Please allow me to continue, Mr. Chair.
I thank the official for his reply. I completely agree with him: The intention is there and it's drafted that way. However, the directives that the Canada Revenue Agency gives to Revenu Québec, as well as the discussions and negotiations between these two organizations, do not confirm this.
I agree with what Mr. Davies, Mr. Turnbull and the senior official say. I thank them for it and I agree with them, but it's all still in the realm of intention. If we really want to guarantee that the GST exemption will apply to these Quebec professionals, we need to amend the text of the bill. We've been talking about this for months. We've had representatives from all the professional orders come and explain it to us at length, forwards and backwards. Unfortunately, this is what it takes. If the amendment is not adopted, they will probably not have access to it. That's really worrying. So that's why I'm proposing it.
Of course, I wish we could have had representatives from the Canada Revenue Agency with us to clarify the situation once and for all and explain why they're telling Revenu Québec that there can't be a GST exemption in this case.
The professional orders have told us that, following their discussions with the Canada Revenue Agency and Revenu Québec, it seems that, even though the bill talks about professionals who have the same training or competence as those who practise this trade in a province where it is regulated, the only way for a professional belonging to these Quebec orders to qualify for the GST exemption is to obtain recognition from a maritime province allowing them to practise their profession there, even if this is not their intention, and then return to practise their profession in Quebec. Quebec has a population of eight million. This obligation will overflow the systems of New Brunswick or the other maritime provinces, which will have to give this attestation to Quebec professionals. This is a serious problem.
I don't want these people from Quebec to be left behind, as happens so often. That's what I've observed in my experience on this committee: After a budget implementation bill is passed, there's no follow-up from the government and it falls into oblivion. I write to Ms. Freeland, she thanks me and says she'll follow up with me, but nothing happens after that.
Now is the time to get it right. I therefore invite you to vote in favour of this amendment.
Thank you.