Finance Committee on July 20th, 2021

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

I ask because obviously rumours abound about an upcoming election, and yet within that second press release, that clarification, there was indication that legislation would come forward and be implemented by November 1. If there was an election during this fall session, term, or time period, would it be possible for our government to pass that kind of legislation?

[Philippe Dufresne]

If there is an election, there is a dissolution of the House, so there's no ability for the House to consider legislation during that time.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

If they wanted to come back super fast, if there were changes, potentially, to the makeup of the House of Commons, they could now change that will of Parliament by bringing forward amendments as they wished.

[Philippe Dufresne]

The House will consider legislation according to the composition of its members at any given time. Certainly if the composition of the House changes, then that can have impacts.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Okay. Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

We'll have to end it there. We will go to Mr. Berthold for about two and a half minutes, and then Mr. Maguire and then Ms. O'Connell.

Go ahead, Luc.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Let me proceed very quickly, because I have several short questions for Mr. Dufresne.

Earlier, you mentioned that, the day after a piece of legislation was enacted, you had never seen a department say that it would delay its coming into force because it contains no date.

[Philippe Dufresne]

That is correct.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

So this goes against the constitution acts and the primacy of Parliament.

[Philippe Dufresne]

This is something we had not seen before. As I noted, the lack of a date in a bill does not prevent it from coming into force.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Dufresne, you said earlier that a government can amend tax measures, apply them and implement them before a bill is passed. However, if I am not mistaken, the bill must have been introduced in Parliament beforehand.

[Philippe Dufresne]

The practice is that the government can announce tax measures that it will introduce later and, in some cases, begin to implement them at that time. However, the measures remain subject to final approval by Parliament, which will confirm that they are valid.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

In your view, would Parliament be breaking the law if it announced now that it intended to make amendments to Bill C‑208 and put the new measures in place immediately?

[Philippe Dufresne]

Parliament, not the government, can amend the bill. The government can indicate that it intends to introduce legislation later and that it has begun to implement it, to an extent. However, if it does so, it is still subject to Parliament's approval and decision to pass the legislation.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

What would happen if the government actually decided not to implement Bill C‑208 today and did not get parliamentary approval later?

Who would be held accountable, given that there could be a change of government or an election? What would happen to all the victims, farms and small businesses that could not make the transfer according to the details of Bill C‑208?

[Philippe Dufresne]

It is up to the courts to determine whether state authorities or the public have complied with the legislation as it exists. If a concern to that effect were to be raised before the courts, the courts would have to address that issue.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

So the current government could announce what it wants, such as making tax changes. Afterwards, aggrieved people would have to go to court.

That possibility creates a lot of uncertainty for all small business owners who want to transfer their business now. The news release creates even more ambiguity because we don't have the details of a possible bill and what the government intends to do.

I have one final question for you.

The news release issued yesterday mentions that the measures are in effect now. But there was another one on June 30. In your opinion, will the people who would have benefited from the good news that Bill C‑208 was enacted between those two dates be adversely affected?

[Philippe Dufresne]

Bill C‑208 has been in force since June 29. This does not change and the news releases do not affect it.

The June 30 news release indicated the government's intention to change the date of coming into force by means of a future bill. The July 19 news release confirms that this is not the case and that the legislation is in effect now.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

It has been in effect since June.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

I'm sorry, Luc. We'll have to go to Mr. Maguire.

[Philippe Dufresne]

Yes, it has been in effect since June 29.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Larry.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank you for the calling of this meeting and our witnesses for being here today.

Mr. Dufresne, in the case of June 30, 2021, when Finance announced the suspension of Bill C-208, what legal authority did the department use to announce this tax policy change?

[Philippe Dufresne]

My view is that the bill was in force. The bill has been in force since June 29. What the communiqué did on June 30 was indicate that the government intended to introduce future legislation to change that coming into force retroactively.