Finance Committee on Nov. 25th, 2009

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

We have a witness here.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Mr. Wallace has the floor, and he can move the motion because he has the floor.

Can you read your motion?

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

You actually have it, so maybe you could read it.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Okay.

Pursuant to Standing Order 97.1, the Committee requests an extension of thirty days to consider Bill C-288, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act (tax credit for new graduates working in designated regions), thereby providing the Committee with a total of ninety sitting days during which to complete its study of the bill. The Committee finds it necessary to consult further in order to give the Bill the consideration it requires. Therefore, it requests an extension of thirty sitting days.

The motion is in order.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Very briefly, we've already heard today that there's a potential amendment coming line by line by the Liberal Party of Canada, and I would like the PBO to look at that amendment and cost that out for us. It may make a major reduction in the cost of this. So I think the PBO should be further consulted on this.

I think the Department of Finance should be consulted on this. I'd like to invite them. Mr. Pacetti just talked about the difference between a 100% tax credit, which is the full amount, or other tax credits at around 17% that you are able to bring forward and deduct from your tax payable. And let's make sure the mover of the bill understands what we're doing.

I'd like to see the mover of the bill again, because I think there are some more questions that I certainly didn't get to. And based on the testimony that we heard today by the PBO, I think we should be calling Professor Finnie from the University of Ottawa to come over and talk to us about mobility of labour and what the real effect of this bill could be. That's why I'm in favour of the extension.

I think more work needs to be done to make this a more palatable bill.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you, Mr. Wallace.

I have Mr. Laforest.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Mr. Chairman, unlike my colleague, I think this motion—

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Point of order, Mr. Pacetti.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

We have a witness here who we haven't finished questioning, and now we're on a motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Mr. Pacetti, it's my wish as chair that we not interrupt witnesses with motions, but Mr. Wallace's motion is entirely in order. So as the chair, I'm obliged to follow that rule.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Well, we have a witness here, so the point of order is that we have to deal with the witness. If there's other questioning, we have to deal with the witness first and then we go to the motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

As a former chair, you know very well that is not the rule. The rule is if someone has the floor, they can move a motion on the topic of the day. Those are the rules that the chair has to follow.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

As a former chair, Mr. Chairman, with all due respect, the point of order is that we bring order back to the meeting. To bring order back to the meeting is to go back to the orders of the day, and I believe the orders of the day are that between 3:30 and 4:30 we've summoned the Library of Parliament and Mr. Page has been the witness. If the committee chooses to relieve Mr. Page of his duties, then I have no problem with that. But out of respect for the witnesses....

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Mr. Pacetti, the fact of the matter is that if a member has the floor, they can move a motion on the topic of the day. That is what Mr. Wallace has done.

The preference of having a witness dealt with and then having a motion afterwards is my preference as a chair. But in fact Mr. Wallace is entirely within his rules as a member. I've checked this with the clerk, and he's checked it with the head clerk, so that is in fact the way we're operating.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

It's your committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

It's not my committee, it's our committee, but I have to operate according to the rules.

Mr. Laforest.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I was saying that I disagree with Mr. Wallace's motion for the following reason: this motion requesting a 30-day extension to complete the study of the bill is unnecessary—at least, at this point, because the deadline for referring the bill back to the House is December 2—next Tuesday. Between now and then, we have two more Committee meetings. I know that our agendas are full, but there is no urgency at this time.

Mr. Wallace was saying, in support of his own motion, that he would like to review the amendments proposed by the Liberal Party. However, at those two meetings we will have an opportunity to look at those amendments carefully, and others as well, if there are any. We'll see. So, we have to look at them carefully and then move to clause-by-clause consideration. In fact, I would like to suggest that we do that next Tuesday, on December 1, which is the deadline.

It would be better to wait until we have reached the deadline to ask for an extension or additional time, rather than doing that now. It seems to me that would be a more reasonable course of action.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Merci, Monsieur Laforest.

Mr. McCallum, go ahead, please.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Well, I would also vote no to the motion from Mike Wallace. I think it is not necessary. I think there are a couple of issues—in terms of drafting—that can be changed and clarified quite easily in time for a clause-by-clause vote next week.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Okay. Thank you.

Mr. Menzies, go ahead, please.

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Of course I will be supporting Mr. Wallace's motion, because I think it is the only responsible thing we can do. To rush a private member's bill through without giving it due diligence when we've just heard from the Parliamentary Budget Officer.... He's begging us for an opportunity to further analyze what the actual costs are.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Begging? We have him here. Why don't you ask him a question?

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

This is the first time we've ever heard him beg for anything, so we recognize that.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Order.

Mr. Menzies has the floor.