Bill C-97 (Historical)

Budget Implementation Act, 2019, No. 1

An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 19, 2019 and other measures

Part 1 implements certain income tax and related measures by
(a) providing a temporary enhanced first-year capital cost allowance rate of 100% in respect of eligible zero-emission vehicles;
(b) removing the requirement that property be of “national importance” in order to qualify for the enhanced tax incentives for donations of cultural property;
(c) providing a temporary enhanced first-year capital cost allowance rate in respect of a wide range of depreciable capital properties, including a temporary first-year capital cost allowance rate of 100% in respect of
(i) machinery and equipment used for the manufacturing or processing of goods, and
(ii) specified clean energy equipment;
(d) ensuring that social assistance payments under certain programs are non-taxable, are not included in income for the purposes of determining entitlement to income-tested benefits and credits and do not preclude an individual from being considered a “parent” for the purposes of the Canada Workers Benefit;
(e) repealing the use of taxable income as a factor in determining a Canadian-controlled private corporation’s annual expenditure limit for the purpose of the enhanced scientific research and experimental development tax credit;
(f) providing support for Canadian journalism;
(g) introducing the Canada Training Credit;
(h) amending the Income Tax Act to reflect the current regulations for accessing cannabis for medical purposes;
(i) eliminating the requirement that sales be to a farming or fishing cooperative corporation in order to be excluded from specified corporate income for the purposes of the small business deduction;
(j) extending the mineral exploration tax credit for an additional five years;
(k) ensuring that business income of a communal organization retains its character when it is allocated to members of the communal organization for tax purposes;
(l) increasing the withdrawal limit under the Home Buyers’ Plan and amending how it applies on the breakdown of a marriage or common-law partnership;
(m) extending joint and several liability for tax owing on income from carrying on business in a TFSA to the TFSA’s holder and limiting the TFSA issuer’s liability for such tax;
(n) supporting employees who must reimburse a salary overpayment to their employer due to a system, administrative or clerical error;
(o) expanding tax support for electric vehicle charging stations and electrical energy storage equipment;
(p) allowing joint projects of producers from Canada and Belgium to qualify for the Canadian film or video production tax credit; and
(q) ensuring appropriate pension adjustment calculations in 2019 and subsequent tax years for registered pension plans that reference the enhanced Canada Pension Plan.
Part 2 implements certain goods and services tax/harmonized sales tax (GST/HST) measures proposed in the March 19, 2019 budget
(a) to provide GST/HST relief in the health care sector by relieving the GST/HST on supplies and importations of human ova and importations of in vitro embryos, by adding licenced podiatrists and chiropodists to the list of practitioners on whose order supplies of foot care devices are zero-rated and by exempting from the GST/HST certain health care services rendered by a multidisciplinary team of licenced health care professionals; and
(b) by introducing amendments to ensure that the GST/HST treatment of expenses incurred in respect of zero-emission passenger vehicles parallels the income tax treatment of those vehicles.
Part 3 implements certain excise measures proposed in the March 19, 2019 budget by changing the federal excise duty rates on cannabis products that are edible cannabis, cannabis extracts (including cannabis oils) and cannabis topicals to $0.‍0025 per milligram of total tetrahydrocannabinol contained in the cannabis product.
Part 4 enacts and amends several Acts in order to implement various measures.
Subdivision A of Division 1 of Part 4 amends the Bank Act to, among other things, provide members of federal credit unions with different methods of voting prior to meetings and provide additional exceptions to the requirement that a proxy circular be sent in order to solicit proxies. The Subdivision also makes a technical amendment to An Act to amend certain Acts in relation to financial institutions.
Subdivision B of Division 1 of Part 4 amends the Canadian Payments Act to allow the term of the elected directors of the Board of Directors of the Canadian Payments Association to be renewed twice, to extend the term of the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of that Board and to allow the remuneration of certain members of the Stakeholder Advisory Council.
Subdivision A of Division 2 of Part 4 amends the Canada Business Corporations Act to require a corporation, on request by an investigative body that has reasonable grounds to suspect that certain offences have been committed, to provide to the investigative body a copy of its register of individuals with significant control or information in that registry that is specified by the investigative body. It also requires those investigative bodies to keep certain records in relation to their requests and to report annually in respect of those requests.
Subdivision B of Division 2 of Part 4 amends the Criminal Code to add the element of recklessness to the offence of laundering proceeds of crime.
Subdivision C of Division 2 of Part 4 amends the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act to, among other things,
(a) allow the Governor in Council to make regulations defining “virtual currency” and “dealing in virtual currencies”;
(b) require the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (“the Centre”) to disclose information to the Agence du Revenu du Québec and the Competition Bureau in certain circumstances;
(c) allow the Centre to disclose additional designated information that is associated with the import and export of currency and monetary instruments;
(d) provide that certain information must not be the subject of a confidentiality order made in the course of an appeal to the Federal Court; and
(e) require the Centre to make public certain information if a person or entity is deemed to have committed a violation or is served a notice of a decision of the Director indicating that a person or entity has committed a violation.
Subdivision D of Division 2 of Part 4 amends the Seized Property Management Act to authorize the Minister to, among other things,
(a) provide consultative and other services to any person employed in the federal public administration or by a provincial or municipal authority in relation to the seizure, restraint, custody, management, forfeiture or disposal of certain property;
(b) manage property seized, restrained or forfeited under any Act of Parliament or of the legislature of a province; and
(c) dispose of property when it is forfeited to Her Majesty in right of Canada and, with the consent of the government of the province, when it is forfeited to Her Majesty in right of a province, and share the proceeds.
The Subdivision also makes consequential amendments to the Criminal Code, the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act and the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act.
Division 3 of Part 4 amends the Employment Equity Act to require federally regulated private-sector employers to report salary information that supports employment equity reporting beyond salary ranges, including making wage gap information by occupational groups more evident.
Division 4 of Part 4 authorizes payments to be made out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund for climate action support and in relation to infrastructure as well as to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and to the Shock Trauma Air Rescue Service.
Division 5 of Part 4 amends the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act to, among other things,
(a) require all parties in a proceeding under the Act to act in good faith; and
(b) allow the court to inquire into certain payments made to, among other persons, directors or officers of a corporation in the year preceding insolvency and imposes liability on the directors for those payments.
The Division amends the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act to, among other things,
(a) limit the relief provided in an order made under section 11 to what is reasonably necessary and limit the period staying all proceedings that might be taken in respect of the company to 10 days;
(b) allow the court to make an order to disclose an economic interest in respect of a debtor company; and
(c) require all parties in a proceeding under the Act to act in good faith.
The Division also amends the Canada Business Corporations Act to, among other things,
(a) set out factors that directors and officers of a corporation may consider when acting with a view to the best interests of that corporation; and
(b) require directors of certain corporations to disclose certain information to shareholders respecting diversity, well-being and remuneration.
Finally, the Division amends the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985 to clarify that a pension plan is not to provide that, among other things, a member’s pension benefit or entitlement to a pension benefit is affected when a plan terminates. It also authorizes a pension plan administrator to purchase an immediate or deferred life annuity for former members or survivors in order to satisfy an obligation under the plan to provide a pension benefit arising from a defined benefit provision.
Division 6 of Part 4 amends the Canada Pension Plan to authorize the Minister of Employment and Social Development to waive the requirement for an application for a retirement pension in certain cases.
Division 7 of Part 4 amends the Old Age Security Act to provide, starting in July 2020, a new income exemption for the purposes of calculating the Guaranteed Income Supplement. The new exemption excludes the first $5,000 of a person’s employment and self-employment income as well as 50% of their employment and self-employment income greater than $5,000 but not exceeding $15,000.
Division 8 of Part 4 amends the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act, the Public Service Superannuation Act and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superannuation Act to increase the surplus limit that applies to the Canadian Forces Pension Fund, the Public Service Pension Fund and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Pension Fund, respectively, to 25% of the amount of liabilities.
Subdivision A of Division 9 of Part 4 amends the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act to permit trustee licensing fees to be paid on a date to be prescribed by regulation and to permit trustees to maintain electronic records instead of retaining original documents.
Subdivision B of Division 9 of Part 4 amends the Electricity and Gas Inspection Act to allow for the addition, by regulation, of units of measurement for electricity and gas sales and distribution.
Subdivision C of Division 9 of Part 4 amends the Food and Drugs Act to improve safety and enable innovation by introducing measures to, among other things,
(a) allow the Minister of Health to classify certain products exclusively as foods, drugs, cosmetics or devices;
(b) provide oversight over the conduct of clinical trials for drugs, devices and certain foods for special dietary purposes;
(c) provide a regulatory framework for advanced therapeutic products; and
(d) modernize inspection powers.
Subdivision D of Division 9 of Part 4 amends the Importation of Intoxicating Liquors Act to limit the application of the Act to intoxicating liquors imported into Canada.
Subdivision E of Division 9 of Part 4 amends the Precious Metals Marking Act to provide that exemptions made by regulation can be either conditional or unconditional.
Subdivision F of Division 9 of Part 4 amends the Textile Labelling Act to provide that exemptions made by regulation can be either conditional or unconditional.
Subdivision G of Division 9 of Part 4 amends the Weights and Measures Act to authorize, by regulation, the use of new units of measurement and to update the definitions of the basic units of measurement in accordance with international standards.
Subdivision H of Division 9 of Part 4 amends the Hazardous Materials Information Review Act to streamline the process for reviewing claims for exemption, to allow for the suspension and cancellation of exemptions and to harmonize the provisions of the Act that allow for the disclosure of confidential business information with similar provisions in other Department of Health Acts.
Subdivision I of Division 9 of Part 4 amends the Canada Transportation Act to authorize the electronic administration and enforcement of Acts under the Minister of Transport’s authority and to promote innovation in transportation by authorizing the granting of exemptions for the purpose of research, development and testing.
Subdivision J of Division 9 of Part 4 amends the Pest Control Products Act to, among other things, allow the Minister of Health to
(a) expand the scope of a re-evaluation of, or a special review in relation to, a pest control product rather than initiating a new special review; and
(b) decide not to initiate a special review if the aspect of a pest control product that would otherwise prompt such a review is being, or has been, addressed in a re-evaluation or another special review.
Subdivision K of Division 9 of Part 4 repeals the provisions of the Quarantine Act that relate to the laying of proposed regulations before Parliament.
Subdivision L of Division 9 of Part 4 repeals the provisions of the Human Pathogens and Toxins Act that relate to the laying of proposed regulations before Parliament.
Division 10 of Part 4 amends the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act to establish the Management Advisory Board, which is to provide advice to the Commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police on the administration and management of that police force.
Division 11 of Part 4 amends the Pilotage Act to, among other things,
(a) set out a clear purpose and principles for that Act;
(b) transfer the responsibility for making regulations from the Pilotage Authorities, with the approval of the Governor in Council, to the Governor in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Transport;
(c) transfer responsibility for enforcing that Act and issuing and charging for licences and certificates from the Pilotage Authorities to the Minister of Transport;
(d) set out an enforcement regime that is consistent with other Department of Transport Acts;
(e) provide that regulatory matters for the safe provision of compulsory pilotage services not be addressed in service contracts between the Pilotage Authorities and pilot corporations;
(f) allow the Pilotage Authorities to impose charges other than by making regulations;
(g) require that service contracts between pilot corporations and the Pilotage Authorities be publicly available; and
(h) prohibit pilots, or users or suppliers of pilotage services, from sitting on the board of directors of a Pilotage Authority.
The Division also makes consequential amendments to the Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act and the Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada Act.
Division 12 of Part 4 enacts the Security Screening Services Commercialization Act. That Act, among other things,
(a) authorizes the Governor in Council to designate a body corporate incorporated under the Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act as the designated screening authority, which is to be solely responsible for providing aviation security screening services;
(b) authorizes the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority to sell or otherwise dispose of its assets and liabilities to the designated screening authority;
(c) regulates the establishment, imposition and collection of charges related to the provision of aviation security screening services; and
(d) provides for the dissolution of the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority.
The Division also makes consequential amendments to other Acts.
Division 13 of Part 4 amends the Aviation Industry Indemnity Act to authorize the Minister of Transport to undertake to indemnify
(a) NAV CANADA for acts or omissions it commits in accordance with an instruction given under an agreement entered into between NAV CANADA and Her Majesty respecting the provision of air navigation services to the Department of National Defence; and
(b) any beneficiary under an insurance policy held by an aviation industry participant.
Division 14 of Part 4 amends the Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada Act to clarify that the Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada has jurisdiction in respect of reviews and appeals in connection with administrative monetary penalties provided for under the Marine Liability Act.
Division 15 of Part 4 enacts the College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants Act. That Act creates a new self-regulatory regime governing immigration and citizenship consultants. It provides that the purpose of the College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants is to regulate immigration and citizenship consultants in the public interest and protect the public. That Act, among other things,
(a) creates a licensing regime for immigration and citizenship consultants and requires that licensees comply with a code of professional conduct, initially established by the responsible Minister;
(b) authorizes the College’s Complaints Committee to conduct investigations into a licensee’s conduct and activities;
(c) authorizes the College’s Discipline Committee to take or require action if it determines that a licensee has committed professional misconduct or was incompetent;
(d) prohibits persons who are not licensees from using certain titles and representing themselves to be licensees and provides that the College may seek an injunction for the contravention of those prohibitions;
(e) provides the responsible Minister with the authority to determine the number of directors on the board of directors and to require the Board to do anything that is advisable to carry out the purposes of that Act; and
(f) contains transitional provisions allowing the existing regulator — the Immigration Consultants of Canada Regulatory Council — to be continued as the College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants or, if the existing regulator is not continued, allowing the establishment of the College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants, a new corporation without share capital.
The Division also makes related amendments to the Citizenship Act and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to double the existing maximum fines applicable to the offence of contravening section 21.‍1 of the Citizenship Act or section 91 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
In addition, it amends those Acts to provide the authority to make regulations establishing a system of administrative penalties and consequences, including of administrative monetary penalties, applicable to certain violations by persons who provide representation or advice for consideration — or offer to do so — in immigration or citizenship matters.
Finally, the Division makes consequential amendments to the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act.
Division 16 of Part 4 amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to
(a) introduce a new ground of ineligibility for refugee protection if a claimant has previously made a claim for refugee protection in another country;
(b) provide that if the Federal Court refuses a person’s application for leave to commence an application for judicial review, or denies their application for judicial review, with respect to their claim for refugee protection or their application for protection, the date of that refusal or denial is the first day of the period that must pass before a request or application referred to in section 24, 25 or 112 of that Act may be made; and
(c) authorize the Governor in Council to make an order regarding the processing of applications for temporary resident visas, work permits and study permits made by citizens or nationals of a foreign state or territory if the Governor in Council is of the opinion that the government or competent authority of that state or territory is unreasonably refusing to issue or unreasonably delaying the issuance of travel documents to citizens or nationals of that state or territory who are in Canada.
Division 17 of Part 4 amends the Federal Courts Act to increase the number of Federal Court judges.
Division 18 of Part 4 amends the National Housing Act to allow the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation to acquire an interest or right in a housing project that is occupied or intended to be occupied by the owner of the project and to make an investment in order to acquire such an interest or right.
Division 19 of Part 4 enacts the National Housing Strategy Act. That Act provides for, among other things, the development and maintenance of a national housing strategy and imposes requirements related to the mandatory content of the strategy. It also establishes a National Housing Council and requires the appointment of a Federal Housing Advocate. Finally, it requires the submission of an annual report by the Advocate on systemic housing issues and the submission of periodic reports by the designated Minister on the implementation of the strategy and the achievement of desired housing outcomes.
Division 20 of Part 4 enacts the Poverty Reduction Act, which provides for an official metric and other metrics to measure the level of poverty in Canada, sets out two poverty reduction targets in Canada and establishes the National Advisory Council on Poverty.
Division 21 of Part 4 amends the Veterans Well-being Act to expand the eligibility criteria for the education and training benefit in order to make members of the Supplementary Reserve eligible for that benefit.
Division 22 of Part 4 amends the Canada Student Loans Act and the Canada Student Financial Assistance Act to extend the interest-free period on student loans by six months and to provide for transitional measures in respect of individuals to whom student loans were made and who ceased to be students at any time during the six months before the amendments come into force.
Division 23 of Part 4 amends the Canada National Parks Act to establish Thaidene Nene National Park Reserve of Canada and to decrease the hectarage of certain ski areas.
Division 24 of Part 4 amends the Parks Canada Agency Act to provide that, starting on April 1, 2021, any balance of money appropriated to the Parks Canada Agency that is not spent by the Agency in the fiscal year in which it was appropriated lapses at the end of that fiscal year.
Subdivision A of Division 25 of Part 4 enacts the Department of Indigenous Services Act, which establishes the Department of Indigenous Services and confers on the Minister of Indigenous Services various responsibilities relating to the provision of services to Indigenous individuals eligible to receive those services.
Subdivision B of Division 25 of Part 4 enacts the Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Act, which establishes the Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs, confers on the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations various responsibilities relating to relations with Indigenous peoples and confers on the Minister of Northern Affairs various responsibilities relating to the administration of Northern affairs.
Subdivision C of Division 25 of Part 4 makes amendments to other Acts and repeals the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development Act.
Subdivision D of Division 25 of Part 4 makes amendments to the First Nations Land Management Act, the First Nations Oil and Gas and Moneys Management Act and the Addition of Lands to Reserves and Reserve Creation Act.
Division 26 of Part 4 enacts the Federal Prompt Payment for Construction Work Act in order to establish a regime to provide prompt payments to contractors and subcontractors for construction work performed for the purposes of a construction project in respect of federal real property or federal immovables and a regime to resolve disputes over the non-payment of that construction work.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

I had my staff do just a bit more research on “Indigenous governing body”. I asked them to do a search on where that term also exists.

The term exists in Bill C-35, the early learning and child care in Canada act; in Bill C-23, an act respecting places, persons and events of national historic significance or national interest, archaeological resources and cultural and natural heritage; the Corrections and Conditional Release Act; Bill C-91, an act respecting indigenous languages; Bill C-92, an act respecting first nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families; Bill C-68, an act to amend the Fisheries Act and other acts in consequence; Bill C-69, an act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act and to make consequential amendments to other acts; and Bill C-97, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 19, 2019.

I haven't looked at how these might differ from each other.

Having said that, have you been able to assess whether or not there are similarities or differences between what's in this act and what these other acts might be?

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you for that.

The Canadian government says it's “modernizing” the safe third country agreement. That's the term it uses. It won't actually tell us what that means and what its plans are in the negotiations with the United States.

What we've seen, of course, is that the government, in a hidden kind of way, expanded the use of the safe third country agreement. In the omnibus budget bill, Bill C-97, a 379-page document, the government snuck in there the safe third country agreement application to the Five Eyes countries. That automatically turns people away if they try to seek asylum here in Canada.

Do you think that's right?

This question is directed to The Refugee Centre. I don't know who wants to respond to that.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I want to follow up on the call to action, because when the Pamour mine went down and the Kerr-Addison gold mine, one of the richest mines in the country, was stripped of its assets and the pensioners were left with nothing, the pensioners believed that they had savings, but they were lied to, and then they found that they were at the back of the line.

When I hear people say how unfair it is that we move these people, who spent their lives and literally gave the health of their lives to the company, and that somehow we're going to affect business if we give them any priority.... What happened at Pamour happened 30 years ago. I would have thought that it would have changed, but then I look at Sears. Then we are told “Oh well, it's a bricks-and-mortar business and they can't compete”, blah, blah, blah. Sears was a damn good business. It was taken over by a hedge fund bandit, Eddie Lampert, who stripped it. Again, it was perfectly legal.

We had legislation brought in that was supposed to protect those Sears workers. What lessons have we learned? Did Bill C-97 do the job it was supposed to do, or are we just continually letting these bandits rob pension funds and strip assets out of good, valuable companies?

[Siobhan Vipond, Executive Vice-President, Canadian Labour Congress]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Hello to you and all the committee members. Thank you for this opportunity to appear in front of you.

My name is Siobhán Vipond, and I'm the executive vice-president of the Canadian Labour Congress, Canada's largest central labour body. We, as Canada's unions, advocate on national issues on behalf of all workers from coast to coast to coast.

Pensions are essential to the financial security and well-being of working people. Canadian research shows that income from an employer pension plan can make the difference between financial security in retirement and a decline in living standards, compared to pre-retirement levels. Next to their homes, pension savings are one of the most important pools of assets that workers accumulate over their lifetimes.

It’s important to remember that workplace pensions are not gifts from employers. Pension benefits are deferred wages. Pensions are earned and paid for by workers, and workers depend on that money being there for them when they retire. Employers are legally obligated to provide those pensions when a worker retires. It is frustrating and unjust that this legal obligation can be torn up when a company enters insolvency.

When a company enters insolvency proceedings, workers and pensioners go to the back of the line. They are essentially treated like involuntary unsecured creditors of the firm, behind the banks and the secured creditors. No one asked workers and plan members if they would lend the value of their pension benefits to their employer. It's quite the opposite. Plan members trust that their employer will live up to the terms of the pension bargain.

Unlike commercial creditors, employees and pensioners are generally unable to protect themselves against the risk of their employer’s insolvency. If their previous employer enters bankruptcy, pensioners cannot easily return to work and find new and additional sources of income.

In 2018, Sears Canada pensioners outside Ontario learned that their pension benefits would be reduced by 30%. One Sears retiree in Calgary—which happens to be my hometown—who had worked for 44 years took a monthly pension cut of $800 a month. After a lifetime of work and a lifetime of pension contributions, his pension was slashed in retirement.

Another retiree, who had worked for 35 years, saw his pension drop by $450. In anticipation of benefit reductions, this 72-year-old pensioner took a job at Home Depot as a greeter. For many others, taking a minimum-wage job to make up for pension reductions is not a realistic option, nor should it be an expectation.

The way pensions and benefits are treated in insolvency is outrageous and unfair. Despite this, the government has not taken steps to extend protections to pensioners and plan members.

The government’s legislated changes in response to the Sears Canada debacle were woefully inadequate. In 2019, Bill C-97 made minor changes around the edges of the problem. None of these legislated changes would have prevented another Sears Canada, or the pain and suffering it caused for Sears pensioners.

This is especially frustrating since the evidence shows that many companies with underfunded pension plans could eliminate the solvency deficiencies of their plans by allocating just a portion of their shareholders' payouts to the pension plan. Studies show that many firms consciously choose to reward shareholders and senior executives, boosting the stock prices, rather than fully funding their pension plans. This leaves pensioners and plan members at risk if the company becomes insolvent.

Over the years, we at the CLC have supported numerous NDP and Bloc members' bills. None of these bills have been allowed to proceed. For years, we have urged governments to put in place national mandatory pension insurance akin to the Ontario pension benefits guarantee fund. We have been unable to get traction on this idea.

The CLC supports the passage of the revised Bill C-228, and we support the bill’s proposed changes to the CCAA and BIA. The proposed amendments to the Pension Benefits Standards Act are not well conceived and should be deleted from Bill C-228 in their entirety.

We will be very happy to answer any questions you may have. At the centre of this issue are the workers and pensioners across this country.

Thank you for your attention.

[Brian Myles]

I am going to add to what Mr. Jamison said earlier. I belong to the school of thought that wants a bundle of measures to support the news media. We didn't say it, but we believe that all of the federal programs contained in the Budget Impementation Act, 2019, No. 1, should be retained, even if Bill C‑18 were passed.

The model applied under Bill C‑18, referred to as the Australian model, compensates the news media based on digital coverage or number of journalists in a newsroom. Ultimately, it is difficult to support and accept for small weekly papers, for small publications and for emerging players, which do not have a big market position or broad digital coverage and which have small newsrooms. Those media may be disappointed with Bill C‑18.

That is why we have to reform the Local Journalism Initiative, or LJI. I have been on the jury, and we did our best based on our knowledge and the parameters we had. By force of circumstances, the program benefited a number of companies that were national players and were very well established in their market. To be completely transparent, I have to say that Le Devoir has been able to fund positions using the LJI. I believe this program could be reformed to ensure that it places greater priority on small players and on emerging players. The question of the number of paid jobs in a newsroom should also be reviewed. The LJI could help to encourage more innovation and the growth of publications in fragile markets. I think we could produce a better LJI that was targeted to the needs of local communities.

[Sahar Raza, Project Manager, National Right to Housing Network]

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of the finance committee.

My name is Sahar Raza. I am the project manager of the National Right to Housing Network, a network of over 350 organizations and experts from across the housing and homelessness sector, including FRAPRU, which we heard from earlier today. We are all dedicated to seeing the meaningful implementation of the right to adequate housing, which Canada has committed to in both domestic and international law.

In fact, it was this very committee that adopted key amendments to the National Housing Strategy Act in 2019 in order to recognize adequate housing as a fundamental human right, so it really is an honour to be here today to discuss how we can turn that transformational human rights commitment into practical solutions that can actually address this housing crisis.

As we know, financialization is a major driver of the housing crisis, because housing is being treated as a profit-making commodity rather than a social good and human right. While increasing supply is certainly important, particularly in rural, remote and northern areas, supply alone will not get us out of this housing crisis. We are losing affordable housing stock at a faster rate than we can possibly produce it, and that means we need to revamp ineffective housing programs and policies to better utilize our current housing supply. We need to close tax loopholes and increase investments in non-market housing, for which our stock is about half that of other OECD and comparable countries.

For starters, we know that large corporate landlords, such as real estate investment trusts, are huge drivers of financialization. They are known for buying up affordable housing stock, “renovicting” low- and middle-income tenants, and then jacking up home prices, which makes housing even more unaffordable. Yet, in a recent study by ACORN Canada, it was estimated that just over the last 10 years these real estate investment trusts have benefited from more than $1.2 billion in tax exemptions, compared to if we were to just tax them like a normal corporation. If we look to international human rights guidelines, they actually tell us that we need to close these types of real estate loopholes and then reinvest that tax money in our national housing strategy. There's a huge opportunity here to simply use the tax money being left on the table to improve our housing supply, to repair our current homes and for programs for people in greatest housing need.

Along that vein, there's also an opportunity here to increase taxes on all private investments or investors who own multiple properties, because, as we've seen, existing homeowners and investors are seeing a major equity gain, which means that they are easily able to take that equity alongside low interest rates and buy even more investment properties or else pass that wealth on to their children, which makes it even more difficult for renters and first-time homebuyers to break into the market. We're even seeing disadvantaged groups experience that disadvantage multiplied generationally.

These are highly inequitable outcomes that violate the right to housing, but again, they can be easily addressed through regulatory and tax measures such as an incremental tax for each additional property beyond your primary residence, or through national speculation and vacancy taxes, all to disincentivize profit-hoarding in the housing market. Again, this money can be reinvested in our national housing strategy to improve supply and so on.

However, I will say now that our existing national housing strategy requires a major rights-based revamp, because its capital funds, like the rental construction financing initiative—which, by the way, holds the biggest price tag of all programs in the strategy—have extremely lenient and short-term affordability guidelines that simply do not target low-income households. Just to exemplify that, many NHS-funded projects are unaffordable for up to 90% of renters. This means that we are actually using government funds to drive the housing crisis instead of addressing the housing crisis.

This could easily be reformed if we just think of some new criteria for these capital funds. For example, we could require that a certain percentage of units be permanently affordable at rents geared to income for every new development. We can implement anti-displacement or anti-eviction regulations. We can implement rent controls. We can dedicate more funds from these capital initiatives to non-market housing.

I will end here, but these are just a few of the practical human rights-based solutions that we can implement today to ensure that every person in Canada has access to adequate and affordable housing, which I think is the goal that we all share here at this table.

Thank you for your time. I very much look forward to your questions.

[Krista James, National Director, Canadian Centre for Elder Law]

Madam Chair and honourable committee members, thank you for the opportunity to appear before the committee.

I speak for the Canadian Centre for Elder Law. We conduct research and develop reports and educational tools on legal and policy issues related to aging. You will find many elder abuse resources on our website. Last month, we completed a study paper on elder abuse for the B.C. Council to Reduce Elder Abuse. We are presently updating our “Practical Guide to Elder Abuse and Neglect Law in Canada”, with funding from the Department of Justice victims fund.

We commend the committee for setting aside time to study elder abuse in Canada.

I will first speak briefly to the sufficiency of existing Criminal Code provisions and then comment on some other prevention and response issues within the federal jurisdiction.

First, elder abuse includes different kinds of victimization, which require different policy and legal responses. Roughly, elder abuse includes interpersonal family violence and neglect; financial abuse under a power of attorney or another legal document; fraud, scams and professional cons; and then, finally, abuse and neglect in institutional settings.

In terms of interpersonal violence, older people are mostly harmed by people they care about—often, dependent family members. Most seniors do not want their child or grandchild to go to jail; they just want the abuse to stop. When they are harmed by con artists, they are more supportive of prosecution. Family members want corporations penalized for neglecting older adults living in long-term care.

We concur with previous comments that the existing age-neutral Criminal Code provisions are largely adequate for responding to elder abuse in Canada. That said, the proposal by Mr. Webb, from the Advocacy Centre for the Elderly, for a Criminal Code provision on criminal endangerment to facilitate the prosecution of neglect in long-term care merits study.

Further, we recommend legal research into, one, the effectiveness of existing Criminal Code provisions for addressing violence against other populations, such as women and children and, two, the U.S. experience with criminal law responses to elder abuse.

We are part of a law reform agency at the Canadian Centre for Elder Law. We believe that law reform is ideally informed by robust comparative research that allows us to learn from the mistakes and the victories of others. Many states in the U.S. penalize elder abuse criminally. We need a better understanding of these experiences before we follow their lead. We recommend that the Government of Canada fund this research.

Although Criminal Code enforcement falls largely to the provinces and the territories, the Government of Canada has a significant role to play. For example, law enforcement in smaller communities across Canada is by the RCMP, which requires funding for better outreach and response. Much of the police response to elder abuse is attending on site to provide information and referral. Social worker/counsellor and police detective pairings make for great on-site support for older adults.

Most jurisdictions do not have a Crown counsel policy regarding how to work with victims and witnesses who have mental capacity issues, including, for example, dementia. The Government of Canada can provide leadership in supporting research and policy development in this area, perhaps by bringing back the federal elder abuse initiative, which has funded some excellent resource development in Canada. The government could also support interjurisdictional knowledge exchange on this topic, possibly through the federal-provincial-territorial working group on seniors issues.

While punishment can be very important, we encourage the committee to apply a victim-and-survivor-centred lens that gives attention to the unique needs of different vulnerable populations in Canada. This approach highlights many responsibilities that are within the federal jurisdiction, beyond the Criminal Code.

First, a number of populations that are particularly vulnerable to abuse fall under the federal jurisdiction, for example, indigenous peoples and immigrants and refugees. Both groups require better support when they experience abuse and neglect, and you can imagine some unique vulnerability here.

Second, and my final point, the recently passed National Housing Strategy Act codified a human right to housing in Canada. It requires the minister responsible to develop and maintain a national housing strategy that addresses persons most in need of housing, which includes, according to Canada’s national housing strategy, both seniors and people fleeing violence.

There is only one transition house in Canada developed to meet the needs of older women. In many communities, the only emergency housing for older men is a homeless shelter.

The Atira report, “Promising Practices across Canada for Housing Women who are Older and Fleeing Violence or Abuse”, identified a significant lack of appropriate temporary housing for older women. More recently, the UN special rapporteur on the right to adequate housing called for national-level leadership in realizing the right to housing for vulnerable populations in Canada.

Thank you very much.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Thank you for that answer.

Chair, I'd like to switch gears a bit and ask about something that came out of the budget implementation act of 2019, which is legislation around the establishment of a new college of immigration and citizenship consultants.

I think all of us around the table have had experiences in this area. I've heard stories about immigration consultants who can run the gamut from very reputable to not so much. I'd like the deputy to give us an update on the status of the college of immigration and citizenship consultants.

[Véronique Laflamme, Spokesperson, Front d'action populaire en réaménagement urbain]

Hi, everyone.

My name is Véronique Laflamme. Today, I am representing the Front d'action populaire en réaménagement urbain, FRAPRU, which is a Quebec‑wide group of housing committees, tenants' associations and citizens' committees from various regions of Quebec.

We have 140 groups in Quebec, 30 of which are active groups that work daily with tenants, mainly low‑ and modest‑income tenants, and with people who want to start social housing projects. Our groups support these projects, and provide support and services to tenants, particularly vulnerable tenants. In the context of the current pandemic, our groups receive many calls from tenants who are worried about losing their homes or who have reached the threshold of being able to pay.

FRAPRU is a group that promotes the right to housing, a right to which Canada committed itself as a signatory to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, but also by recently adopting, last June, Bill C-97, which included the recognition of the right to housing.

I would point out that the right to housing includes protection against eviction and a criterion relating to the ability to pay, which every home must meet, and that it must be implemented progressively, not regressively, using the maximum available resources.

The current pandemic highlights the interrelation between the right to adequate income, the right to health, the right to food and the right to housing. The particular consequences of the lack of decent housing for the homeless in particular have just been clearly highlighted by the person who spoke before me, but the consequences for seniors are also revealed by the current situation. It is important to remember that there are many seniors who are not in public institutions, but rather in rooming houses or in poor housing situations.

FRAPRU's main concern in the current pandemic is therefore to avoid mass evictions after the end of the health emergency. In most provinces and in Quebec, there is a moratorium on tenant evictions during the health emergency. Unfortunately, in most cases, this will disappear at the end of the pandemic. Since tenants' ability to pay is affected, we fear a wave of mass evictions, particularly because of the lack of employment insurance for many low‑income workers, despite the income assistance provided by the Canada emergency response benefit.

We are concerned that many people will not be able to pay their rent and that they will be even more precarious after the pandemic, not to mention those who will not be able to return to work or low‑income households that do not qualify for these programs. I am thinking in particular of low‑income retirees and people on social assistance who have to pay more for food because of the closure of resources that often allow them to have access to some free food. These people will become more vulnerable and will have a harder time paying their rent because of the pandemic and the end of various services.

So our main concern is to avoid evictions during the pandemic, but we're also thinking about what will happen afterwards. We are well aware that this is a provincial jurisdiction, but it remains a concern that the federal government must have, given its commitments to housing rights.

Our other concern has to do with the ability to pay. The Canadian government has been able to take action on the income side, particularly through the benefit programs that have been announced but, as I was saying, we don't think that will be enough, for a number of reasons. It isn't yet the case in all Quebec cities, but in several Canadian cities, the $2,000 is close to the amount charged for rent—it's important to remember that. In Toronto and Vancouver, but also in Montreal, many tenants are already paying $1,500 or more in rent. Therefore, additional resources are needed. Later on, I will suggest some measures that could be implemented by the federal government.

At the same time, I would point out that tenants are all the more vulnerable to eviction because hundreds of thousands of them were already in core housing need at the time of the last census. In fact, 1.7 million tenant households in Canada were paying more than the standard of 30% of their income for housing, and 800,000 tenant households in Canada, including 195,000 in Quebec, were spending more than half of their income on housing.

This prevents them from meeting their other basic needs.

Food banks were already highlighting the impact of the lack of affordable housing on the increased demand for food assistance. These situations are exacerbated by the current pandemic. There was a pre‑existing housing crisis in Quebec and in several Canadian cities because of the scarcity of affordable rental housing, but especially because of the high cost of housing, which was already leading to the exclusion of many tenants from their neighbourhoods. Finally, there was also a context of real estate speculation, which is still present and will unfortunately not disappear with the pandemic.

The major problem in Canada is the lack of alternatives for all these tenants. At FRAPRU, we have often highlighted the fact that this crisis has been caused by the lack of social housing and the federal government's withdrawal from housing outside the private market, whether it be low‑rent housing, co‑ops or non‑profit organizations. According to the OECD, Canada ranks 16th in terms of its percentage of social housing. Social housing accounts for 4% of Canada's housing stock.

As Ms. Arbaud said, in this case social housing is inaccessible to many, making many tenants even more vulnerable to eviction. They have nowhere else to go, which leads to more homelessness.

In the current context, bearing in mind that Quebec's areas of jurisdiction must be respected, the demands we are making of the federal government are not the same as those we are making of the Quebec government. First of all, we are talking about a contingency fund. Yesterday, the government announced assistance measures of this type, including loans for commercial rents. We believe that this requires a contingency fund and not just interest‑free loans, because we must avoid increasing debt. It takes special grants and then perhaps interest‑free loans for tenants.

In Canada, particularly in Ontario, there is already such a fund to help people who, for one reason or another, can't pay their rent. It could be set up by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, which already manages mortgage loans.

Then there is the funding of emergency rent supplement programs. Rent supplement programs have been federally subsidized in the past. They can be managed by the provinces, which have infrastructure. These programs need to be funded quickly to help people stay in their homes with financial assistance.

At the same time, funds must be made available now to rehabilitate the social housing that Ottawa has funded in the past. This would make it possible to quickly rehouse people who can no longer afford to pay their current rent. Because of underfunding by the federal government, 300 social housing units are shuttered in Montreal alone. Renovating these units would not take as long as building new ones.

[James van Raalte]

The results of the one-for-one rule speak for themselves. We have seen a net reduction financially in cost to businesses in terms of administrative burden.

To go to a two-for-one rule, from an analytical perspective, the jury is still out in terms of the experiences from other countries. The U.K. has rolled back its efforts in terms of going from one-to-one to one-to-two to one-to-three, and in fact, it has eliminated the rule altogether.

Mexico introduced a two-for-one initiative and has scaled that back to a one-for-one initiative, and we are still seeing how that is performing. Spain has a one-for-one rule, and we are watching what they're doing. It depends on what the government is trying to accomplish in terms of administrative burden and looking across at the other tools in the tool box that we have.

We are looking at an annual administrative regulatory modernization bill. The first one was part of the budget implementation act last year in terms of removing regulatory irritants that businesses had identified. We expect to bring forward, with the minister's permission, another reg-mod bill in this session.

I've spoken a little about regulatory reviews, and so has my colleague. It's a question of a balanced package in terms of moving forward on the modernization of Canada's regulatory framework.

Supplementary Estimates (A), 2019-20

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Chair, I am pleased to rise in committee of the whole to discuss the supplementary estimates (A). I will speak to the spending connected to my files.

Canadians need a transportation system that allows them to safely and efficiently reach their destinations and receive goods for their daily lives. Businesses and customers expect a transportation system they can trust to deliver resources and products to market and for the jobs on which they depend.

The transport file includes other significant challenges, such as air and ocean pollution, public safety and security, and economic opportunities for all Canadians. In all, transport activities account for around 10% of Canada's GDP. The federal transport file includes Transport Canada and various Crown corporations, agencies and administrative tribunals, all of which do important work to serve Canadians. These important federal organizations strive to keep making Canada's transportation network safer, greener, more secure and more efficient.

Transport Canada, which includes the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority, or CATSA, and Marine Atlantic, both of which are crown corporations, is seeking additional financing resources through the 2019-20 supplementary estimates (A). Transport Canada is seeking an increase of $227.1 million in the supplementary estimates. This includes $223.9 million in voted appropriations for 12 different items.

At this time, I will focus my remarks on the department's three largest items. These are $165.5 million for the incentives for zero-emission vehicles program; $31.5 million to address indigenous people's marine and environmental priorities regarding the Trans Mountain expansion project; and, finally, $10.5 million for the rail safety improvement program.

The Government of Canada's incentives for zero-emission vehicles program helps reduce greenhouse gas emissions and contributes to an environmentally responsible transportation network by promoting the adoption of this type of vehicle. Between May 1, when the program was launched, and November 24, 30,000 Canadian individuals and businesses received the point-of-sale incentive. Canada made a commitment to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 30% below 2005 levels by 2030. The incentives for zero-emission vehicles program will help us meet that target.

To meet the demand for incentives, Transport Canada has had to advance funding from future years. Canadians understand that protecting the environment and growing the economy go hand in hand. The Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project has the potential to create thousands of good middle-class jobs and generate billions of dollars to help fund clean energy solutions.

To address marine safety and environmental concerns raised about the Trans Mountain expansion project by indigenous groups, Transport Canada is leading on three measures: providing indigenous coastal communities with access to web-based maritime information; funding for marine safety equipment and training; and, finally, supporting a demonstration to advance low-noise and low-emission crude oil tankers servicing the Trans Mountain expansion. This includes up to $30 million to support the crude oil tanker technology demonstration program, which will support the construction of next-generation quiet vessel tankers powered by liquefied natural gas.

Reducing underwater noise and air emissions from those tankers will help mitigate the impacts of marine shipping on the environment, including vulnerable marine mammals such as the southern resident killer whale. Another $1.5 million will support the enhanced maritime situational awareness initiative, allowing three more indigenous communities to become pilot host communities. These funds will allow the department to continue to develop meaningful relationships with indigenous communities through the project.

I am proud to point out that Canada has one of the safest rail networks in the world, due in part to initiatives like the rail safety improvement program, which provides funding to improve rail safety security and reduce injuries and fatalities related to rail transportation. The program funds various activities, including roadway and intersection improvements, such as adding sidewalks, diversion roads, flashing lights, bells, gates and even full pedestrian overpasses, the adoption of innovative safety technologies for detection, data recording and communication, and research or studies related to enhancing the safety of rail lines. In the supplementary estimates, Transport Canada is seeking to defer nearly $10.5 million to reimburse funding recipients for eligible expenses that they incurred but have not yet submitted for reimbursement.

Other important measures include $1.5 million to help Transport Canada continue its work to protect and recover southern resident killer whales. This funding for the whales initiative would reduce the economic impacts on the shipping industry of an expanded voluntary vessel slowdown off the coast of British Columbia. Through a contribution agreement, the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority would administer funds to eligible vessel operators to offset the additional pilotage costs from participating in the slowdown.

The Canadian Air Transport Security Authority is also seeking approval to defer $26.1 million. The deferred funds would be used for a bomb detection system and other projects to streamline and increase screening activities. In budget 2019 and Budget Implementation Act, 2019, No. 1, the Government of Canada committed to ensure the transition of the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority from an agent Crown corporation to an independent, not-for-profit screening authority that would be responsible for providing air safety screening services.

Marine Atlantic provides a constitutionally mandated ferry service to and from Newfoundland. This is a vital service for travellers as well as for the companies that do business in that region. It brings more than one-quarter of all visitors to Newfoundland as well as two-thirds of all freight, including 90% of perishables and time-sensitive goods.

Through these supplementary estimates, Marine Atlantic is seeking $3 million in 2019-20 for fleet renewal to procure a new ferry. I am proud to be resuming my role as Minister of Transport in no small part because I am proud of the ongoing achievements of Transport Canada and other federal organizations in this important portfolio.

Our roads, our railways, our ports, our ferry services and our airports must be integrated and sustainable. They must enable Canadians and businesses to access world markets.

Our transportation system is vital for our economy and for our quality of life. I am looking forward to continuing the work we did during my first four years in this role.

There is no doubt that the financial resources requested under these supplementary estimates will enable us to continue this work.

I am ready to take questions.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Well, as I said, Monsieur Dubé, we have had an enormous volume of work to get through, as has this committee, as has Parliament, generally. The work program has advanced as rapidly as we could make it. It takes time and effort to put it all together. I'm glad we're at this stage, and I hope the parliamentary machinery will work well enough this week that we can get it across the finish line.

It has been a very significant agenda, when you consider there has been Bill C-7, Bill C-21, Bill C-22, Bill C-23, Bill C-37, Bill C-46, Bill C-66, Bill C-71, Bill C-59, Bill C-97, Bill C-83, Bill C-93 and Bill C-98. It's a big agenda and we have to get it all through the same relatively small parliamentary funnel.

Housing

[Rémi Massé, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Innovation]

Madam Speaker, I thank my NDP colleague for his question.

Every Canadian deserves a safe, affordable and accessible place to call home. However, as we all know, one of the hardest things for a first-time homebuyer is to scrape together enough funds for a down payment and cover the associated costs of a home purchase. That is why budget 2019 announced a number of new initiatives to make it more affordable for Canadians to buy a home.

This builds on Canada's national housing strategy by taking concrete action to increase access to housing that is affordable and to help middle-class Canadians realize their dream of owning a home.

To address the difficulty that young families may be have in becoming homeowners, budget 2019, through Bill C-97, which is currently before Parliament, proposes a new first-time homebuyer incentive. With this extra help in the shape of a shared equity mortgage through the CMHC, Canadians can lower their monthly mortgage payments, making home ownership within reach. Qualified first-time homebuyers who save their minimum 5% down payment would be eligible for a 10% shared equity mortgage for a newly built home or a 5% shared equity mortgage for an existing home.

That means that first-time homebuyers will be able to save money every month, giving them more money to pay down their traditional mortgage sooner or to spend on their priorities.

It is expected that approximately 100,000 first-time homebuyers will benefit from this incentive over the next three years. The program criteria will make it easier for eligible first-time homebuyers to buy homes they can afford.

The even more generous incentive for new builds may also encourage home construction, which will address some of the housing supply shortages in Canada, particularly in our largest cities.

Bill C-97 also proposes to increase the home buyers' plan withdrawal limit from $25,000 to $35,000. That means first-time homebuyers will be able to withdraw larger amounts from their RRSPs in order to buy a home. This is the first time the withdrawal limit has been increased in 10 years.

In closing, the new measures set out in budget 2019 will make housing more affordable by lowering the barriers to home ownership for first-time homebuyers and stimulating the Canadian housing market.

Budget Implementation Act, 2019, No. 1

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

It being 3:15 p.m., pursuant to order made Tuesday, May 28, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the amendment of the member for Beloeil—Chambly to the motion at third reading of Bill C-97.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-97, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 19, 2019 and other measures, be read the third time and passed, and of the amendment.