On a point of order, Mr. Chair—
Evidence of meeting #199 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A video is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #199 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A video is available from Parliament.
12:35 p.m.
London North Centre, Lib.
—my colleague, who I have come to know a little bit in the past three years, is a nice guy—I won't dispute that—but he's taking up the time in our meeting. We're here to focus on something entirely different.
We were kind enough and you were kind enough to give him the leeway to ask the question. He's put the question forward, and I think it's time to now move on. Now he has definitely—
12:35 p.m.
Banff—Airdrie, CPC
If I can respond to the point of order—
Mr. Peter Fragiskatos —without question in my mind, sprung into completely irrelevant territory, completely irrelevant to the proceedings.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Yes, you can, but I believe Mr. McGowan is going to get back to you on that information if there's any, Mr. Richards.
Go ahead and then we'll hear from Mr. Dusseault.
12:35 p.m.
Banff—Airdrie, CPC
Then it's fine, and I appreciate that he will do so.
Really, my line of questioning had in fact ended, but of course, as chair you decided to engage in debate, and I felt it was necessary to respond to indicate my concern around that, so really, if Mr. Fragiskatos had concerns, he should have had them with the comments that you were making, Mr. Chair. I was simply responding to those.
Again, I will point out that I think most Canadians would find it quite laughable for anyone in the Liberal government to be suggesting that SNC-Lavalin was not going to benefit from these representations being made. It was quite clear in the statements made by Ms. Wilson-Raybould yesterday that it was exactly what was attempted to be happening there. Frankly—
12:35 p.m.
An hon. member
Point of order.
12:35 p.m.
Banff—Airdrie, CPC
We're on a point of order already, and I'm speaking on the point of order, Mr. Chair.
12:35 p.m.
Banff—Airdrie, CPC
I understand that when someone steps out of line and doesn't toe the line in this government—Ms. Wilson-Raybould has clearly learned what happens when the Prime Minister isn't happy with what you have to say—that you're removed from your position, and I can understand, Mr. Chair, that you wouldn't want to see that happen to you. I guess I can appreciate that was why you wanted to bring that forward. However, I don't believe it was appropriate. That's just my response to the point of order.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Okay.
Mr. Sorbara, and then I'm going to a question from Mr. Dusseault for the witnesses, I believe.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
I need 30 seconds, Mr. Chair. Thank you.
On a point of order, I do want to put on the record that Bill C-82 on base erosion and profit shifting came forth from exhaustive negotiations between 2013 and 2015 under the prior Conservative government. Now we're finally passing the legislation, or going through it here in committee.
Hopefully, legislation will be passed and put into place so we can ensure that Canadian corporations—all of them, much like their counterparts all over the world—benefit from this agreement, but also so Canadian citizens benefit from this agreement, in that all corporations are paying their fair share of taxes. That's something that I know our side wants. I'm not sure why the other side does not see it that way. Our side sees it that way.
I'll stop there, Chair, and Bill C-82—
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Yes. I don't really think that was a point of order. I think it was more on the discussion we're supposed to be on.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
12:35 p.m.
NDP
Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC
I acknowledge that Mr. Richards has managed, in the circumstances, to ask a question on another topic, even though I think that shows a lack of respect for the business of this committee. Without wishing to complicate matters, however, I believe you then started discussing the matter and seemed to want to debate it. So I was wondering whether you wanted to do so in committee today or at another time.
Today may not be the right moment, but I think it would be beneficial for the committee if we could set aside some time for that debate, Mr. Chair.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
We will have it at another time. I think it's more appropriate that we deal with Bill C-82.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
If we decide to schedule that, we'll schedule it at an organization meeting—if and when.
Are we ready to go to clause-by-clause consideration?
12:35 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Now, turning to clause-by-clause study of Bill C-82, pursuant to Standing Order 75(1), consideration of clause 1, the short title, is postponed.
(Clauses 2 to 6 inclusive agreed to on division)
Shall the schedule carry?
(Schedule 1 agreed to on division)
Shall the short title carry?
12:35 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.