An Act to amend the Canada National Parks Act

This bill was last introduced in the 37th Parliament, 3rd Session, which ended in May 2004.

Sponsor

David Anderson  Liberal

Status

This bill has received Royal Assent and is now law.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Canada Steamship LinesOral Question Period

February 5th, 2004 / 2:30 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Michel Gauthier Bloc Roberval, QC

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-28, which made it possible for the Prime Minister's company to save some $100 million in taxes, was his second attempt at avoiding taxes. On December 2, 1996, while he was the Minister of Finance, the Prime Minister introduced Bill C-69, with exactly the same objectives. It died on the Order Paper because of the subsequent general election.

Are not these two attempts by the Prime Minister proof that this was a wholly premeditated and planned act, and that he was fully aware of all of the consequences?

Canada Steamship LinesOral Question Period

February 5th, 2004 / 2:20 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC

Mr. Speaker, not only did Bill C-28 give a direct advantage to the Prime Minister's company, but the tax convention with Barbados, which he chose to uphold while he was finance minister, was also beneficial to CSL International.

Is the Minister of Finance prepared to admit that the tax convention enabled the Prime Minister to bring back to Canada capital on which he paid just over 1% in taxes in Barbados instead of the Canadian rate, which is 37%? That is a $100 million profit in the Prime Minister's pockets.

Canada Steamship LinesOral Question Period

February 4th, 2004 / 2:25 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC

Mr. Speaker, not only was this legislation tailored so as to allow companies, such as his CSL International, to save millions of dollars in taxes, but furthermore, it is retroactive to 1995.

Does the Prime Minister know many taxpayers able to benefit from tax legislation that is retroactive, as Bill C-28 was for companies such as his?

Canada Steamship LinesOral Question Period

February 4th, 2004 / 2:25 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-28 was sponsored by the Prime Minister. Maintaining the tax treaty with Barbados is also the Prime Minister's doing. I am quite prepared to believe that the Minister of Finance is going to ensure that equity is restored, but if there is none at present, that is the doing of his predecessor. And he benefited from it. He saved $100 million in taxes.

What more do we need before this can be called a conflict of interest? If this is not a conflict of interest, what is? When a person sponsors a bill, maintains a tax treaty with Barbados, asks others to pay taxes but arranges things so as not to have to pay any, what is that, exactly?