Canadian Heritage Committee on March 23rd, 2022

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Thank you so much.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, John Nater]

Thank you, Mr. Bittle.

That does concludes our round of questioning. I want to thank all of our witnesses.

I'd like to thank the witnesses who were with us today. It was a good meeting.

You're now free to go on with the rest of your day. Enjoy the rest of your day, and thank you for your time. You can now disconnect.

Committee members, could you stay on the line and stay in the room? I'm not going to suspend and we're not going to go in camera, if that's okay with everyone on the committee. We'll stay in public to do a quick couple of items of committee business. We'll just pause. We won't suspend.

Okay. I think we're back to committee members only.

We did leave our meeting on Monday without a decision on hearing from certain tax experts at this committee. There were some recommendations made by the Library of Parliament; it is up to the committee if we invite additional witnesses specifically on the tax side of things. I would look for direction from the committee as to what the preference is.

Ms. Gladu, I see your hand raised.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

I think we've heard that there's an issue, so we should get some advice from those in the know, and perhaps a variety of opinions, as there's usually a diversity of thought on these things. I certainly think that would be fine.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, John Nater]

It's Mr. Waugh and then Mr. Champoux.

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

Definitely the Canada Revenue Agency should be invited. It would be first and foremost out of all the guests that should be invited. Maybe also the Canada Industrial Relations Board, the CIRB, should be as well. We should have those two. If we could get those next week, it would be great.

While the chair—

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

There are three minutes left.

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

We have been advocating for years as you know, but today the Saskatchewan budget boosted the grant program. We're back in the film and television industry in my province of Saskatchewan.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear!

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

They gave them $8 million, so come to Saskatchewan and make movies, please.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, John Nater]

I know Kevin's been talking about that in almost every meeting we've had over the last six months.

I will just say that the CIRB is already invited, so they will be attending.

Monsieur Champoux.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I agree with my colleague Mr. Waugh. I think it would indeed be very appropriate for us to hear from tax experts who are specialized in the field of culture and who are used to working in this sector, which we all know is not like any other.

I know that this may be a bit last minute, but we have suggested names of Quebec tax experts who work with Quebec artists. We have talked a lot about tax measures for artists in Quebec. I think it might be appropriate for us to hear from experts from Quebec, who could guide us in our thinking about what we could then apply to the Status of the Artist Act of Canada.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, John Nater]

Are there any other comments? Ms. Fry did send me an email, and that was her comment, that we should hear from someone from Quebec who has the expertise in that side of things.

The recommendation has been made by Monsieur Champoux and Mr. Waugh that representatives from the CRA and a representative of the Quebec cultural taxation industry be invited. Is that...?

Ms. Thomas, I missed your hand.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

Maybe, Chair, you could help me understand why we would hear from Quebec tax experts.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, John Nater]

Sure, Ms. Thomas.

I would just say that I believe the original motion did include a comment about tax measures, and, specifically related to Quebec, they have an income-averaging program through their taxation system, which doesn't apply at the federal level. It's fairly unique to the Quebec experience, so I think that would be why, in this case, it's specific to Quebec. If Mr. Champoux agrees, that's my interpretation of the motion.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

I have another question, Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, John Nater]

Yes, go ahead.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

I'm just wondering if we've agreed to four meetings for this study whether we are still on track to complete it within four meetings or we are looking to expand that.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, John Nater]

I would ask the clerk. I believe we would still do it within four meetings.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Ms. Aimée Belmore]

It's entirely at your discretion. I currently have the Canada Revenue Agency and two individuals proposed by Monsieur Champoux. If it's the will of the committee—not to steal your thunder, Mr. Chair—we're anticipating the CIRB and the Canada Council for the Arts on April 4, along with the department, which means that we will be having a meeting with two panels. Currently you've proposed three organizations. If you like, I could try to have the tax experts on the same day as the department if they're available that day. That would leave six witness positions open for Wednesday, March 30.

I do have more than six people on the witness list. I have about 10, which means that now I could most likely still fill the meeting, even if I have some refusals. If the committee likes that idea, then I can certainly pursue that.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Chair, with this conversation we're having today about these witnesses, does that mean we're knocking other witnesses off? I have a number of witnesses who haven't yet made it to this committee, as perhaps do others around the table.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, John Nater]

I think, if I'm correctly interpreting what the clerk is saying, we have about 10 witnesses remaining and about six spots. That would probably take up the full six spots, assuming that there are always a number of witnesses who are unable to make it and who decline the invitation. I think we wouldn't be not inviting anyone who's been proposed.

Would that be correct, Madam Clerk? We'll just wait a second for confirmation there.

[The Clerk]

Yes, there are some witnesses on the list who will not end up getting an invitation, but as far as the witness names submitted by your party are concerned, I've contacted everyone.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, John Nater]

If there's a consensus from the committee, we'll go ahead with that suggestion then, in terms of the names that have been proposed.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, John Nater]

I see a consensus.

The clerk would also like to make a quick comment about committee travel.

No? It says right here that the clerk has a brief announcement about committee travel.