Evidence of meeting #13 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was provincial.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
4:45 p.m.
Manager, Policy Section, Corporations Canada, Department of Industry
The changes to clause 146 are consequential to having voted down clause 29. In the bill, currently subclauses 146(1) and 146(6) make a reference to proposed section 29. Now that proposed section 29 is gone, we have to get rid of subclauses 146(1) and 146(6). All this amendment does is get rid of them.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Thank you.
(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]
(Clause 146 as amended agreed to)
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Siobhan Coady Liberal St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL
No.
(Clauses 147 to 160 inclusive agreed to)
(On clause 161—Calling annual meetings)
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Clause 161 has an amendment that has been proposed by the government.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
4:45 p.m.
Manager, Policy Section, Corporations Canada, Department of Industry
Stakeholders, particularly the Canadian Bar Association, have commented that the regime in clause 160 as drafted requires corporations to apply to court for an order, if they can't hold their annual meeting within the time period specified. They've asked that the director, as appointed under the act, do it instead. There are a number of provisions wherein the director is given the power to give an exemption to allow a corporation to do something slightly different from what is currently in the statute. All this does is take out the reference to the court and make it a reference to the director, with the required standard and authority for him to act.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Thank you, Madam Kirby.
(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]
(Clause 161 as amended agreed to)
(Clauses 162 to 180 inclusive agreed to)
(On clause 181--Qualification of public accountant)
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
We have two amendments for clause 181. I will begin with the amendment as proposed by the Bloc Québécois.
Mr. Bouchard and Mr. Vincent, do you have an amendment to clause 181?
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
4:45 p.m.
Bloc
Robert Bouchard Bloc Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
Yes. We move that lines 5 to 38 be removed. We feel that the text in those lines is really redundant.
New subsection 181(1) would read as follows:
In order to be a public accountant of a corporation, a person shall (a) be a member in good standing of an institute or association of accountants incorporated by or under an act of the legislature of a province; and (b), subject to subsection (6), comply with the standards of independence of that institute or association of accountants.
We do not think that it is necessary to be any more explicit. Members of an institute or association of accountants have rules that are almost always regulated by an act of the provincial legislature. For that reason, it is our contention that everything else is simply detail. Saying that a person is a member of an association of accountants means that everything else is included.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Thank you, Mr. Bouchard.
Would any of the three public officials care to comment?
Go ahead, Mr. Charland.
4:50 p.m.
Senior Director, Corporate and Insolvency Law Policy and Internal Trade Directorate, Department of Industry
Mr. Chair, what would be the effect of the proposed amendment? I have lost track of the words that would be removed and what would replace them
How would subsection 181(1) read with the proposed amendment?
4:50 p.m.
Bloc
Robert Bouchard Bloc Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
It would read as follows:
In order to be a public accountant of a corporation, a person shall (a) be a member in good standing of an institute or association of accountants Incorporated by or under an act of the legislature of a province; and (b), subject to subsection (6), comply with the standards of independence of that institute or association of accountants. Subject to subsection (6), after becoming aware of the disqualification...
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
It is not exactly the same amendment. You read a second paragraph.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Okay. Thank you, Mr. Bouchard.
Mr. Charland, do you have any comments on the Bloc Québécois amendment?
Mr. Lennon, go ahead.
4:50 p.m.
Senior Project Leader, Corporate and Insolvency Law Policy and Internal Trade Directorate, Department of Industry
The act as presently drafted recognizes that provinces have the authority to set standards for the accounting profession. The federal government does not do so. All the act does is say that you can be a member of a professional body, but you also, at the same time, must adhere to any other legislation that sets standards within a province, including the province of Quebec.
The independent standards are consistent with those in the CBCA. They're an objective set of standards that is understood within the profession and within the legal community. There is nothing that prevents accountants, or anybody doing an audit or review engagement, from additionally adhering to the independent standard set by the professional association.
That's what the act does.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
4:50 p.m.
Bloc
Robert Vincent Bloc Shefford, QC
In subsection 181(1), we would remove everything after the word “provinciale“, namely ”possède les qualifications requises, le cas échéant, en vertu d’une loi ou d’un règlement provincial pour exercer ses attributions aux termes des articles 189 à 192 [...]“ The word “provinciale” is on the fourth line of the subsection. Do you see it, Mr. Charland?
The subsection starts: “ L'expert-comptable d'une organisation est membre en règle d'un institut [...]“ and continues to the word “provinciale“.
If we take out the rest of the text, would there be any effect? They came to us to explain that public accountants are governed by the province. A person can be called a public accountant in one place and called something different somewhere else. So anything governed by a province should continue to be so governed.
