Evidence of meeting #203 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was body.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:20 p.m.
Director General, Tax Legislation Division, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance
Yes, it requires that there be a body. I don't want to preclude the possibility that such a body could already exist.
4:20 p.m.
Director General, Tax Legislation Division, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance
Again, the requirement is simply that the regulations prescribe a body for the purposes of designating organizations for the definition. It does not touch on what that body might be, but the term “body” is used throughout the Income Tax Act to refer to a variety of not even just entities but things from administrative tribunals to new government agencies.
That is a fairly broad term, and I don't want to imply that this legislation requires or establishes a separate administrative tribunal, for example, when it doesn't. It just has the requirement that a body be prescribed for the purposes of the “qualified Canadian journalism organization” definition.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Where can I find the wording that requires that that body exist?
4:20 p.m.
Director General, Tax Legislation Division, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance
It's in subclause 43(2), in part 1 of the bill, and it's an amendment to subsection 248(1) of the Income Tax Act. It's in the new definition of qualified Canadian journalism organization, in proposed new paragraph 248(1)(b), on page 36 of the bill, line 28, I believe.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
It might seem like an arcane detail, but we're discussing which group of people will decide who is a qualified journalism organization, and that is a drastic departure from how free and independent press normally works—having a government body, as you call it, deciding which organization is journalistic and which is not.
A free press implies that no government organization gets to tell us who is a journalist and who isn't. The reader gets to choose who they want to read. The viewer gets to choose who they want to watch. The listener gets to decide who they listen to. We don't have, in a free press, government bodies that tell us what constitutes a journalism organization. We can only imagine what kind of political pressure such a body would fall under if it were established in law or through regulation by a political government.
Do you have any response to that?
4:25 p.m.
Director General, Tax Legislation Division, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance
I'd just like to circle back to comments made initially by my colleague, Maude. It has been announced that it would follow the establishment of an independent advisory panel. Again, I wish I had the details with me right now, but that—
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
I rise on a point of order, Mr. Chair.
My colleague is playing detective and trying to spell out a doomsday scenario that's taken straight out of Orwell. I think the officials have answered the question. We're descending into debate now. The answer is there. There's a mechanism provided for here in the BIA that would allow for the creation of a panel. Government is not mandating that the independent media in Canada buy the government line and run with it.
I'm not sure—well, I think I know—where my colleague is going. This is not fair to the officials, and we've got the answer.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
I think we see exactly what the problem is with this proposal. When members of the government hear things, uncomfortable questions, they try to shut them down. The last thing we need is to give government the ability, through some body, to determine which is or isn't a qualified journalism organization. If this happens, we will see government officials saying, “I'm sorry, I'm not sure you're making a relevant point here. Maybe you ought not to be considered a qualifying journalism organization.”
I want to thank my Liberal member for making my point for me.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
We are going to continue to ask questions on this, Mr. Chair.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Let me finish my point, Mr. Poilievre.
I do think if officials are not able to answer the question of how an advisory committee is appointed, then certainly the minister should come prepared as to how that advisory committee is established. I think that's the bottom line of Mr. Poilievre's question. I think that is a fair question for us to ask: How do you get to an advisory committee? How is it appointed? The authorities are outlined to a certain extent in here, but I think the key question is how is it appointed.
Go ahead, Mr. Poilievre.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
You said that this body is established. Can you read into the record the clause that creates this body?
4:25 p.m.
Director General, Tax Legislation Division, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance
As I noted, there is no clause in the bill that creates—
4:25 p.m.
Director General, Tax Legislation Division, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance
In clause 43(2) of the bill in part 1, would you like me to read the relevant parts of the provision?
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
I believe it starts with “qualified Canadian journalism organization, at any time, means a corporation, partnership or trust that...”. Am I correct?
4:25 p.m.
Director General, Tax Legislation Division, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance
That's correct. “Subsection 248(1) of the act is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order:...” Subsection 248(1) is where a number of the definitions that apply for the purposes of the Income Tax Act are contained. It would introduce the new definition, “qualified Canadian journalism organization, at any time, means a corporation, partnership or trust that...”, and paragraph (a) contains a number of conditions that would need to be met.
Paragraph (b) is the one that is relevant to this discussion and it reads, “is designated at that time by a body prescribed for the purpose of this definition”.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
This is not a small detail. This body is going to designate which gets to be a journalistic organization, and which doesn't. You're asking us to authorize this body to make such decisions, and no one can tell us who appoints the body.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Just as a point of clarification on Mr. Poilievre's point, this body doesn't designate journalistic organizations but it could designate who this tax measure applies to. Is that correct?
4:30 p.m.
Director General, Tax Legislation Division, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance
That's right. It is relevant for the purposes of defining “qualified Canadian journalism organizations”, which itself is relevant for each of the three measures we've discussed: the qualified donee status, the labour tax credit and the digital subscription tax credit. Of course, it does not go beyond that to define what is meant by a journalism organization—
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Am I correct in saying that it would be an advisory group that basically assists in deciding who the tax measures related to Canadian journalism apply to?