Evidence of meeting #13 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was rate.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Phil McColeman Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
We have already had witnesses here regarding this issue. We've heard testimony on this issue, have we not? It's already been part of what we have determined is right in the wheelhouse of this committee. This strikes to the very financial heart of what our programs are all about in this country.
It's shocking to hear the government now wanting it to go to another committee. We've already been studying this through the witnesses we've had at this committee.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Just to correct you, Mr. McColeman, these folks are not the government; they're members of the governing party.
Mr. Ouellette.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Robert-Falcon Ouellette Liberal Winnipeg Centre, MB
I would like to bring an amendment to the motion: that pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee refer this study to the committee of social development. Is that the title?
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Before that amendment could be put, Mr. Caron would have to give his approval for such an amendment.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Robert-Falcon Ouellette Liberal Winnipeg Centre, MB
The reason that I would like to refer to another committee is that I'm not sure how much time we're going to have in order to really study it at a larger level. I don't know whether it's in the Standing Orders that we're allowed to join with other committees. I know you can convene special joint committees on various issues with the Senate, but I think the issues are far wider and involve so much larger a domain than perhaps the expertise around this table. No offence to any of my colleagues—I'm not an expert in everything, and neither is anyone around here—but I think there are a lot of people on another committee who would also bring a lot more information and perhaps a greater depth to a study on something like this.
I think we should consider doing something a little bit larger and a little bit more in depth, but I think it might be better done with another committee that would do it to a greater extent.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
We can't really tell another committee what to do, but there is such a thing as joint committees, because I've sat on them in a previous life.
Mr. Caron.
12:50 p.m.
NDP
Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
The amendment completely changes the nature of the motion that asks that the committee study this matter.
Let's talk about the time that would be devoted to this.
The Standing Committee on Finance manages the time it devotes to a study as it wishes. We are going to have things to do and I know how busy we are going to be, because I am the only member who has already been on this committee.
I also know that we can find the time to study an issue like this one, particularly since we are not mentioning any time frame or duration. We could hold ten meetings on this topic over the next two years. Nothing prevents us from doing that. Consequently, the argument put forward by the government members is not valid. We have already had discussions on this in this committee. They have in fact been recorded and we find references in the minutes of committee proceedings to the fact that members were favourable to such a study.
It would consequently be entirely irresponsible to renege on that and claim that this is no longer our responsibility, but that of another committee, despite the important consequences motions like this one could have on public finances.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
Robert-Falcon Ouellette Liberal Winnipeg Centre, MB
Would it be possible to wait before we debate this matter and vote on the motion? The subcommittee should meet to add to the agenda of the work we are supposed to do. We need to know what we want to do and what we want to accomplish. We can add things as we go along, but I would like to have an overall vision of what we want to accomplish over the long term so that we can make sure we give each topic the necessary attention.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
It should be noted that the HUMA committee is looking at various welfare programs and different income support programs and has already started down that path.
It's not that we disagree with the intent of your motion, but we obviously feel that the other committee has already started this process of different income support programs, Mr. Caron.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Phil McColeman Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
Although I don't have a copy of it in front of me, this was part of our recommendations in our pre-budget report. It was approved by this committee as one of the recommendations going forward in the pre-budget report. It was a recommendation of this committee; it was voted on.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
All those in favour of the motion—
What Mr. Ouellette was proposing wasn't accepted by you, so we can't deal with it. We're dealing with the motion as on paper, unless you want to withdraw it and have further discussions on the side.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
The question has been called. All those in favour of the motion as tabled, please signify.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
All right.
(Motion negatived: nays 5; yeas 4)
We have two motions that are quite similar. I would suggest, Mr. Caron, that you read your motion, and Mr. Sorbara, you read yours. We can deal with them one at a time—
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
And then arm wrestle, yes, as Lisa says.
Mr. Caron, do you want to read your motion and then we'll have Mr. Sorbara read his and see if we can come to a combination of the two, because they are very similar?
12:55 p.m.
NDP
Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Yes and no.
The motion reads as follows:
That the Standing Committee on Finance invite the Honourable Diane Lebouthillier, Minister of National Revenue; Andrew Treusch, Commissioner and Chief Executive Officer, Canada Revenue Agency (CRA); Ted Gallivan, CRA Assistant Commissioner, Compliance Programs; and Stéphanie Henderson, Manager, Offshore Compliance, to inform members of the committee about the recent revelation of an amnesty deal dated May1, 2015, offered by the CRA to former and current clients of KPMG LLP regarding its participation in a structure known as an “offshore company” or “offshore company structure”; that the committee invite to a subsequent meeting officials from the KPMG LLP accounting firm as well as experts the committee deems pertinent; and that the committee plan an additional meeting to consider a draft report.
