Budget Implementation Act, 2022, No. 1

An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022 and other measures

Sponsor

Status

This bill has received Royal Assent and is, or will soon become, law.

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament often publishes better independent summaries.

Part 1 implements certain income tax measures by
(a) providing a Labour Mobility Deduction for the temporary relocation of tradespeople to a work location;
(b) allowing for the immediate expensing of eligible property by certain Canadian businesses;
(c) allowing the Children’s Special Allowance to be paid in respect of a child who is maintained by an Indigenous governing body and providing consistent tax treatment of kinship care providers and foster parents receiving financial assistance from an Indigenous governing body and those receiving such assistance from a provincial government;
(d) doubling the allowable qualifying expense limit under the Home Accessibility Tax Credit;
(e) expanding the criteria for the mental functions impairment eligibility as well as the life-sustaining therapy category eligibility for the Disability Tax Credit;
(f) providing clarity in respect of the determination of the one-time additional payment under the GST/HST tax credit for the period 2019-2020;
(g) changing the delivery of Climate Action Incentive payments from a refundable credit claimed annually to a credit that is paid quarterly;
(h) temporarily extending the period for incurring eligible expenses and other deadlines under film or video production tax credits;
(i) providing a tax incentive for specified zero-emission technology manufacturing activities;
(j) providing the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) the discretion to accept late applications for the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy, the Canada Emergency Rent Subsidy and the Canada Recovery Hiring Program;
(k) including postdoctoral fellowship income in the definition of “earned income” for RRSP purposes;
(l) enabling registered charities to enter into charitable partnerships with organizations other than qualified donees under certain conditions;
(m) allowing automatic and immediate revocation of the registration of an organization as a charity where that organization is listed as a terrorist entity under the Criminal Code ;
(n) enabling the CRA to use taxpayer information to assist in the collection of Canada Emergency Business Account loans; and
(o) expanding capital cost allowance deductions to include new clean energy equipment.
It also makes related and consequential amendments to the Excise Tax Act , the Children’s Special Allowances Act , the Excise Act, 2001 , the Income Tax Regulations and the Children’s Special Allowance Regulations .
Part 2 implements certain Goods and Services Tax/Harmonized Sales Tax (GST/HST) measures by
(a) ensuring that all assignment sales in respect of newly constructed or substantially renovated residential housing are taxable supplies for GST/HST purposes; and
(b) extending eligibility for the expanded hospital rebate to health care services supplied by charities or non-profit organizations with the active involvement of, or on the recommendation of, either a physician or a nurse practitioner, irrespective of their geographic location.
Part 3 amends the Excise Act, 2001 , the Excise Act and other related texts in order to implement three measures.
Division 1 of Part 3 implements a new federal excise duty framework for vaping products by, among other things,
(a) requiring that manufacturers of vaping products obtain a vaping licence from the CRA;
(b) requiring that all vaping products that are removed from the premises of a vaping licensee to be entered into the Canadian market for retail sale be affixed with an excise stamp;
(c) imposing excise duties on vaping products to be paid by vaping product licensees;
(d) providing for administration and enforcement rules related to the excise duty framework on vaping products;
(e) providing the Governor in Council with authority to provide for an additional excise duty in respect of provinces and territories that enter into a coordinated vaping product taxation agreement with Canada; and
(f) making related amendments to other legislative texts, including to allow for a coordinated federal/provincial-territorial vaping product taxation system and to ensure that the excise duty framework applies properly to imported vaping products.
Division 2 of Part 3 amends the excise duty exemption under the Excise Act, 2001 for wine produced in Canada and composed wholly of agricultural or plant product grown in Canada.
Division 3 of Part 3 amends the Excise Act to eliminate excise duty for beer containing no more than 0.5% alcohol by volume.
Part 4 enacts the Select Luxury Items Tax Act . That Act creates a new taxation regime for domestic sales, and importations into Canada, of certain new motor vehicles and aircraft priced over $100,000 and certain new boats priced over $250,000. It provides that the tax applies if the total price or value of the subject select luxury item at the time of sale or importation exceeds the relevant price threshold. It provides that the tax is to be calculated at the lesser of 10% of the total price of the item and 20% of the total price of the item that exceeds the relevant price threshold. To promote compliance with the new taxation regime, that Act includes modern elements of administration and enforcement aligned with those found in other taxation statutes. Finally, this Part also makes related and consequential amendments to other texts to ensure proper implementation of the new tax and to ensure a cohesive and efficient administration by the CRA.
Division 1 of Part 5 retroactively renders a provision of the contract that is set out in the schedule to An Act respecting the Canadian Pacific Railway , chapter 1 of the Statutes of Canada, 1881, to be of no force or effect. It retroactively extinguishes any obligations and liabilities of Her Majesty in right of Canada and any rights and privileges of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company arising out of or acquired under that provision.
Division 2 of Part 5 amends the Nisga’a Final Agreement Act to give force of law to the entire Nisga’a Nation Taxation Agreement during the period that that Taxation Agreement is, by its terms, in force.
Division 3 of Part 5 repeals the Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act .
It also amends the Income Tax Act to exempt from taxation under that Act any income earned by the Safe Drinking Water Trust in accordance with the Settlement Agreement entered into on September 15, 2021 relating to long-term drinking water quality for impacted First Nations.
Division 4 of Part 5 authorizes payments to be made out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund for the purpose of addressing transit shortfalls and needs and improving housing supply and affordability.
Division 5 of Part 5 amends the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation Act by adding the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation and one other member to that Corporation’s Board of Directors.
Division 6 of Part 5 amends the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act to authorize additional payments to the provinces and territories.
Division 7 of Part 5 amends the Borrowing Authority Act to, among other things, count previously excluded borrowings made in the spring of 2021 in the calculation of the maximum amount that may be borrowed. It also amends the Financial Administration Act to change certain reporting requirements in relation to amounts borrowed under orders made under paragraph 46.1(c) of that Act.
Division 8 of Part 5 amends the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985 to, among other things, permit the establishment of a solvency reserve account in the pension fund of certain defined benefit plans and require the establishment of governance policies for all pension plans.
Division 9 of Part 5 amends the Special Import Measures Act to, among other things,
(a) provide that assessments of injury are to take into account impacts on workers;
(b) require the Canadian International Trade Tribunal to make inquiries with respect to massive importations when it is acting under section 42 of that Act;
(c) require that Tribunal to initiate expiry reviews of certain orders and findings;
(d) modify the deadline for notifying the government of the country of export of properly documented complaints;
(e) modify the criteria for imposing duties in cases of massive importations;
(f) modify the criteria for initiating anti-circumvention investigations; and
(g) remove the requirement that, in order to find circumvention, the principal cause of the change in a pattern of trade must be the imposition of anti-dumping or countervailing duties.
It also amends the Canadian International Trade Tribunal Act to provide that trade unions may, with the support of domestic producers, file global safeguard complaints.
Division 10 of Part 5 amends the Trust and Loan Companies Act and the Insurance Companies Act to, among other things, modernize corporate governance communications of financial institutions.
Division 11 of Part 5 amends the Insurance Companies Act to permit property and casualty companies and marine companies to not include the value of certain debt obligations when calculating their borrowing limit.
Division 12 of Part 5 enacts the Prohibition on the Purchase of Residential Property by Non-Canadians Act . The Act prohibits the purchase of residential property in Canada by non-Canadians unless they are exempted by the Act or its regulations or the purchase is made in certain circumstances specified in the regulations.
Division 13 of Part 5 amends the Parliament of Canada Act and makes consequential and related amendments to other Acts to, among other things,
(a) change the additional annual allowances that are paid to senators who occupy certain positions so that the government’s representatives and the Opposition in the Senate are eligible for the allowances for five positions each and the three other recognized parties or parliamentary groups in the Senate with the greatest number of members are eligible for the allowances for four positions each;
(b) provide that the Leader of the Government in the Senate or Government Representative in the Senate, the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and the Leader or Facilitator of every other recognized party or parliamentary group in the Senate are to be consulted on the appointment of certain officers and agents of Parliament; and
(c) provide that the Leader of the Government in the Senate or Government Representative in the Senate, the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and the Leader or Facilitator of every other recognized party or parliamentary group in the Senate may change the membership of the Standing Senate Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration.
Division 14 of Part 5 amends the Financial Administration Act in order to, among other things, allow the Treasury Board to provide certain services to certain entities.
Division 15 of Part 5 amends the Competition Act to enhance the Commissioner of Competition’s investigative powers, criminalize wage fixing and related agreements, increase maximum fines and administrative monetary penalties, clarify that incomplete price disclosure is a false or misleading representation, expand the definition of anti-competitive conduct, allow private access to the Competition Tribunal to remedy an abuse of dominance and improve the effectiveness of the merger notification requirements and other provisions.
Division 16 of Part 5 amends the Copyright Act to extend certain terms of copyright protection, including the general term, from 50 to 70 years after the life of the author and, in doing so, implements one of Canada’s obligations under the Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement.
Division 17 of Part 5 amends the College of Patent Agents and Trademark Agents Act to, among other things,
(a) ensure that the College has sufficient independence and flexibility to exercise its corporate functions;
(b) provide statutory immunity to certain persons involved in the regulatory activities of the College; and
(c) grant powers to the Registrar and Investigations Committee that will allow for improved efficiency in the complaints and discipline process.
Division 18 of Part 5 enacts the Civil Lunar Gateway Agreement Implementation Act to implement Canada’s obligations under the Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America concerning Cooperation on the Civil Lunar Gateway. It provides for powers to protect confidential information provided under the Memorandum. It also makes related amendments to the Criminal Code to extend its application to activities related to the Lunar Gateway and to the Government Employees Compensation Act to address the cross-waiver of liability set out in the Memorandum.
Division 19 of Part 5 amends the Corrections and Conditional Release Act to restrict the use of detention in dry cells to cases where the institutional head has reasonable grounds to believe that an inmate has ingested contraband or that contraband is being carried in the inmate’s rectum.
Division 20 of Part 5 amends the Customs Act in order to authorize its administration and enforcement by electronic means and to provide that the importer of record of goods is jointly and severally, or solidarily, liable to pay duties on the goods under section 17 of that Act with the importer or person authorized to account for the goods, as the case may be, and the owner of the goods.
Division 21 of Part 5 amends the Criminal Code to create an offence of wilfully promoting antisemitism by condoning, denying or downplaying the Holocaust through statements communicated other than in private conversation.
Division 22 of Part 5 amends the Judges Act , the Federal Courts Act , the Tax Court of Canada Act and certain other acts to, among other things,
(a) implement the Government of Canada’s response to the report of the sixth Judicial Compensation and Benefits Commission regarding salaries and benefits and to create the office of supernumerary prothonotary of the Federal Court;
(b) increase the number of judges for certain superior courts and include the new offices of Associate Chief Justice of the Court of Queen’s Bench of New Brunswick and Associate Chief Justice of the Court of Queen’s Bench for Saskatchewan;
(c) create the offices of prothonotary and supernumerary prothonotary of the Tax Court of Canada; and
(d) replace the term “prothonotary” with “associate judge”.
Division 23 of Part 5 amends the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to, among other things,
(a) authorize the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration to give instructions establishing categories of foreign nationals for the purposes of determining to whom an invitation to make an application for permanent residence is to be issued, as well as instructions setting out the economic goal that that Minister seeks to support in establishing the category;
(b) prevent an officer from issuing a visa or other document to a foreign national invited in respect of an established category if the foreign national is not in fact eligible to be a member of that category;
(c) require that the annual report to Parliament on the operation of that Act include a description of any instructions that establish a category of foreign nationals, the economic goal sought to be supported in establishing the category and the number of foreign nationals invited to make an application for permanent residence in respect of the category; and
(d) authorize that Minister to give instructions respecting the class of permanent residents in respect of which a foreign national must apply after being issued an invitation, if the foreign national is eligible to be a member of more than one class.
Division 24 of Part 5 amends the Old Age Security Act to correct a cross-reference in that Act to the Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1 .
Division 25 of Part 5
(a) amends the Canada Emergency Response Benefit Act to set out the consequences that apply in respect of a worker who received, for a four-week period, an income support payment and who received, for any week during the four-week period, any benefit, allowance or money referred to in subparagraph 6(1)(b)(ii) or (iii) of that Act;
(b) amends the Canada Emergency Student Benefit Act to set out the consequences that apply in respect of a student who received, for a four-week period, a Canada emergency student benefit and who received, for any week during the four-week period, any benefit, allowance or money referred to in subparagraph 6(1)(b)(ii) or (iii) of that Act; and
(c) amends the Employment Insurance Act to set out the consequences that apply in respect of a claimant who received, for any week, an employment insurance emergency response benefit and who received, for that week, any payment or benefit referred to in paragraph 153.9(2)(c) or (d) of that Act.
Division 26 of Part 5 amends the Employment Insurance Act to, among other things,
(a) replace employment benefits and support measures set out in Part II of that Act with employment support measures that are intended to help insured participants and other workers — including workers in groups underrepresented in the labour market — to obtain and keep employment; and
(b) allow the Canada Employment Insurance Commission to enter into agreements to provide for the payment of contributions to organizations for the costs of measures that they implement and that are consistent with the purpose and guidelines set out in Part II of that Act.
It also makes a consequential amendment to the Income Tax Act .
Division 27 of Part 5 amends the Employment Insurance Act to specify the maximum number of weeks for which benefits may be paid in a benefit period to certain seasonal workers and to extend, until October 28, 2023, the increase in the maximum number of weeks for which those benefits may be paid. It also amends the Budget Implementation Act, 2021, No. 1 to add a transitional measure in relation to amendments to the Employment Insurance Regulations that are found in that Act.
Division 28 of Part 5 amends the Canada Pension Plan to make corrections respecting
(a) the calculation of the minimum qualifying period and the contributory period for the purposes of the post-retirement disability benefit;
(b) the determination of values for contributors who have periods excluded from their contributory periods by reason of disability; and
(c) the attribution of amounts for contributors who have periods excluded from their contributory periods because they were family allowance recipients.
Division 29 of Part 5 amends An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Canada Labour Code to, among other things,
(a) shorten the period before which an employee begins to earn one day of medical leave of absence with pay per month;
(b) standardize the conditions related to the requirement to provide a medical certificate following a medical leave of absence, regardless of whether the leave is paid or unpaid;
(c) authorize the Governor in Council to make regulations in certain circumstances, including to modify certain provisions respecting medical leave of absence with pay;
(d) ensure that, for the purposes of medical leave of absence, an employee who changes employers due to the lease or transfer of a work, undertaking or business or due to a contract being awarded through a retendering process is deemed to be continuously employed with one employer; and
(e) provide that the provisions relating to medical leave of absence come into force no later than December 1, 2022.
Division 30 of Part 5 amends the Canada Business Corporations Act to, among other things,
(a) require certain corporations to send to the Director appointed under that Act information on individuals with significant control on an annual basis or when a change occurs;
(b) allow that Director to provide all or part of that information to an investigative body, the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada or any prescribed entity; and
(c) clarify that, for the purposes of subsection 21.1(7) of that Act, it is the securities of a corporation, not the corporation itself, that are listed and posted for trading on a designated stock exchange.
Division 31 of Part 5 amends the Special Economic Measures Act and the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law) to, among other things,
(a) create regimes allowing for the forfeiture of property that has been seized or restrained under those Acts;
(b) specify that the proceeds resulting from the disposition of those properties are to be used for certain purposes; and
(c) allow for the sharing of information between certain persons in certain circumstances.
It also makes amendments to the Seized Property Management Act in relation to those forfeiture of property regimes.

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.

Votes

June 9, 2022 Passed 3rd reading and adoption of Bill C-19, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022 and other measures
June 9, 2022 Failed Bill C-19, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022 and other measures (recommittal to a committee)
June 9, 2022 Failed 3rd reading and adoption of Bill C-19, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022 and other measures (subamendment)
June 7, 2022 Passed Concurrence at report stage of Bill C-19, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022 and other measures
June 7, 2022 Failed Bill C-19, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022 and other measures (report stage amendment)
June 7, 2022 Passed Bill C-19, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022 and other measures (report stage amendment)
June 7, 2022 Failed Bill C-19, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022 and other measures (report stage amendment)
June 7, 2022 Failed Bill C-19, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022 and other measures (report stage amendment)
June 6, 2022 Passed Time allocation for Bill C-19, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022 and other measures
May 10, 2022 Passed 2nd reading of Bill C-19, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022 and other measures
May 10, 2022 Failed 2nd reading of Bill C-19, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022 and other measures (reasoned amendment)
May 10, 2022 Failed 2nd reading of Bill C-19, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022 and other measures (subamendment)
May 9, 2022 Passed Time allocation for Bill C-19, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022 and other measures

The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca

I call this meeting to order.

I see Monsieur Ste-Marie's hand up.

Monsieur Ste-Marie, I will recognize you after my opening remarks.

Welcome to meeting number 52 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance. Pursuant to the order of reference of May 10, 2022, the committee is meeting on Bill C-19, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022, and other measures.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format pursuant to the House order of November 25, 2021. Members are attending in person in the room and remotely using the Zoom application. Per the directive of the Board of Internal Economy on March 10, 2022, all those attending the meeting in person must wear a mask except for members who are in their place during proceedings.

I would like to make a few comments for the benefit of witnesses and members. Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. For those participating by video conference, click on the microphone icon to activate your mike, and please mute yourself when you are not speaking. Interpretation for those on Zoom is available for this meeting. You have the choice, at the bottom of your screen, of the floor, English or French. For those in the room, you can use the earpiece and select the desired channel.

This is a reminder that all comments should be addressed through the chair. For members in the room, if you wish to speak, please raise your hand. For members on Zoom, please use the “raise hand” function. The clerk and I will manage the speaking order as best we can. We appreciate your patience and understanding in this regard.

Pursuant to the motion adopted in committee on Monday, May 9, the committee will proceed today with the clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-19. We have witnesses from various departments here with us who will be able to answer questions as we move through the clauses of the bill.

I'm recognizing Monsieur Ste-Marie, who has his hand up.

May 26th, 2022 / 12:45 p.m.


See context

Parliamentary Budget Officer, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer

Yves Giroux

Thank you very much for having asked these two questions.

With respect to your first question, it's true that the tax on luxury goods will increase federal revenue, but unfortunately decrease provincial revenue, at least for provinces that have a sales tax on goods of this kind.

Your second question was about warnings. We haven't studied the parts or divisions that did not include financial provisions or that did not generate considerable expenditures.

However, we did note that division 6 of Part 5 is identical to what is in Bill C‑17. I'm talking here of the transfer of $2 billion to the provinces to reduce health care wait times. These two provisions have exactly the same goal; at least that's how I understand it. I believe that it is included because the government expects to have Bill C‑19 adopted before Bill C‑17. We believe that this deserves the attention of parliamentarians, to avoid duplication in the objectives and expenditures. We are, after all, talking about $2 billion.

Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

As I have only two and a half minutes left, I'll ask my questions in succession.

My first question is about the new tax on certain luxury goods.

This tax will increase the federal government's revenue, but it will decrease provincial revenue because the number of sales will drop and the provincial sales tax on such goods will apply to a smaller tax base. I'd like confirmation that I've understood this properly.

My second question is about Bill C‑19. I'm afraid that the committee will not be able to fully study this mammoth bill of over 400 pages in length, and which includes many parts and divisions.

Do you and your team have any warnings for us, or anything they would like to point out to us, in connection with Bill C‑19? I don't know whether you've had enough time to examine the entire bill, and Part 5 in particular.

I'm thinking, for example, of division 9, which concerns the Special Import Measures Act and other areas. Do you think there are any dangers here?

Is division 15, which is about the Competition Act, put together coherently?

And what of division 16, in connection with the Copyright Act, and division 17, with respect to patents?

I'm also surprised to see, in a budget implementation bill, that there should be a mention of the Civil International Space Station Agreement Implementation Act. That's in division 18.

And division 19 addresses prison strip searches.

Suggested amendments to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and the Employment Insurance Act are also found in this bill.

Are you looking at all of that, because it's a budget implementation bill, or are you somewhat overwhelmed, as we are, by the scope of this bill?

Do you have any warnings for us?

Marilyn Gladu Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON

Thank you, Chair.

Certainly I do support the removal of 32, but I want to be clear, because if we say we want to split it, normally what that means is that the Speaker of the House will split the bill and you will vote Bill C-19 separately from division 32. I don't know if that is exactly the intent of Ms. Chabot. I think she agrees that this needs further consultation, which is what we heard from the witnesses, and there's a full review of the EI process that's going to go on. If that's the case, perhaps the word “remove” would more accurately reflect the intention that she expressed.

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

Mr. Chair, it is important to understand the meaning of the word “scinder”. In fact, I believe the meaning is the same in English.

The word “scinder” means that this part of Bill C‑19 is going to be treated separately. We want this part to be split so that it is dealt with separately, by another committee, and there is discussion. That's what I got from the consensus and the comments from the workers' representative, the Employment Insurance Commission representative. This is no small thing.

The Employment Insurance Commission, which has a worker representative and an employer representative, sent a joint and unanimous letter to the ministers concerned. It asked that the debate be held in a different framework than that of Bill C‑19.

In Bill C‑19, the translation does not match that used in the unanimous committee report. The word “scinder” means “to treat separately”.

Recommending to the Standing Committee on Finance that this part be split up means that we are recommending that this part be treated separately, in the way the government would like us to treat it. It is essential that it be treated separately. That is what the word “scinder” means.

Bonita Zarrillo NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank Madame Chabot for the motion. I do believe that there's consensus among the witnesses that this needs to be removed.

I wanted to get some clarity on what the word “split” would mean in regard to the removal of this portion of the budget implementation act or how “split” would be interpreted by the government.

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First of all, I want to thank all the members of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities for allowing this study on important sections of the employment insurance system. This is within our area of expertise and jurisdiction. I look forward to dealing with the much needed comprehensive reform. At the moment, we have heard witnesses primarily on division 32.

I want to inform you that we have tabled a notice of motion. It is in proper form and we have forwarded it to the clerk in both official languages. My point is this. In light of the testimony heard on division 32 of part 5 of Bill C‑19, the best recommendation we can make to the Standing Committee on Finance is to withdraw division 32 of part 5 of omnibus Bill C‑19 for separate study.

If I were to summarize the comments of all the witnesses we heard from on Tuesday and Wednesday, including Mr. Bolduc of the FTQ, they believe that division 32 of part 5 of Bill C‑19 should be part of a separate bill and therefore removed from this omnibus bill so that the reform can be the subject of thorough review and deliberation. The same is true for the Mouvement autonome et solidaire des sans-emploi, MASSE. This morning, the three witnesses were unanimously of the same opinion.

There is a consensus among employers and workers. They say that they were consulted and that a report was arrived at, but that what was put in Bill C‑19 does not correspond to the consensus established after many consultations. The government, in an August 15, 2019, Employment and Social Development Canada news release, for which Minister Duclos was responsible at the time, made the following commitment:

The Canada Employment Insurance Commission will become responsible for first-level EI appeals through the creation of a new tripartite decision-making tribunal called the Employment Insurance Boards of Appeal.

This is a cry from the heart that it is extremely important that this be done. Moreover, we do not understand why the government included this in Bill C‑19. One witness told us that it could not have done a better job of clouding the issue. Even I, as employment critic, was surprised to see this section in Bill C‑19. There was no mention in the budget of any intention to extend pilot projects for workers in the seasonal industry. At least it looks good, because it has a cost impact. If we had done nothing, it would have meant abandoning a measure that provides interim support until comprehensive EI reform.

In short, the wisest proposal we can make to the Standing Committee on Finance is to withdraw division 32 of part 5 of Bill C‑19.

I will read the motion:

Based on the evidence received and heard in committee, in considering divisions 26, 27, 29 and 32 of Bill C‑19, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022, and other measures, the committee recommends to the Standing Committee on Finance that division 32 of Bill C‑19 be split.

Yves Giroux Parliamentary Budget Officer, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer

Good afternoon Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

Thank you for the invitation to appear before you today.

We are pleased to be here to discuss the analysis of your study of Bill C‑19, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022 and other measures.

With me today are Xiaoyi Yan, Director, Budgetary Analysis.

In compliance with the mandate of the Parliamentary Budget Officer, which consists of providing independent and non-partisan analyses to Parliament, we published our analysis of the 2022 budget on April 22. In the report, we identified several key issues to assist parliamentarians in their budgetary deliberations, and also presented updated fiscal and economic projections.

I will now continue my remarks in English.

In terms of transparency, budget 2022 includes long-term economic and fiscal projections, which improve fiscal transparency and contribute to sustainability analysis. However, the analysis provided in the budget would be further enhanced by the inclusion of additional details, such as long-term projections of old age security, employment insurance and children's benefits.

It's also worth noting that while the budget includes some of the measures from the Liberal Party's 2021 election platform, the implementation of any remaining platform measures and additional commitments not accounted for in the budget, such as pharmacare, will impact the budgetary balance going forward.

Our report also notes the continued misalignment of financial reporting, as budget 2022 was tabled a month after the government's main estimates. Parliamentarians could be well served by adopting a new legislative or administrative framework to enforce better alignment among the government's various financial reports.

Following this assessment, on May 17 we published a stochastic debt sustainability analysis of the medium-term outlook presented in budget 2022. The report provides a stress test of the government's financial position. Based on past experience, our results suggest that the government could maintain debt sustainability over the medium term. However, our results also suggest that on balance, there is upside risk to the budget 2022 projection of gross debt as a share of GDP.

In addition to our reports, my office has also released independent cost estimates of selected measures contained in budget 2022, including the mobility tax deduction for tradespersons and indentured apprentices and the luxury goods sales tax.

We would be pleased to respond to any questions you may have regarding our analysis of budget 2022 or other PBO work.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

What I find interesting about this discussion is that we are talking about employment insurance, and the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities is the place to do it. If we are dealing with issues that affect something other than the divisions before us, it is because they are part of the long-awaited comprehensive reform of employment insurance. This is actually part of the mandate of the Minister of Employment, who was to present us with a framework for employment insurance reform before June 2022.

There is hope, at least I hope so, because there is a lot of discussion, and it concerns the main stakeholders, those who pay into EI: workers and employers. So I thank you for your testimony. It will enrich our future discussions. At least, we hope so.

What worries me is that we go to the trouble of consulting with employers and workers on what a reform of the appeals process should be, we turn off the lights for two years and nine months, perhaps for good reason, and then all of a sudden we think of a reform and put it in a budget implementation bill. It leaves an odd impression about the government's intentions.

If I understand correctly, it is imperative that we recommend to the Standing Committee on Finance that Bill C‑19 be split to allow for a real discussion on reforming the appeals process based on the recommendations that you worked on and were consulted on at the time, before 2019. You can simply answer yes or no.

May 26th, 2022 / 11:35 a.m.


See context

Secretary-Treasurer, Centrale des syndicats du Québec

Luc Beauregard

Thank you, Ms. Chabot.

Why consider clause 32 of Bill C‑19 separately? It has been said, the bill is huge. It covers a lot of ground. We believe this section, which deals with employment insurance, should be dealt with on its own because of its importance to Canadians.

We saw quick action being taken during the pandemic. As a result, Canada was able to move forward and continue to operate despite the pandemic, which affected other countries' economies and workforces much more severely.

In our view, there are significant aspects of Bill C‑19 that do not reflect the interests of workers.

We're referring to a tripartite approach, that is a departure from what existed before.

You shouldn't make the 2012 mistake of not holding consultations again. We need to get back on track, and the EI file needs to be worked on separately.

May 26th, 2022 / 11:35 a.m.


See context

President, Centrale des syndicats démocratiques

Luc Vachon

Good morning, Ms. Chabot. Thank you.

We had initially asked for clause 32 to be considered separately so that the issues it covers could be examined in greater depth. Frankly, since its reform, the Social Security Tribunal has done major damage for several years. It has neither been efficient nor cost‑effective.

You’d want to avoid making the same mistakes again when overhauling the tribunal and the way it operates. We’d like for things to be set straight, as they should’ve been from the start. There seems to be consensus on a tripartite model, which is excellent news. There were consultations, but will the outcomes of those consultations be taken into consideration?

We had asked for consultations because Bill C‑19 is colossal, just huge. Our concern and the reason why we wanted to have clause 32 considered separately is that potential corrections have been discussed for years. Opportunities like these don’t arise very often, so it’s important not to fumble. Any misstep could be felt for years.

We called for a separate review of clause 32 out of a desire to achieve the best possible outcome. We would be concerned if that did not happen.

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the witnesses for joining us.

I will make a short introduction by saying how relevant I think it is for the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities to have taken the time to hear from witnesses and for them to have accepted our invitation to testify on important provisions concerning employment insurance. Those provisions don't affect the budget so much, which is the purpose of Bill C‑19. They are at the heart of an employment insurance reform, which concerns things like training and seasonal industry issues.

We are still waiting for the comprehensive modernization of the employment insurance act. Those key issues are now included in the budget—in other words, in Bill C‑19, which is an omnibus bill that must be passed as quickly as possible. Those don't seem like winning conditions to me.

Concerning division 32, the witnesses the committee heard from—Mr. Vachon, Mr. Beauregard and Ms. Nord—and the witnesses we heard from on Tuesday, are unanimous on the reform of the Social Security Tribunal of Canada. While consultations have been held, recommendations have been made and foundations have been built, everyone is wondering why we are unexpectedly finding this today in Bill C‑19.

Why is it important to remove this division from Bill C‑19? Why will that be important moving forward in the reform?

Let's go in order. Ms. Nord, Mr. Vachon and Mr. Beauregard, you can take turns answering.

May 26th, 2022 / 11:20 a.m.


See context

Senior Director, Workforce Strategies and Inclusive Growth, Canadian Chamber of Commerce

Leah Nord

That's correct. It was in the fall of 2018; I believe it was October 2018. There was a framework developed to modernize the SST process. It did look very much like the previous one, to be honest. A lot of the ways did lead to that previous structure. Again, in 2019, through announcements, we were led to believe that framework was going ahead, and this is not what we're seeing in its entirety within division 32 of Bill C-19.

Thank you.

Stephanie Kusie Conservative Calgary Midnapore, AB

Ms. Nord, what I'm hearing you say is that you thought adequate consultation and proper consultation was done in the 2019 process, and you feel that consultation process was not done for Bill C-19 for division 32.

May 26th, 2022 / 11:20 a.m.


See context

Senior Director, Workforce Strategies and Inclusive Growth, Canadian Chamber of Commerce

Leah Nord

Yes, that is our recommendation, one of those coming out of our response to Bill C-19 that I reiterated today for reasons that I can repeat. The changes that are proposed in division 32, part 5, of Bill C-19 are not what we expected. There is reference to the KPMG evaluation. There was also a 2018 codevelopment process that was truly tripartite.

On a personal note, I had the opportunity to participate in that process, and I laud it as an example of a tripartite discussion. There were two or three days where it was government, business and labour sitting together. We had principles, we went through a process, and we developed a framework.

You also heard reference to the 2019 announcement where all of us thought that those changes were reflected in the recommendations from KPMG and the process we had gone into. As you can hear from many here, this isn't exactly what we thought, and it doesn't align with the principles. We think that it should be taken out of an omnibus bill and that it deserves its own attention for those reasons as well as because it's an incredibly complex process. We want it to get the proper and deliberative attention it deserves.

Thank you.