It's an amendment.
Evidence of meeting #102 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was finance.
A video is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #102 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was finance.
A video is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Where are you in this debate? Mr. Albas has put a motion that the witness list be split fifty-fifty.
You are a third party.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Your numbers would have to go up somewhat as well. What I'm hearing Mr. Albas say is that if we get 24 witnesses, 12 should come from that side of the table and 12 should come from the other side of the table.
NDP
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
If the motion carries, you're all by yourself. You will have to get in gear to take on three others.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
The amendment is that the witness list be split fifty-fifty between the opposition parties and the government. It will be a recorded vote.
(Amendment negatived: nays 5; yeas 4)
Conservative
Liberal
Conservative
Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
As a new member of the committee, replacing Ron Liepert, who I'm sure you will all miss for his sunny personality—
September 19th, 2017 / 4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Conservative
Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB
I have a question about the second bullet on the motion. The committee I was on before, the foreign affairs committee, didn't have as many motions, because we were more collegial, it seems, than here and we didn't surprise each other....
On the study, does this imply that we'll be providing recommendations to the Minister of Finance by next week? This reads “the week of September 25 to 29, 2017”. Therefore, we'd hold those two meetings, have a third meeting, and thereafter we would draft a report with recommendations in it. What's implied on this study?
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
I did not mean to imply that the report would be written by the end of next week.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
It was my understanding, Mr. Kmiec, when I asked the question earlier, that the record of the hearings we hold here, with 24 witnesses, would be provided to the minister as part of those consultations, without recommendations; they would just be part of the consultations that end on October 2. That's my understanding.
We would also have the minister next week after the witnesses, so it would have to be Thursday or Friday, I gather. Then, committee members can go at it in terms of the minister and where's he at and what we've heard from some of the people who appeared before this committee, and your own personal feelings as well. That's my understanding.
Is that the way it is?
Conservative
Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB
I should obviously give the same concerns of my colleagues on this side.
We'll basically be also providing the minister with his own comments from the committee transcript, his own viewpoints back to him. Obviously he agrees with his own proposals, I would assume; otherwise, he wouldn't have made them in the dead of summer to surprise everybody.
Mr. Chair, I see that you sort of agree to that point.
I have very serious concerns about just the process. Six hours is really insufficient for this type of review or study, a study with no recommendations, which we're supposed to go through in such a rushed way, and not to go over the witness issue again.
The committees I've been on don't do it quite this way. We don't rush a study, especially on an issue that is taking up a significant amount of the public interest. I have Okotoks dental.... One of the dentists there has told me that they have concerns. He wrote me a letter. I have it with me. I have clippings of just today's emails to me.
We know there's a lot of interest from people, and it shouldn't just be associations and groups who represent others. We should be talking to actual business owners, who can bring their spreadsheets and show the type of damage that this might do to their individual businesses.
It will not be possible to rush someone like that at the last minute, giving them a four-day opening next week when they could speak to the committee and present their own balance sheets, their own retirement plans...to demonstrate a physical example of a bakery, Canadian Dent in my riding, or whoever else that may be.
It is not just about associations speaking at a 30,000-foot level, but down to the actual person, the mother running her store, the siblings who come together to form a business. That type of example will not be possible, because small business owners can't just leave their business at the last minute.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Okay, I have one more person on the list.
Mr. Fergus, do you want to close the gate and we'll go to the question, and then we'll go to the witnesses?
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
I have limited experience on the finance committee.
As we have done on other short studies that we've had where an issue has come up, such as the marketing practices of our schedule I banks, witnesses came and testified here. This was very important for them.
We have also accepted written submissions from several Canadians who wanted to testify but did not have the privilege of appearing before the committee. I think it's perfectly acceptable that we keep that.
In fact, we know that individuals, groups or key stakeholders represent associations, but there are also individuals. Several people, who are in favour of or opposed to the proposals, have contacted me in this regard. In my view, it is only natural that we proceed in accordance with the tradition of the committee.
