Environment Committee on Oct. 17th, 2017

[Joëlle Montminy]

What we're saying as well is that tax incentives are potentially good financial measures, but our view is that it has to be looked at in a broader context with all other financial measures. No single financial measure will be sufficient to address issues with respect to the preservation and conservation of heritage.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Agreed.

You've acknowledged that the $10-million funding is going back to $1 million, which will result in a significant oversubscription to the cost-sharing program. Is that correct?

[Joëlle Montminy]

That's a fact.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

So introducing a new tool is not a bad thing. Would you agree?

[Joëlle Montminy]

If it's looked at in the context of all other things available, and it relies on accountability tools that are ready to be implemented, it can be one measure amongst many that can be useful.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Just so that the sponsor of the bill has full information, are there additional accountability tools that you feel are necessary for this bill to have the proper rigour to be effective?

[Joëlle Montminy]

Yes. I spoke to the standards and guidelines, and the reliance on the guidelines with respect to how the work has to be conducted. In the certification process there are also challenges.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

There are some challenges with the certification process. Could I ask that you provide us with some suggested wording? You don't have to do that today, but follow up with the committee and provide us with something in writing. If, in fact, it's something that needs to be looked at seriously, we will, and we will consider that wording, if you have it to propose.

I want to go back to Mr. LeBlanc. I didn't hear full-throated support from you, either, for this bill. You probably know there is a fair bit of support among members of Parliament for doing something to support heritage preservation. Our study has certainly revealed that there are still very significant needs and, I suppose, incentives required to get Canadians to invest themselves in rehabilitating these buildings.

You also veered off into one area. You just touched briefly in passing on the capital gains exemption for homes. You used the words “for now” in reference to the program. I want clarification so there is no confusion about what was intended.

[Pierre LeBlanc]

I attribute it to the translation, because it certainly wasn't intended.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

All right. When we are talking about the exemption on personal residences, as far as you know, there is no plan to change that.

[Pierre LeBlanc]

That's certainly the case, as far as I know.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Thank you. That assurance is very helpful.

Those are my questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

You had about a minute left, but we can move on, and that gives us a chance for more rounds.

Mr. Cannings, go ahead.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Thank you.

Thank you for coming here today.

I'll start with Mr. LeBlanc, and Mr. Langdon, for that matter. I was going to ask you a question about boutique tax credits that might benefit wealthier individuals and families in Canada more than others, but I think you covered that in your testimony. I was going to talk about capital gains as well, but I think you answered that.

You mentioned some of the other methods that can support people in maintaining and upgrading these buildings. You mentioned donations. I just wonder how that would work. This bill is seeking to provide support for owners of buildings who would like to maintain them. How could they access the donations part of the tax regime to advance their cause? What charities would they turn to? I'd be interested to hear that.

[Blaine Langdon, Chief, Charities, Personal Income Tax Division, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance]

I don't think there is much in the bill before us for charities. I was listening in on the previous testimony, and I think it did get touched on.

Essentially, what we are suggesting with respect to the reference to registered charities is that.... There are a number of charities out there that exist for the purposes of preserving historic properties for the benefit of the public. They acquire the property—either they purchase it outright, or it is donated to the registered charity—and then the charity becomes responsible for preserving that building. You see that in a number of different cities. You can go and visit. It really is for the benefit of the public. As an individual or as a corporation, you can support those activities through donations, either straight cash donations or donations of stock, which get special tax treatment.

I guess what we are trying to point out is that there is already, through the tax system, a mechanism for the support of historic properties, although obviously it doesn't apply to private owners of historic properties.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Yes, that's what I was trying to get at. I couldn't make that connection, so thank you.

I would like to ask Parks Canada a question about the list again. This may not have a direct link to the bill before us, but just to clear up some of the confusion around the provincial lists, the federal list, and the register that combines both. I assume there is a federal list, as well as various provincial lists, and they are combined on this register.

I'd like to get some clarity on what programs you have in Parks Canada that can benefit sites that are on either or both of these. Are there programs in Parks Canada that apply only to sites that are on your list, rather than the provincial lists?

[Genevieve Charrois]

The only program we have is the cost-sharing program for national historic sites, heritage railway stations, and heritage lighthouses right now. We ask that they be registered on the Canadian register, but there's no need for that because we have a directory of national designation as well. They are captured in that directory already.

We have no program that speaks to the other...well, to a certain degree, yes. Something could be in a province, but it would be a national historic site, or a heritage lighthouse, or a heritage railway station. It would not be on their list except for some multi-level designated places. This may happen as well. Because something is designated as a national historic site does not mean that it cannot be another type of heritage resource for another level of government.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Again, if you're on the provincial list but not on the Parks Canada list, you're not eligible for the cost-sharing program?

[Genevieve Charrois]

The answer is not that direct. Sorry.

I would like to have a clearer answer here. The Canadian register is made up of everything that is designated at the local, municipal, provincial, territorial, and national levels. But to be eligible to the program that Parks Canada is running, you need to be designated by the federal government.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

That's what I thought. I just wanted to make it clear because there are sites in my riding that fit into the provincial category and can't access federal funds. I just wanted to make sure because this talks about the combined list, which I think is a good idea.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

You have 30 seconds.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

I'm done.

Thanks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Okay.

Next up is Mr. Aldag.

[John Aldag, Liberal, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Great, thank you.

I have seven questions and six minutes in which to ask them, so I'm going to ask the witnesses to be quite tight in their responses.

I have two for Parks Canada. The first might be a very simple one.

Does the register capture current conditions of the properties that are on the register at this time?

[Genevieve Charrois]

The register is not about the condition of buildings. It's really about why they're designated. What is captured is the heritage character of a place, why it was designated.