Evidence of meeting #215 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.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Maude Lavoie  Director General, Business Income Tax Division, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance
Trevor McGowan  Director General, Tax Legislation Division, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance
Charlene Davidson  Senior Project Leader, Financial Crimes Policy, Financial Systems Division, Financial Sector Policy, Department of Finance
Samuel Millar  Director General, Corporate Finance, Natural Resources and Environment, Economic Development and Corporate Finance, Department of Finance
Clerk of the Committee  Mr. David Gagnon
Darryl C. Patterson  Director, Corporate, Insolvency and Competition Policy Directorate, Marketplace Framework Policy Branch, Department of Industry
Tolga Yalkin  Director General, Consumer Product Safety Directorate, Department of Health
Colin Stacey  Acting Director General, Pilotage Act Review, Department of Transport
Sara Wiebe  Director General, Air Policy, Department of Transport
Joyce Henry  Director General, Office of Energy Efficiency, Energy Sector, Department of Natural Resources
André Baril  Senior Director, Refugee Affairs, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Michel Tremblay  Senior Vice-President, Policy and Innovation, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation
Ariane Gagné-Frégeau  Procedural Clerk
Karen Hall  Director General, Social Policy Directorate, Strategic and Service Policy Branch, Department of Employment and Social Development
Hugues Vaillancourt  Senior Director, Social Development Policy Division, Social Policy Directorate, Strategic and Service Policy Branch, Department of Employment and Social Development

1:20 p.m.

Liberal

Michael McLeod Liberal Northwest Territories, NT

Thank you.

1:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

I didn't even know that. I have to comb my hair.

We'll go through recorded votes on these clauses.

Mr. Richards, there's been a request that we try to stop around 1:30 because some other people have to do some things in the House. I think we'll try to suspend from around 1:30 until 3:30 to give you folks the opportunity to do what you have to do, if that's okay.

We are taking recorded votes, Mr. Clerk.

(Clause 270 agreed to: yeas 8; nays 1)

(Clause 271 agreed to: yeas 8; nays 1)

(Clause 272 agreed to: yeas 8; nays 1)

(Clause 273 agreed to: yeas 8; nays 1)

(Clause 274 agreed to: yeas 8; nays 1)

(Clause 275 agreed to: yeas 8; nays 1)

(Clause 276 agreed to: yeas 8; nays 1)

(Clause 277 agreed to: yeas 8; nays 1)

(Clause 278 agreed to: yeas 8; nays 1)

(Clause 279 agreed to: yeas 8; nays 1)

Go ahead, Mr. Dusseault.

1:25 p.m.

NDP

Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC

I have a quick comment. I'm a bit surprised that the Conservatives don't support my amendments.

I will refer them to a letter signed by MPs Block, Jeneroux and Liepert. I'll cite the letter they sent to us:

For these...reasons, we supported the NDP's amendment proposed during our Committee's May 14, 2019 meeting and recommend that your Committee remove Division 12 from Bill C-97 and call on the Government of Canada to introduce stand-alone legislation early in the new Parliament following a meaningful consultation period with all affected stakeholders.

I'm finding myself surprised by what just happened.

1:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

All right. You've made your point.

There are no amendments from clause 280 to clause 291. Can we carry those on division? Then we will suspend until 3:30.

(Clauses 280 to 291 inclusive agreed to on division)

(On clause 292)

We will come back and start with clause 292, when amendment CPC-10 will be up.

We will suspend until 3:30.

3:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

We will reconvene. We got to clause 290. We'll be starting in a moment with clause 291. We had a clause that we needed to come back to, which was clause 131. That clause was allowed to stand.

We were waiting for an official. I believe you had some questions for her, Mr. Kmiec. I believe it was Joyce Henry. We stood that clause down for the moment. We'll go back and deal with it now.

I will ask the other witnesses to just stay at the table and we'll get to you in a minute.

Are you ready to roll, or do you want a minute? You're always ready?

3:30 p.m.

Conservative

Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB

I'm always ready.

May 27th, 2019 / 3:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

That's good.

3:30 p.m.

Conservative

Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB

Thank you, Ms. Henry, for coming. I'm pretty sure we dug you out of the catacombs of the Flaherty building, so I'm happy you could come here.

There was a discussion among MPs here. We were told that FCM provides some type of document to the minister and the minister is obliged to then table it in the House, or a version of it. Is that correct?

3:30 p.m.

Joyce Henry Director General, Office of Energy Efficiency, Energy Sector, Department of Natural Resources

Yes.

I'd like to apologize for not being here earlier. I'm actually with the Department of Natural Resources, with the office of energy efficiency.

The FCM is required to provide an annual report to the three ministers with whom they have an agreement, those being the Minister of Natural Resources, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and the Minister of Infrastructure. Then the previous agreements have said that those reports may be tabled in Parliament. It wasn't a requirement.

3:30 p.m.

Conservative

Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB

So it's a “may”. It's not a “must”.

3:30 p.m.

Director General, Office of Energy Efficiency, Energy Sector, Department of Natural Resources

Joyce Henry

It's a “may”, but the language in the current agreement with the new funding on energy efficiency has been strengthened to say “shall”. We would go forward with tabling.

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB

Will it be the original FCM document that would be tabled, or does the minister do a summary of it?

3:35 p.m.

Director General, Office of Energy Efficiency, Energy Sector, Department of Natural Resources

Joyce Henry

No, it's an annual report, so this is the one most currently available. They have to provide it to the ministers within five months after the end of their fiscal year end. This is the 2017-18 one, and they have to make it public. They do make it public already, but it's not necessarily tabled in Parliament.

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Are we okay now?

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB

No—

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

No, I mean you're done, if I can put that way. We're done with the discussion on questions related to clause 131, which was stood.

On CPC-5, did we debate that amendment? We need to go to the question on CPC-5, which was the amendment. Is there anything further to discuss on CPC-5? It was back quite a few amendments ago.

All those in favour of CPC-5?

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(On clause 131)

All those in favour of clause 131?

(Clause 131 agreed to on division)

(On clause 292)

Who was doing the discussion on CPC-10?

Go ahead, Mr. Richards.

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB

The issue we had here is around taking the regulatory body that exists now, with which there are a whole host of issues, and allowing it to become essentially the college. That's where our concerns are. That's why we have these amendments.

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Is there anything else on amendment CPC-10?

Go ahead, Mr. Sorbara.

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON

Thank you, Chair.

Good afternoon, everyone.

I'll be speaking to this amendment. I thank Mr. Richards for bringing it forward. I will be disagreeing with it and not voting for the amendment.

The amendment would effectively remove the option for the existing regulatory body to apply to continue as a new college. It would effectively mean we'd be starting from scratch. It would replicate many of the same growing pains we've witnessed with the current regulator and it would also fail to mention knowledge and expertise of the professional staff of the current regulator.

There are some other reasons that I can opine upon, but needless to say the amendment doesn't add value to the new organization, the new committee being created.

Thank you, Chair.

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Thank you. We'll open it up for discussion.

I don't think there are any more questions for you, Ms. Henry. Thank you for coming and hanging around three or four times.

Officials are here on this whole section. We have Ms. Duffin, Senior Policy Analyst with the Immigration Department, and Mr. Smith, Assistant Director of Social Immigration Policy and Programs.

If there are any questions for the officials, they're available to take them.

Is there any further discussion on CPC-10?

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clause 291 agreed to on division)

There are no amendments on clauses 293 to 299.

(Clauses 293 to 299 inclusive agreed to on division)

(On clause 300)

On clause 300, we have amendment CPC-11.

3:40 p.m.

Conservative

Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB

I'll speak to that one. It's pretty simple.

It gets to the same idea as the last one we had problems with. It's this new college, and it's fraught with issues. Removing this section of the legislation would allow the existing regulatory body to continue. It's the same idea that we're trying to get out in removing this particular section.

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Is there any discussion?

Go ahead, Mr. Sorbara.

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON

Similar to my comments on the prior amendment that was put forward by the opposition party, one of the primary reasons for this clause is that the legislation was drafted to provide for the Immigration Consultants of Canada Regulatory Council to continue as a new college. That is the preferred path on our government's priority, as it will help ensure a smooth transition and minimize the disruption to IRCC's clients. The current regulator would have difficulty retaining its staff in the period of time before a new regulator could be established, hampering its ability to govern the profession in the interim period and its ability to provide continued service to clients.

We would like to have a smooth transition, Mr. Chair.

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Is there any further discussion on CPC-11?

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clause 300 agreed to on division)

Thank you, folks. It wasn't too hard a task.

We're now turning to division 16. From IRCC, we have Mr. Valentine, Director General for Refugee Affairs; and Mr. Baril, Senior Director.

Mr. Dusseault, do you have a question?

3:40 p.m.

NDP

Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC

As I did with the other part of the bill, I am asking for a recorded vote on clauses 301 to 310.