Finance Committee on June 4th, 2015

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

I'm speaking in opposition to both amendments. These amendments would leave the term of protection for performances and sound recordings unchanged at 50 years, defeating the whole objective of the government's proposal.

We're committed to a longer term of protection of 70 years for performances and sound recordings. Our actions will better position Canadian performers to generate revenue throughout their lives and help foster a strong Canadian recording industry by ensuring that performers and record labels continue to share in the value of their sound recording.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you.

All in favour of amendment PV-18?

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

All in favour of amendment PV-20?

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

All those in favour of clause 81?

Monsieur Côté.

[Raymond Côté, NDP, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's very kind of you to let me speak.

As you know, the NDP voted against the Green Party of Canada's proposed amendments quite simply because we support the principle of extending the term of protection from 50 to 70 years.

But, on Monday, I was at the ceremony honouring former parliamentarians and had the tremendous pleasure of hearing a timeless classic by Raymond Lévesque, who at the age of 86, can barely sing his greatest hits anymore. And one of those greatest hits, which is one of the best Quebec songs of all time, if not the best, is “Quand les hommes vivront d'amour”. Similarly, other major artists, composers and authors will lose the ability to perform or promote their works. Unfortunately, these proposals simply amount to helping those who record their works and record companies. We would have liked to see this protection extend to authors and composers as well.

That leads me to underscore how shameful it is that these two provisions weren't subject to adequate scrutiny by the appropriate committee, rather than the Standing Committee on Finance.

Be that as it may, we support the two provisions because they improve upon the existing situation, at least. Nevertheless, it's necessary to go further and, above all, to extend this protection to those who are responsible for composing the works that make up our venerable audio and theatrical heritage.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Okay.

Thank you.

(Clause 81 agreed to)

(Clause 82 agreed to)

We'll thank our officials from Heritage.

We'll then move to division 6, on the Export Development Act. We have some amendments in this division. We'll welcome our officials back from Foreign Affairs and from Finance.

I'll deal with clause 83. There are no amendment to clause 83.

Mr. Brison, please go ahead.

(On clause 83)

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Mr. Chair, budget 2015 says this initiative will have an initial capitalization of $300 million over five years. However, at the briefing for parliamentarians last month, an official said the expected fiscal impact on the government is still unknown as the exact financing model is yet to be determined.

When is a final decision expected on the financing model, and when is the development finance initiative expected to be operational?

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Mr. Kuhn.

[Steven Kuhn, Chief, International Finance, International Trade and Finance Branch, Department of Finance]

I'll answer that question.

First, I will start by clarifying the intention of what was said in a previous meeting, which is that there is no fiscal cost of the capitalization on the $300 million because it would be operationalized as a transfer of capital to Export Development Canada. Export Development Canada, as a consolidated entity on Canada's books, would have no fiscal costs. It just becomes an asset on the Government of Canada's books. I'm sorry if that's not very clear.

But with respect to when decisions will be made as the DFI is operationalized, should this legislation be approved, the next step would be for the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development to issue to the corporation a statement of priorities and accountabilities. In that letter the minister would set out his expectations of what the DFI would look like and Export Development Canada would be required, as part of their next corporate planning process, to describe how it would be operationalized.

The corporate planning process occurs on Export Development Canada's fiscal year basis, so their fiscal year ends December 31, 2015. That corporate plan would be approved by Treasury Board and tabled in Parliament by the end of that calendar year.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you.

We'll go to Mr. Rankin, please.

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

The NDP will be opposing this set of amendments from clauses 83 to 86.

In theory we think that DFIs have some potential, but we're concerned that the track records across the world haven't been very good. We think Canada could develop a best case example of these DFIs but we have little faith the government, which has made such serious cuts to development funding and has tarnished our reputation internationally, would proceed, so we're simply not prepared to support this.

We do have two amendments, as you know, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you.

(Clause 83 agreed to)

(On clause 84)

We will go to clause 84, and we will go to NDP-1, then.

Mr. Rankin, do you want to speak to that?

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thanks, Chair.

The purpose of the amendment is really quite straightforward. We would simply like to add four criteria to the development finance initiative to ensure that it mirrors the Official Development Assistance Accountability Act, as well as stakeholder consultations. We would suggest in this amendment adding the four criteria that are before you. That is:

(i) contributes to poverty reduction,

(ii) takes into account the perspectives of the poor,

(iii) is consistent with international human rights standards, and

(iv) clearly constitutes financial support that is not available from other sources and that benefits development.

That is what the amendment would seek to achieve.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you, Mr. Rankin.

I'll go to Mr. Saxton.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

This proposed NDP-1 amendment goes against the arm's-length nature of the government's role in overseeing a crown corporation. Should the proposed amendments to the Export Development Act come into force, EDC will include a strategy for operationalizing the development finance initiative, including with respect to performance measures and corporate social responsibility policies in its corporate plan.

As part of his ongoing consultation activities, the Minister of International Development will consider stakeholder views pertaining to the development finance initiative.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you.

We'll go to further discussion.

Mr. Rankin.

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

I can understand the concept of crown corporations but there are many examples where directives and other documents are laid upon crown corporations.

Note that the rest of the amendment also would go on to require the minister to consult with civil society, other international agencies, and so forth, and take those views into account in formulating that opinion. It's no different from directives that are given to crown corporations all the time.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you.

We'll then vote on NDP-1.

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

We have PV-21 and PV-22, so we'll go back to Mr. Hyer, for that amendment. We'll deal with PV-22.

[Bruce Hyer, Green, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This amendment seeks to do two things, as recommended by James Haga, VP of Engineers without Borders. The first is poverty reduction, and specifically that Canada's development goals should be at the very heart of the development finance initiative's, DFI's, core mandate. Second, DFIs' investments should complement but be quite distinct from Canada's official development assistance.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you to Mr. Hyer on this.

Mr. Saxton.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

It should be noted that the DFI's capital base to make investments will be additional and complementary to Canada's official development assistance. It will not be sourced from Canada's international assistance budget. Support under the proposed legislation will not qualify as official development assistance under current international rules set out by the OECD Development Assistance Committee. However, these rules are being reviewed and could be subject to change in the future.

Consequently, the proposed amendment would produce an outcome that could put Canada out of step with international norms in the future.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you, Mr. Saxton.

We'll go then to PV-22.

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clause 84 agreed to)

(On clause 85)

On clause 85, we have NDP-2.

Mr. Rankin.

[Murray Rankin, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thanks, Chair.

I'm certain that the government will support this, since it is simply an effort to provide greater accountability and transparency, something they are of course committed to.

It would require, under the proposed amendment, a review every five years after the paragraph comes into force, and every five years thereafter in consultation with the minister of finance, and that the results of that review be tabled in Parliament within one year.

We think this is important because the track record of development finance initiatives internationally, as I said earlier, isn't particularly good. People have written a great deal about how funds don't often end up benefiting local populations, but rather the donor export countries are supported. We think that to address that well-known problem in the literature and in the experience, having strong reporting requirements would go some measure to addressing that apparent deficiency.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you, Mr. Rankin.

Mr. Saxton.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

There is no need for a statutory requirement to have such frequent reviews, given existing accountability mechanisms in place through the Export Development Act. The act already includes a section instructing the minister responsible for EDC to review, in consultation with the minister of finance, the provisions and operation of the act, including proposed paragraph 10(1)(c) should it come into force, every 10 years.

The next legislative review of the Export Development Act is scheduled for 2018, and would thus be expected to cover the operationalization of EDC's development finance initiative, should it come into force.

In addition to this formal statutory obligation, the government will monitor EDC's development financing activities and provide clear direction on Canada's international development priorities through the existing crown corporation's corporate planning process. Under this process, EDC is obligated to publish a summary of its corporate plan and an annual report on its activities.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Okay, thank you.

We'll go then to the vote on NDP-2.

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clause 85 agreed to)

(Clause 86 agreed to)

We'll thank our two officials for being here for this division.

We will move then to division 7 dealing with the Canada Labour Code. We have a series of amendments on this division.

I don't have any amendments for clauses 87 and 88.

(On clause 87)

Speaking to clause 87, Mr. Rankin and then Mr. Brison.