Evidence of meeting #1 for Finance in the 44th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
I only have one thing to propose. We would like to receive the two ministers at different times. In other words, we would have two hours with the Minister of Finance, and at another time, an hour with the Minister of Canadian Heritage.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca
Yes, it's a friendly amendment.
Did I see other hands go up?
I have Mr. Baker and Ms. Dzerowicz.
Liberal
Yvan Baker Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Thank you for your explanation, Mr. Ste‑Marie. I understand the importance of the subject you've raised and I know it is important for you to ask questions about it. I respect that. There are also, however, people from other sectors who are affected by the bill or who are left out. So we could invite witnesses from the different affected sectors. I think it was Mr. Blaikie who suggested this idea.
That said, it is the Minister of Finance who is responsible for this bill. I think that in her testimony she will be able to answer the questions that you have raised about it. So we can accomplish what you want by having the person responsible for this bill, the Minister of Finance, appear before the committee.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca
Thank you.
I have Mr. Ste-Marie, Mr. Blaikie, Ms. Chatel and then Ms. Dzerowicz.
Bloc
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC
I thank Mr. Baker for the points he has made. Unfortunately, I do not agree with him.
The support program that would be proposed for self-employed workers in the cultural sector would come from the Department of Canadian Heritage. For us in the Bloc Québécois, this is so important that it will determine whether or not we give our support to Bill C‑2 at the committee stage as well as at the report and third reading stages in the House. Since it is the Minister of Canadian Heritage who has negotiated with the organizations representing the people affected, and since we are talking about a program or a bill that would come from him, it is essential that he be the one to come and explain it publicly to all the members of the committee and to the entire population.
We want to ask for clear and specific commitments on this and then get confirmation from the organizations representing those affected that this is acceptable to them, before we support Bill C‑2 at the next stages. We feel this is essential, and it will have a direct impact on our vote.
Liberal
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
I would like to expand on that. This question has already been asked a few times in the House of Commons. I myself have raised the shortcomings of this bill with regard to the cultural sector. In her responses, the Minister of Finance said that it was up to the Minister of Canadian Heritage to set up a new program for self-employed cultural workers. Given that the Minister of Finance has said she will ask the Minister of Canadian Heritage to respond to these questions, it would make sense for us to invite the minister directly to come and talk to us here. That is why I support the amendment brought forward by my Bloc Québécois colleague.
Liberal
Sophie Chatel Liberal Pontiac, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thanks for the clarification. It answers a question I was about to ask. Indeed, any changes to the Income Tax Act are really the responsibility of the Department of Finance. I did not understand how the Minister of Canadian Heritage's proposals were related to the bill that the committee must vote on. It seems to me that the positions of the Bloc Québécois and the NDP on Bill C‑2 are more akin to a political argument. In any case, this is outside the scope of the bill.
I just want confirmation that this will not change what the committee has to analyze.
Bloc
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC
No, this does not change Bill C‑2.
May I answer the question, Mr. Chair?
Bloc
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC
Yes.
The government is telling us that they are not able to include what we were asking for in Bill C‑2, but that they will put it in another bill. So, we want to make sure that this will be the case when we vote on Bill C‑2. Otherwise, the bill will be missing a part, from our perspective. So we would like some reassurance on that.
Liberal
Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I appreciate the conversation. Those who have been committee members before know that I talk a lot about arts and culture in my own community. I care a lot about that.
When I look at this bill, I see that there are already elements in here around emergency supports for the arts and culture sector, particularly around live performances and exhibits and around museums and historic sites. There are a number of emergency supports. It's not that it's completely missing, because a lot of our arts and culture actually fit within the tourism and hospitality recovery program. I want to mention that.
When I heard the response of our Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance in the House of Commons about supports for individual artists, my understanding was that it is going to be a separate bill. I feel confident that there is a separate bill and a separate solution being worked on right now for individual artists and those working within the cultural sector.
It is important for us to stay focused on this bill. If we start going down the track of who's missing from this bill, we get a little bit off track.
I agree that the Minister of Finance will be able to respond to questions around what is included in supports for the arts and cultural sector, as well as what isn't included and why it's not included. That discussion would be possible when we have the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance come before us.
I encourage us to stay focused on the bill and to stay focused on moving forward. As mentioned, we have a lot to do this week to make sure that we study this bill appropriately, to make sure that we have the right witnesses and to make sure that we are evaluating the bill in the right fashion so that we can move forward with it as soon as possible.
Mr. Chair, am I able to call the question for us to do the vote right now?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca
We can call the question, but there is an amendment, and then there was a friendly amendment by Monsieur Poilievre.
We'll call the question.
The Clerk
The question is on the amendment of Mr. Ste-Marie to have the Minister of Canadian Heritage come before the committee for an hour, not at the same time as the Minister of Finance.
(Amendment agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
I have just a quick procedural point, if I may, Mr. Chair. I know there have been a lot of them already in this meeting.
On the calling of the question, I sat on PROC in the last Parliament, as you may recall. I believe you had the good fortune to visit us. There were members who were trying to call the question at that time and there were a lot of Liberals who really wanted to speak. It is important in our initial meeting that we get off on the right foot, just so that there is no misunderstanding that in fact the question can't be called in committee debates. When all members have said their piece, you can proceed to a vote.
Certainly some meetings of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs would have ended much earlier in the last Parliament if members did indeed have the ability to call questions at committee.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca
Thank you for that.
I did ask if there was any further discussion, but I didn't see anybody, so we did move forward.
Mr. Clerk, what is left is the motion as amended.
The question is on the motion as amended.
(Motion agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0 )
Is there any further business from the committee? No.
The meeting is adjourned.