Bill C-19

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

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.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Yes.

The subamendment to the amendment, to me, at the surface level, seems like it is a good faith exercise, but unfortunately, it's not.

Again, that's not on Mr. Beech. I know that he has a job to do. In fact, Mr. Chair, as a former parliamentary secretary I used to joke when people asked what I did. I'd say, “Well, there are really two types of parliamentary secretaries, and they both burn shoe leather. One shines the shoes of their minister, and the other one gets work done.” I'll let Mr. Beech decide which one he is.

With regard to this, the good faith nature of Mr. Ste-Marie's original amendment was to have a thoughtful scrutiny of several areas of Bill C-19.

On Bill C-19, I think it's important to get something on the record, Mr. Chair, because I've been raising concerns right from the very beginning. You will remember better than anyone that in front of this committee, we had officials from the Department of Finance. I had asked specifically, because we had a technical briefing by the parliamentary secretary on the ways and means motion, whether everything that was covered in that technical briefing was in Bill C-19, and they said no, there were other additions. We have yet to hear back from Department of Finance, and that is raising some questions.

I'll tell you what else concerns me. The copy that I have in this place is what I received as a courtesy copy. I went online, Mr. Chair, and found that there was a whole section from page 421 onward that simply cuts off. Here's page 421 in my copy; notice that it just goes blank. I find out at this late juncture that there are a large number of clauses in here, and even some charts and some areas with regard to duties on vaping products and qualifying flights for remote communities, and then a whole schedule on a table of weeks of benefits for seasonal workers.

I have to say that this process by this government has not been a good one, and that's where I see a pattern. Nixon used to say something to the effect that he was paranoid but that people were actually going after him. I guess I'm paranoid, but I see a pattern here. We see time and time again that the government gives us a courtesy copy, but it's not the whole bill. The government does a technical briefing, and it's not the whole bill.

Now, the parliamentary secretary has made a subamendment to a good faith initiative by Ste-Marie, and it is not in good faith, Mr. Chair. These are all huge challenges that members of Parliament have faced in this process.

Bill C-19—Time Allocation Motion

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I want to start by noting that I have supported time allocation motions in the past and we had a sufficient number of speakers. I will also mention, on the point by the government House leader, that I have been similarly concerned by some of the motions for concurrence we have seen here over the past week. That being said, my understanding is that we have had 11 speakers so far on Bill C-19 at second reading, out of 338 members in this place. This is a substantial piece of legislation. As we have heard from the Bloc, there are 452 pages.

How can we ensure that sufficient debate is provided? If the government House leader is concerned with some tactics from opposition parties, why is the response to those tactics to further erode the quality of debate that we can have in this place?

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Salaberry—Suroît, QC]

Madam Speaker, I knew that this time allocation motion was coming, but I did not think it would be moved so soon. It is important for people to know that we have not yet even had five hours of debate on Bill C-19, which is a big bill with numerous measures. Many sectors have been calling us after seeing the budget. We need to debate this big, important bill, and five hours is not enough time.

I am surprised because I think this demonstrates carelessness and contempt on the part of the government. The Liberals are saying that we have debated this long enough, and they are eager for the bill to be passed. We, too, are eager for it to pass, but debating bills is part of our job. I am therefore very surprised, and even appalled, that this motion was moved today when I was not expecting it until later.

I think that is an exaggeration. I think the government is counting on its tacit agreement with the NDP to prevent meaningful and thorough debate, especially in the case of Bill C-19. This is not a small bill; it is 452 pages long and the Standing Committee on Finance has already begun its study.

This is not a question, but I will say to my colleague that it is a bit discouraging to see that the leader continues to be contemptuous of the legislative work that we have to do here in the House.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am not quite surprised by this. The only thing surprising me is that the motion was not seconded by the NDP House leader.

This is just amazing to me. This is a government that argued with its coalition partners in the NDP about Motion No. 11. What Motion No. 11 was going to do was expand the time, give more opportunities for members to speak by expanding the hours, and yet, with just two and a half days of debate, the government moved time allocation on an important piece of legislation, doing the exact opposite of what it argued Motion No. 11 was going to do.

Before the Liberals spare us the false indignation of obstruction, in fact what the government is doing is utilizing this motion to obstruct members of Parliament from doing their job, which is providing oversight and scrutiny on important pieces of legislation. Therefore, it is not surprising to me that we are at this point. I know the opposition House leader is going to go on about Friday and about the movement of a motion to committee, splitting up a bill. We called a vote. There was no reason for Bill C-19 not to be debated, except the filibuster by the government.

My question is a simple one. Is it not true that the government House leader and the Prime Minister, in fact, because of this tag-team partnership with the NDP, actually have exactly what they want and need in this Parliament, and that is an audience, not an opposition?

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

moved:

That, in relation to Bill C-19, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022 and other measures, not more than one further sitting day shall be allotted to the consideration at second reading stage of the bill; and that, 15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders on the day allotted to the consideration at second reading stage of the said bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this order, and, in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

In essence, ultimately all of us are going to have to monitor every single meeting that happens there, or hear from the testimony, and then draw in amendments. To me, that doesn't seem like a great process. If those committees had the ability to do clause-by-clause consideration, it would make a lot more sense.

Lastly, Mr. Chair, we have witnesses today. I believe that you, Mr. Chair, in good faith, worked with the clerk to arrange for them to be here. Can you perhaps arrange for a future committee business meeting and show some respect for those witnesses who are here to speak to Bill C-19 and are prepared for that?

I move that we adjourn this debate and allow you, Mr. Chair, to go to the witnesses.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

That's excellent.

This is the next question I have, Mr. Chair. Obviously, the committee itself has chosen to do a prestudy of Bill C-19. Inevitably one may ask, particularly thanks to the confidence agreement and the supply agreement that the NDP has with the Liberals, whether, if they were in such a mood—because we know that when the Prime Minister gets into a mood, he gets what he wants—it is possible that the House might just send Bill C-19 in its entirety to us, and where does that put our committee?

Are we actually asking these committees to do clause-by-clause study, and what if that's in conflict with the order from the House? Maybe you and the clerk could speak to that.

I don't want to agree to do something, Mr. Chair, that ends up actually running against the House.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First of all, I thank Mr. Beech for providing us with the text of his subamendment in French; I am very pleased.

I apologize for not putting my proposed amendment in writing in both official languages. Incidentally, Mr. Chair, I thank you for accepting it.

With respect to the subamendment, I agree with the proposal to divide the bill among the various committees. However, I have reservations about the deadline, as I said before.

Politics is the art of compromise without surrendering principles. I can accept the subamendment, but I would have preferred, as Mr. Chambers has just pointed out, that there be no deadline for the other committees or that there not be a later date. I am uncomfortable with that, but if that is the compromise we reach, I am prepared to accept it. However, I am not prepared to set a deadline today for the work of the Standing Committee on Finance on Bill C‑19.

I am prepared to vote on the subamendment and the amendment, and I will move another amendment to the main motion to remove paragraph (b), so that there is no limit to the committee's study at this time. We can come back to it if the work progresses well. After that, the other amendment could be put to the vote.

[Terry Beech, Liberal, Burnaby North—Seymour, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all members for their comments.

I certainly have been working diligently with all members in various phone calls over time to take into account all the needs, wants and desires, including trying to get more study time than we've had on average over the previous five years. In listening to the debate now, I've been feverishly working on language that I hope will meet the majority of needs for the committee.

I'd like to move a subamendment, I guess, to Gabriel's amended motion, and I think it would be best if I read in the entire language of a revised motion. I have to get this over to the clerk as well. Let me read it and see if this meets the needs of members. It would be:

That:

(a) the Chair of the Committee write, as promptly as possible, to the Chairs of the following standing committees to invite them to study the subject matter of the following provisions of Bill C-19, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 7, 2022 and other measures,:

(i) the Standing Committee on International Trade, Part 5, divisions 9 of the Bill;

(ii) the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology, Part 5, divisions 15, 16 and 17 of the Bill;

(iii) the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, Part 5, divisions 26, 27, 29 and 32 of the Bill;

(iv) the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, Part 5, division 23 of the Bill;

(v) the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, Part 5, divisions 18, 19, 21 and 22 of the Bill;

(b) for the standing committees listed in (a),

(i) recommendations in relation to the provisions considered by them, in a letter to the Chair of the Standing Committee on Finance, in both official languages, no later than 4:00 p.m. on Friday, May 20, 2022;

(ii) if a standing committee listed in (a) chooses not consider the subject matter of the provisions, it advise the Chair of the Standing Committee on Finance by letter, in both official languages, no later than 4:00 p.m. on Friday, May 13, 2019.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

—Mr. Chair, of course, it gives me the right to respond to that point of order.

All that is to simply say that I have continually referred back to Mr. Ste-Marie's efforts to spin out different elements of this budget implementation bill in order to make sure it goes to the committees that are best positioned to review those issues.

The reason that is the case is that this government has tabled an omnibus bill. This is not exclusively a spending and taxation bill, as most budgets are; this is an omnibus bill that is basically a grab bag of issues that the government has decided to push into a budget bill, and it's providing us with great frustration because we can't exercise the oversight we're supposed to.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Unfortunately, Mr. Chair, the parliamentary secretary has now gone from trying to tell just this committee what to do to telling multiple House of Commons committees how to do their work.

In fact, Mr. Chair, I think you out of all people would know, having worked so closely with the clerk, that everyone wants to come to finance. We're one of the busiest committees. There are other committees, such as industry, that are extremely seized as well. To suddenly say that you have 11 days to report back on major areas means members would have to stop what they're doing, immediately start a call for witnesses and then immediately start planning sessions. By the time they even got to the first meeting, we probably already would have hit that hard deadline of May 20. That is patently unfair to those other committees.

I totally understand that the member from the Bloc Québécois, MP Ste-Marie, is honourably trying to do his job, Mr. Chair, and trying to work with this and find a way so that he can have his concerns raised in front of those different committees, but you know what? Conservatives have been taking a different approach right from the start. You will know that we've been bringing in shadow ministers who have specific responsibilities to ask questions of the officials specifically on Bill C‑19. We will continue to do that. Unfortunately for my friend from Quebec, MP Ste-Marie, even though his heart and his temperament are 100% in the right place, to have the parliamentary secretary now compound the damage that I think this government is doing to the independence....

Last week, Mr. Chair, as you will remember—you were there in question period—I asked specifically the Minister of National Revenue if she would support a Conservative motion, my colleague MP Stewart's motion, about the concerns of allegations around advance pricing arrangements at CRA. She said, “Oh, well, the member knows that we don't take opinions at all on who comes before committee.” Well, I guess the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance certainly doesn't mind telling the finance committee what to do. Our parliamentary secretary sure doesn't seem to mind telling other committees what to do. I think that's a bit of a shameful process.

Look, I'm not going to make it personal. I know that Mr. Beech as a parliamentary secretary has a job that he is given. I would simply suggest to him to maybe reflect on the points, because it's a long way from when he was elected in 2015, when parliamentary secretaries could come into the room, listen to the debate and maybe have conversations on the sidelines with their other members of Parliament. They would not be voting members.

That changed in 2019. They became voting members.

Now it has changed yet again, Mr. Chair. Now we have the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance dictating not just what the finance committee will do but actually what multiple independent parliamentary committees will do, at the drop of a hat. I think it's not a good faith request that he's made of MP Ste-Marie. Not for one second would I hold it against Mr. Ste-Marie—not in any way, shape or form—that he would be as mad as heck at this government for how they are treating this parliamentary process, and particularly this budget implementation act in this committee, so I would—

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I will speak to the motion. Bill C‑19, which is the budget implementation bill, contains a whole host of measures and legislation and hundreds of pages. We have had discussions about this. My intention is to ask my committee colleagues that we take the time to consider the implications of each part of the motion.

During the pandemic, the House rushed through government bills, and often had to come back with other bills to correct deficiencies that had not been identified. This is because we did not have time to study every implication of the proposed legislation. The 10‑day paid leave provision is reappearing in Bill C‑19 today because it had been worded improperly.

There are a lot of items in this bill. One of my major concerns is the application of the luxury tax. As I have often said, I am very much in favour of it in principle, as I think most of my colleagues are, but I have serious concerns about the impact on the manufacturing sector that we would not have taken into account. There has been no impact assessment on that. My Conservative colleagues have talked about the impact of this tax on the shipbuilding industry, particularly with regard to ship maintenance. I have talked a lot about the impact on aircraft. I hope that the committee will eventually suggest amendments to the proposed bill to the minister so that the manufacturing sector is not overly affected by this new tax.

We understand the government's intention in terms of passing this bill by the end of the parliamentary session, but as there is a huge amount to consider, I would suggest two solutions. The first is to work overtime in committee to study each section in depth. In that case, I would ask my colleagues who are the spokespersons for their parties on different issues to appear before the committee, accompanied by their witnesses, so that everything is dealt with properly.

The alternative, which has often been used in the past, would be to divide the study of the bill among various committees in the following way.

The Standing Committee on International Trade could consider, among other things, division 9 of part 5.

The Standing Committee on Industry and Technology, on the other hand, could consider divisions 15, 16 and 17 of part 5.

The Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities would consider divisions 26, 27, 29 and 32 of part 5, which deal with various aspects of employment insurance.

The Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration would deal with division 23 of part 5 relating to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

Finally, the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights would review divisions 18, 19, 21 and 22 of part 5.

I know that other committees have a lot of work and studies to do, but we are dealing with a major piece of legislation from the government here, and it deserves the full attention of members.

On Mr. Beech's motion, at this time, I am uncomfortable with setting a date for completion, as we have not had an exhaustive discussion and there are many implications related to the legislation being discussed in mammoth Bill C‑19. I would therefore be in favour of removing this part. I would also be in favour of dividing the study between various committees. I understand what that means for the other committees, but I think it is necessary to get to where we want to go.

So I am proposing an amendment to the motion. I have not drafted it yet, but it is to divide the study of the bill among the committees that I named earlier.

If it is convenient for everyone, I can name them again, speaking slowly.

I suggest that we refer part 5, division 9 to the Standing Committee on International Trade for consideration; part 5, divisions 15, 16 and 17 to the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology; to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, divisions 26, 27, 29 and 32 of part 5; to the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, division 23 of part 5; and to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, divisions 18, 19, 21 and 22 of part 5.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[Terry Beech, Liberal, Burnaby North—Seymour, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning, members. As I was saying before, I hope everyone had a tremendous Mother's Day.

As we all know, I circulated a motion last week with regard to our study on the budget implementation act. After speaking with members from all parties, I believe we have majority support to proceed in this matter.

I therefore move the motion as circulated.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 43 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee is meeting on the subject matter of 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.

Alleged Interference of the Government in the Work of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Madam Speaker, in the short time that I have, I will just remind the House that all of today could have been avoided had the question been put. We would have had a vote on Monday. We could have resumed the government legislation and debated Bill C-19, but instead, in a shockingly funny situation, the government moved time allocation on itself.

I know that the member for New Westminster—Burnaby showed his complete indignation to the fact that petitions have not been read. The member supported the government moving to orders of the day all week. That is why they were not.

I am seeking unanimous consent, and I hope that the others will agree, to move that the House proceed to presenting petitions today.