Evidence of meeting #56 for Finance in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site.) The winning word was measure.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Was there an impact assessment done? The volumes are significantly different between tobacco that's brought in or sold in Canada for cigarettes and tobacco for cigars. Fine-cut tobacco, I think, is the reference in the act.
Was any impact analysis done in the various industries with this new taxation adjusted for inflation? Is it disproportionate because one is such a smaller volume, as in the case of cigars?
4:25 p.m.
Tax Policy Officer, Sales Tax Division, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance
We do look at how this would impact all tobacco products. The rate increase is really driven from the corresponding rate increase in cigarettes.
From that point of view, all tobacco products are taxed at a high and stable level in order to discourage their consumption.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
I very much understand that.
My question is whether there was an analysis done in terms of the impact on...in the act it's called fine-cut tobacco. Is that right?
4:25 p.m.
Tax Policy Officer, Sales Tax Division, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance
That's right.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
I don't want to get my terms wrong.
Was there any analysis done on the impact to industry if there's adjustment in taxation?
4:25 p.m.
Tax Policy Officer, Sales Tax Division, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance
We look specifically at how this would impact each tobacco product within the tobacco taxation regime.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Has that been made public?
Was that put out for comment?
4:25 p.m.
Tax Policy Officer, Sales Tax Division, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance
No, this would be internal analysis.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Okay.
Is it possible to make the analysis available to the committee?
4:25 p.m.
Tax Policy Officer, Sales Tax Division, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance
I'd have to look at what we could provide in terms of—
4:25 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Through you, Chair, that would be very helpful.
Thank you.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
If there is anything you can provide, please do so through the clerk.
Thank you, Mr. Martin. We appreciate your being here. We will see you back here at clause-by-clause study, I'm sure.
Colleagues, we'll go to part 4. As you know, some divisions in part 4 have been referred to other committees for study.
We'll move to part 4, division 2, Aeronautics Act.
We have Ms. Shari Currie and Marie-Claude Day. Welcome to the committee.
I have notice of a question from the NDP.
Mr. Caron.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The main purpose of the proposed amendment is to give more powers to the minister in situations related to class 1, class 2 and class 3 aerodromes and even private airports. Is that correct?
4:25 p.m.
Shari Currie Acting Director General, Civil Aviation, Department of Transport
The main purpose of the proposed amendment is to provide the minister with the new authority that would relate to all aerodromes, which would include class 1, class 2, class 3, and all others. It would also provide the minister with regulation-making authority for consultations.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Okay.
I would like to use as an example the airport in Neuville, a private airport, I believe. In fact, this matter has come up quite regularly in question period. The airport is in a colleague's riding, not my own.
How does the minister's current authority compare to the authority he would have with this amendment?
4:25 p.m.
Acting Director General, Civil Aviation, Department of Transport
Sorry for the delay; I want to make sure that my answer is appropriate.
In terms of the current authorities, the minister does not have the authority to intervene in that particular aerodrome. Under the new authorities, if that aerodrome or any other aerodrome chose to expand or change their operations, then the minister would have the ability to intervene where there is a risk to aviation safety or it would be in the public interest to intervene.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Okay.
I would like to make a distinction. Right now, we are talking about the minister's authority, which falls under Transport Canada. The authority over these aerodromes, be they class 1, 2, 3 or private, is still in the hands of the department without necessarily being at the discretion of the minister. Am I mistaken?
4:30 p.m.
Acting Director General, Civil Aviation, Department of Transport
Currently under the authority and the discretion, we don't authorize aerodromes to be built, and we don't have the authority or the discretion to intervene in the development of the aerodrome. This amendment would provide the authority for the minister to intervene.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Basically, right now, any decisions related to building or expanding an aerodrome do not need to be approved or authorized by anyone, whether at the provincial or federal level. Is that correct?
4:30 p.m.
Acting Director General, Civil Aviation, Department of Transport
That is correct.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
After the bill is passed, an authorization will be required. The words “at the discretion of the minister” mean that the department itself can provide authorization.
4:30 p.m.
Acting Director General, Civil Aviation, Department of Transport
No.
I would clarify that the department would not be approving the development, expansion, or change in operations of an aerodrome. The department would be able to intervene if there was a fact-based, substantiated complaint brought to it by a concerned party, whether it was the municipality or a member of the Canadian public. The complaint would have to be brought to the department and we would do an evaluation on whether the department or the minister would intervene. That's where the minister's authority would come in to say that you cannot build there because there is a risk to public safety, or you can't build there because it's not in the public interest, or not say anything and the aerodrome could be built.
4:30 p.m.
An hon. member
Could I ask a question?