Evidence of meeting #31 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.
Liberal
Conservative
Phil McColeman Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
Yes, at this point. I have two further motions as well.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Okay, the motion is on the floor. Does anybody want to speak to it? The motion has been moved.
We'll have Mr. Aboultaif and Mr. MacKinnon.
Conservative
Ziad Aboultaif Conservative Edmonton Manning, AB
Thank you.
I think that with the lack of clarity on the stakeholders in the very first motion, it's very important to agree on inviting some parties to be questioned and consulted on this issue. There won't be anything wrong with agreeing as a group right now, as a committee, on these few suggestions Mr. McColeman is making in order to have some clarity on who we're going to be seeing.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Okay, I'll go to the list, but I think it should be understood that these motions will add to whatever happens at the steering committee. We can't take away from them if these motions carry.
Go ahead, Mr. MacKinnon.
Liberal
Steven MacKinnon Liberal Gatineau, QC
I think we can assure our honourable friends that the views, opinions, and recommendations they bring to the steering committee will all be taken into account and voted on, if required.
I know for our part that there will be a number of interested parties, stakeholders, and officials that we'll certainly want to consider having before the committee and that the opposition's suggestions will be taken into account at that point. I don't know that we need to spend a lot more time trying to triage individual witnesses at this point. We can certainly have the discussion at the subcommittee.
I think you can rest assured that between this examination and the eventual examination of the bill that will enable this important change, we'll have an opportunity to exhaustively go through witnesses.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
We have a motion on the floor. Is there any further discussion? It's to invite the Canadian Federation of Independent Business as a witness on this issue.
Is there any further discussion?
(Motion negatived)
I have a question for the committee before you start, and maybe this is to the clerk. Does this motion inviting the CFIB on this issue deny the subcommittee the right to invite them?
Is the understanding that no, we still could?
Conservative
Phil McColeman Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
I'd like to present the next motion I have.
It reads:
That the Standing Committee on Finance invite the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board to appear before the committee to provide testimony and answer questions about their investment strategy and projections for future rates of return.
I'll pass this out, Mr. Chair.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
This to invite the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board as a witness. Is there any discussion on that point?
There is no discussion. Is there anything you want to add as the mover?
I see there is not.
(Motion negatived)
Conservative
Phil McColeman Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
The third motion is:
That the Standing Committee on Finance invite the Chief Actuary of Canada to appear before the committee to provide testimony and answer questions about how the June 20, 2016 agreement with the provinces to expand the Canada Pension Plan will affect the fund's financial sustainability.
I have it in both official languages, Chair.
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Is there any further discussion?
(Motion negatived)
Does that end your motions?
September 9th, 2016 / 11:40 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Okay. We are of the understanding that the subcommittee can still look at those as witnesses if it so desires.
That concludes the discussion on the Canada Pension Plan.
I will just make a couple of points and see if we have agreement on the pre-budget consultations. I think we're okay in public on this matter.
We have the witness lists from all the parties, and they are in pretty good order. We're short on witnesses in some areas, in particular Newfoundland and Labrador and the Territories. We have a considerable number from the Liberals. I'm asking both the NDP and the Conservatives if they could come forward shortly if they think of anybody.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Those hearings in Newfoundland and Labrador and the Territories will be by video conference, but if you have witnesses, get them in.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
We have two options on the panels. We could go with two one-and-a-half-hour panels of six witnesses, which gives us twelve, or we could go with three one-hour panels of four witnesses, which is also twelve per city. What we have typically done on this committee is to go with the two one-and-a-half-hour panels with a little break. Are people okay going that way? Various committees do it different ways. Are we okay on that?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Then we would have the same procedures we followed in the past.
Some of the committees, especially the trade committee, in an area such as Fredericton, New Brunswick, following the formal presentations with witnesses, have what they call an open mike session, which allows people who didn't get the opportunity to present a brief or who are in the audience and have something they want to say to take a minute or two, not for questions but to at least be able to put their information on the record and give committee members the opportunity to think about it. I think it gives an opportunity for the public who didn't have the opportunity to present to have their say as well.
Would people be okay with doing that at the end of the formal session, at least when we have time?
Go ahead, Mr. Duvall.
NDP
Scott Duvall NDP Hamilton Mountain, ON
I want to just clarify that this wouldn't take away any time from the actual witnesses.
