Finance Committee on Nov. 3rd, 2011

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

I call this meeting to order. The orders of the day for the 28th meeting of the Standing Committee on Finance, pursuant to the order of reference of Monday, October 17, 2011, are a discussion of Bill C-13, An Act to implement certain provisions of the 2011 budget as updated on June 6, 2011, and other measures.

Colleagues, you should have in front of you clause-by-clause consideration, as that is exactly what we are doing here today. We do have a number of amendments, which I'll obviously call upon members to introduce and argue for when we get to those clauses.

We are going to proceed by part, and consideration of clause 1 is postponed pursuant to Standing Order 75(1), so therefore we're going to start with clause 2.

Part 1 deals with clauses 2 to 103.

The first clause I have an amendment for is clause 34. In the interests of organization, I'm going to ask if there any amendments on clauses 2 to 33.

No? Okay.

Mr. Julian.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Sorry, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chair, just so we follow along--I'm not wanting to delay anything--are you talking about the entire part 2?

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

No. We're on part 1.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Part 1 includes clauses 2 to 103.

I have an amendment for clause 34 by Mr. Brison. Therefore, obviously, we want to debate the amendment. I don't have any amendments for clauses 2 to 33.

Mr. Julian, does that clarify things for you?

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Yes. Thank you.

[Alain Giguère, NDP, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Mr. Chair, you have to understand that we used essentially the document that was provided to us by the Department of Finance and which we referred to from time to time.

Yet, those are three different documents and they all have different page numbers, so I would like to ask whether the department officials would be kind enough to tell us at what page clause 2 can be found in the legal document, in the document prepared by the Department of Finance and in the Income Tax Act. Failing that, we will have to search in all three documents the exact reference of what we are voting on. The Revenue Department decided to use 3 different page numberings for each section.

You cannot ask us to vote on clauses without knowing what we are talking about. We do not even know what it is all about. You give us clause numbers without explaining the legal contents. These clauses are related to the page numbering existing in Bill C-13, but it is not the same in the document provided by the Department of Finance, in the document provided by the Library of Parliament, and in the Income Tax Act. In other words, you ask us to search simultaneously in four documents for every vote, without telling us the page number. I am sorry, but you are asking us to sign a blank cheque. As lawmakers, we should know what we are voting on.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Just to clarify matters, what the chair is doing is calling clause-by-clause consideration. The document we're working with is Bill C-13.

This is the document we're working with. Any documents by the Library of Parliament or by the Department of Finance in addition to this are helpful in informing about this piece of legislation, but the bill is actually what we're going through.

This bill is the document that I'll be working with today. Other documents may be provided to help members in terms of informing them as to the specifics of each clause, but this is the bill I'm dealing with.

I'm dealing with the clauses in part 1, and I'm dealing with clauses 2 to 33 because I don't have any amendments for those, so I was going to call those clauses.

Mr. Julian.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

You are regrouping, then. Could you clarify exactly what you're regrouping for part 1?

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

I can call each clause individually. Is that what members prefer?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Now, just.... Do members want me to call each separate clause? Or would they rather the chair group clauses if I don't have amendments? I prefer to group it.

[Some hon. members]

Group.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Group?

[An hon. member]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Okay.

So if I don't have an amendment.... But if there is an amendment, what a member simply has to do is say “Mr. Chair, I have an amendment on this clause”, and then I will not group that clause. Just to be clear on that....

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Yes, and that's fine, Mr. Chair. The one thing I would ask you to do as you regroup, given the complexity of the material, would be to give us a clear indication of what portions of the bill are included then, from which page number to which page number, so we do have a moment just to make sure.

There are amendments, of course, but there are also a few items that we'll probably have a longer conversation about. We want to make sure that we get to those conversations and that we understand fully what's being regrouped. That's all.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Okay. Well, I'm not going to do page number by page number. I can do clause-by-clause, then, because that would be simpler for me.

I did ask members to come prepared to debate the certain sections that they wanted to debate. I'm hoping that all members here have already identified those sections they wish present an amendment to--or to speak to, because obviously you can speak to a clause. But for me to go through and do page numbers for clauses....

I'm presuming all members have gone through the piece of legislation in a fair amount of detail, so my proposal is still this: if I don't have an amendment, I will ask if there is any debate on, say, clauses 2 to 33, and then a member can raise it. Or we'll go to clause 34 after clause 33 because there is an amendment on that.

Mr. Jean.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, on a point of help, page 6 of the document that was provided to us by the Department of Finance actually refers to the clauses in the legislation and gives the page number beside each, as well as the section of the act that it amends.

It would certainly be helpful to look at page 6 of that. It actually reflects exactly your position on the matter.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Okay. Thank you for that piece of information, Mr. Jean.

I'm still proceeding to part 1, clauses 2 to 33.

Shall clauses 2 to 33 carry?

[Alain Giguère, NDP, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Mr. Chair, I have a question on clause 24, which deals with the $500 children's arts tax credit.

Yesterday, I asked the officials of the Revenue Department whether day care centres that offered artistic activities were entitled to charge an additional $500 fee to their clients, who would then be refunded by the Revenue Department. They said yes, which means that the total amount which had been forecasted at $35 million might very well be as high as $100 million.

Has the department thought about deleting the words « [...] a prescribed program of recreational or developmental activity », in section 118.03(1) of the Income Tax Act? By deleting these words, the scope of the legislation would be reduced, and that would prevent day care centres to charge $500 to all the children's parents. Failing that, the total bill will be much higher than the amount allowed for in the budget, as the officials admitted. They also said it was a drafting mistake. It's time to fix it, in order to prevent cost overruns.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Okay. This is on clause 24, so I'm going to call clauses 2 to 23 so I can deal with those, and then we'll deal with clause 24.

Shall clauses 2 to 23 carry?

[An hon. member]

On division.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

(Clauses 2 to 23 inclusive agreed to on division)

(On clause 24)

Do the officials wish to comment?

Mr. Cook, do you wish to comment on what was said?

[Ted Cook, Senior Legislative Chief, Tax Legislation Division, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance]

Yes, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

With respect to the children's arts tax credit, the question as I understood it was whether or not fees charged by a garderie with respect to relevant activities would be eligible for the credit.

The response is that eligible expenditures and eligible activities for the children's arts tax credit are set out by regulation. What is required is that the activities are outside a school's curriculum and that they meet certain requirements with respect to the percentage of time, more than 50% of the--