occupations. This has caused a labour shortage in businesses particularly affected by the pandemic, including the restaurant and tourism industry.

I was talking with management at the Casino du Lac‑Leamy. They told me that they were having trouble finding employees because people had received training in other fields. We know that the federal government attracts a significant portion of the workforce because it provides well‑paying jobs and good working conditions. There's a double standard in the labour market.

When the claims program is implemented, it must be easy for entrepreneurs to manage. They shouldn't need to fill out endless paperwork.

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

My time is up.

Thank you.

[Stéphane Bisson]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, Mr. Ste‑Marie.

We will now move to the NDP.

MP Blaikie, you have six minutes, please.

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

Thank you to all our witnesses for being here today.

I want to direct my first question to National Chief Archibald. First, thank you for being here to express some of the concerns that indigenous people have regarding the use of the Emergencies Act and what it may mean for them in future scenarios. I think one of the opportunities here at this committee is to provide recommendations to government on what we learned through this particular use of the Emergencies Act and what kinds of things we might look at putting in place, whether that's changes to the act itself or whether that's better guidelines and practices to inform future uses of the act, if there are future uses of the act.

I'm wondering if you might have some recommendations along those lines. In your opening remarks, I think you made a good case for why the position of first nation people here in Canada is different from many other protests, particularly in respect of defending land and water rights. I'm wondering if you might have some recommendations for either us as a committee as we explore these issues or the government that you would like to see this committee make as part of its review.

[National Chief RoseAnne Archibald]

Thank you very much, MP Blaikie.

There needs to be more engagement with first nations. That's the first thing I would suggest, namely that this committee find a way to engage first nations across Canada on the deeper implications of the act its invocation.

We're given five minutes. You saw that I went a little bit over my five minutes. It's not really enough time to talk about how the act can be made better. So that's my first recommendation.

The other aspects of it are for government to clearly understand that first nation rights and the things that we do stand up for are very dissimilar from what was going on with this “freedom convoy”. The Emergencies Act can't be used as a tool to suppress issues with land and water rights particularly, and any of the first nation and indigenous rights or aboriginal and treaty rights recognized under the Constitution, which also include the right to self-government. I think that definitely has to be taken into account when looking at the act and its application in the future.

I think there also needs to be a more fulsome engagement on the invocation of the act. For example, Minister Marc Miller called me the day before. There had been talk for a number of days about the act's being invoked, but the day before, he called me and said that this would be happening. To me, although I really appreciate the relationship I've built with Minister Miller, giving the national chief a heads-up the day before is not acceptable. There need to be processes in place that are definitely more fulsome than that when it comes to first nation land defenders and water defenders, in this case.

I hope that answers your question.

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

Thank you very much.

I guess the other component of this for me is that when we talk about Canada's indigenous peoples and the behaviour of government, we often see and have seen in the last 20 or 30 years or so the government adopt a kind of aggressive posture in respect of indigenous rights and the government's ability to circumvent them, but then we see, usually after a lengthy and expensive court battle, the rights of indigenous peoples affirmed in the court.

I'm wondering if you want to speak a little bit to that dynamic and how that might inform approaches to the Emergencies Act, because often justice delayed is justice denied. Clearly, the stakes are high in respect of using something like the Emergencies Act, which means it's important that we get it right the first time. Could you speak a little bit to that relationship and to some of the things the federal government might be able to do to ensure that when it comes to matters as serious as this, it gets it right the first time?

[National Chief RoseAnne Archibald]

There is a need to complete the Constitution talks from the 1980s. I have called on the Prime Minister to have a table again with first nation leaders from across Canada, because that's the starting place of how we build this relationship in a truly equal and positive manner. Courts tend to be combative. We end up getting to a resolve, but the process of getting there isn't positive.

I think if we had constitutional talks and we defined a process together on first nations' role and place within Canada as a country, given that the creative place is here.... This is our country, so to speak. We are the original people. Our laws and all of our lives and processes—ceremonially, culturally and spiritually—have been in a way blanketed. A blanket has been put upon us in terms of Canadian laws and Canadian processes. We need to figure out the original government-to-government, nation-to-nation relationship. I think constitutional talks are a good place to begin.

I also think we need a process in Canada that begins to define those rights. I believe the government did attempt that with legislation, but it was pushed back. I think if you look to first nations for those solutions, they will give them to you. That's what I think this government has to be a little more open to, that they don't have the answers themselves. They bring something to the table, but first nations themselves have the solutions on how to make this country a workable and better place for everyone—truly just, truly fair and the place that we say we are.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you.

Thank you, MP Blaikie.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Members, we're moving into our second round.

In this round, we have the Conservatives up first and MP Chambers for five minutes.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Welcome to our witnesses. I really appreciate your helping us with this study. It would be a pleasure to speak with you about a number of different topics, and I hope there is an opportunity to have you back to the committee in the future as we talk about innovation.

Today, we're focused on the Emergencies Act, so I have a few factual, procedure-based questions that I hope we can get some clarity on.

To the entities that received information from the RCMP—I believe this applies to Mr. Wiley at Wealthsimple and Mr. Walper at Newton—was there any instruction provided from the RCMP or has there been any subsequent instruction on how you might use the information you received by virtue of the Emergencies Act?

[Dustin Walper]

Blair, do you want to answer that?

[Blair Wiley]

Sure.

We received several notices from the RCMP. Those notices came to us via industry associations, regulators and law firms. The notices were helpful in that the original emergency order was extraordinarily broad. It was a concept of designated persons, which was very difficult to interpret. Within the crypto industry and the broader financial industry, we were all trying to understand how to make sense of how to interpret “designated persons”.

It was helpful that the RCMP gave lists of names of the particular people of concern with respect to the convoy. It was certainly helpful for us to be able to respond appropriately to things, like making sure that the transactions were not flowing to fundraising efforts.

[Dustin Walper]

If I may add to that, the way we received the information was a little bit unusual in that it came from the RCMP through via our regulatory council, and we had to verify that it was coming from an appropriate channel.

I will say that, in general—this doesn't just impact issues related to this kind of order or anti-money laundering concerns, but in general, even for things like fraud concerns—we don't have a great line into the RCMP, and we'd love to be able to build on that. It's something that doesn't seem to exist right now.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Thank you very much.

Our understanding is that you are now in possession of names and information that have come from the RCMP. The next logical question is, have you been told how to dispose of that? Are you using that information now to screen against new clients who are signing up with your service?

How are you using that information on an ongoing basis? Are you using it?

[Blair Wiley]

I'll go first here. There are two phases to this inquiry, Adam.

The first phase was during the blockade when the Emergencies Act and the emergency order were in effect. During that time period, we were screening our client lists against the names provided by the RCMP to identify any connections to our client base. Once we received confirmation from the RCMP of the revocation of the Emergencies Act and order, we ceased any sort of additional screening of clients, new clients, for example, who might be attached to that list.

[Dustin Walper]

It was similar for us, sir. We basically put into place a block once we received the initial information. Once we had confirmation that it was lifted, we removed that and we no longer use it to screen any new clients coming into our platform.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

That's helpful. However, for clarity, what I'm hearing is that you've chosen not to do that, but there have been no stipulations from the government or the RCMP on how you can go and use that information going forward, so that's....

[Blair Wiley]

I think that's right. We have obligations under anti-money laundering laws to follow a risk-based approach to screening clients and transactions on our platforms, so every regulated intermediary will make appropriate decisions on how to interpret and apply that risk-based approach. Mr. Walper and I were speaking on behalf of our organizations and not about the way that others may have conducted themselves.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

I have one quick question left to either organization. Did you have any meetings with Department of Finance officials prior to the invocation of the Emergencies Act?

[Blair Wiley]

We did not. We were sort of on the receiving end via notices received through indirect channels and through publication of orders on government websites. I think it's an area for improvement. On a theme of engagement, which has been mentioned here today, it would have been helpful to have had more direct communication with the Department of Finance.

[Dustin Walper]

Yes, I agree. We were in a similar situation. It was quite unclear initially what exactly the implications would be for us, so we would definitely welcome more direct channels in the future.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Thank you.

I believe that's my time, Mr. Chair, but I would point out that the testimony of the CBA last week was that they had multiple conversations with the Department of Finance prior to the invocation of the act.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, MP Chambers.

We're moving to the Liberals and MP Chatel for five minutes, please.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank all the witnesses for joining us virtually.

I'll ask Mr. Bisson a few questions.

I represent the constituency of Pontiac, which includes a significant portion of Gatineau. I'm very interested in the compensation that the government may provide to businesses affected by the occupation of Ottawa.

My colleagues and I, including Steven MacKinnon, who is deeply involved in this matter, are pleased with all the work done by Minister Pascale St‑Onge. On March 7, she announced that Gatineau businesses could receive the same compensation as Ottawa businesses.

Mr. Bisson, you spoke about some of the businesses that suffered damage as a result of the occupation of Ottawa and that can access this assistance. You think that this will help them. I just want you to clarify how it will help them.