Yes.
Evidence of meeting #1 for Finance in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was meeting.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #1 for Finance in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was meeting.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON
In the motion it does say that “although the committee may decide to expand the hearings in the future, it should begin” with the one on--
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
Well, I'm trying to do it right now. I think having a day of this may give us more flexibility, but it's up to you.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON
I would think that we would have the two-hour session or whatever, and then after that we'll have a better idea than we would now as to whether to do more.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
We'll call the question on the motion.
All in favour?
(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Mr. McCallum, do you want to move to your second and third motions?
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON
The other two are more minor.
The next one is to do with this tax treatment and characterization of personal services business. I think this was mainly a Quebec issue. I actually was not present, but I heard from others who were, and I saw the transcript. It seems pretty clear that these people fall between two stools or fall between the cracks, with neither the benefit of being an employee nor the benefit of being self-employed.
All I'm suggesting is that since we've heard them for a day, I think it would be a good idea if we could bring this to the attention of our colleagues in the House by writing a report. We could have one meeting to generate that report.
3:35 p.m.
NDP
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
Mr. Chair, I want to be sure that we will hear from the witnesses. Most of the complaints come from one business in particular. Now that we have heard from the employees or entrepreneurs affected, it is absolutely essential, even critical, that we hear from someone representing the business in question. I fully agree with my colleague, Mr. McCallum—and I thank him for bringing this up—that perhaps one hour should be set aside that day to hear from the witnesses.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
Massimo Pacetti Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
I have a question, as I wasn't at the meeting. Were some officials present?
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
We can say “that the finance committee dedicate at least one meeting”, which encompasses it.
3:35 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
I'm sensing unanimity on that.
Mr. McCallum, your third one, please.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON
Third and finally, this is a question involving Nortel employees and others, and therefore there's some time sensitivity. You may recall that the Nortel people put forward three proposals, I think, to deal with the issue, and there was a letter received from the Department of Finance saying that all three of these proposals were unworkable or undesirable.
My only suggestion is that, out of deference to these people, we invite the Department of Finance officials to a meeting and ask them to explain to us why all of these proposals are unworkable--
3:35 p.m.
An hon. member
And JDS as well.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON
And JDS as well. Yes, it may apply to others. Nortel is the one immediately at issue, but there's JDS also, and there may be others as well. But I'm proposing only that we invite finance officials to a single meeting to explain to us why they are so adamant that these proposals won't work.
March 9th, 2010 / 3:35 p.m.
Conservative
Ted Menzies Conservative Macleod, AB
I certainly have no problem with that. There are some changes that will be coming forward, either in budget implementation act number one or in number two, which help address some of these, from my understanding.
I don't totally understand the whole issue, so I have no problem with them coming, but I wonder if we should wait until we actually have them here discussing what was talked about in the budget and then ask them at that time.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
Ted Menzies Conservative Macleod, AB
That when we have finance officials here discussing the Budget Implementation Act.... I'm not just sure whether it will be in number one or number two. I don't know what the drafting is like. If it isn't in number one, then certainly we can--
3:40 p.m.
Liberal
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON
What's the likely timing of the Budget Implementation Act?