Finance Committee on June 13th, 2024

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I will just reiterate a couple of comments made by my colleague.

One is that Conservatives would be very open even to additional sittings before we rise to get on the record some important testimony with respect to the capital gains.

Further, we would definitely like to hear from the Minister of Finance with respect to the capital gains tax. She has certainly been outspoken in the media.

I'll just go back and reiterate a couple of other comments.

This motion was clearly rushed out the door. There are considerable errors in it, including with respect to the calculation of the capital dividend account. As more and more professionals look at it, they see the simple errors this government has made by rushing this motion, even though it had a couple of months to get it sorted.

It's clear that the Bloc has also realized the error of its ways in voting for this initially. Perhaps it's because of great stakeholders, like the ones we heard from today, on the impact of the capital gains inclusion rate.

We believe that considerable study is needed. Just to build on my colleague Mr. Chambers' excellent comment—I'll put it a little more crudely, because I'm not quite as eloquent as Mr. Chambers—the reality is that only 1% of Canadians will die each year, but in the end, 100% of us will pass away. That is the analogy I would use here. It may be only a relatively small portion in any given year, but as Mr. Chambers said, given a long enough time, nearly all Canadians will be affected by the capital gains inclusion increase, whether directly or indirectly.

I look forward to hearing what my colleagues from the Bloc and NDP, in particular, have to say with respect to this motion. It's relatively rare that an opposition party would move to a prestudy of government legislation. We definitely see that there's an opportunity—in fact, I would say a need—to discuss this further.

Once again, I would reiterate Mr. Chambers' comments that Conservatives would be very open to additional meetings before we rise. What are we on today? We are on the 13th. By the 25th, Canadians will have to decide whether they sell their property and their assets and realize the existing capital gains inclusion rate of 50% or wait until after the 25th.

Time is of the essence. We owe it to Canadians to give them a better understanding of the capital gains tax increase, so that they can understand and decide their affairs more fittingly.

In fact, the limited time is unfair in itself. At the very least, we owe the Canadian public more ability to hear from witnesses in testimony about the impact of the increase with the inclusion of the capital gains tax.

At this point, I will pass the floor on.

Thank you.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Point of order, Mr. Chair.

I seek the consent of the members of the committee to release the witnesses in the first panel.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Members, I think so too. I didn't realize we'd have so much discussion on this, even though it is somewhat about what we are studying, which is housing. We are having it.

However, we thank the witnesses for coming before our committee. We wish them the best with the rest of their day.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.

I have a feeling that we're going to have agreement on the motion, but these are very valuable witnesses. We had a programming motion that said we would study housing. This is the NDP's study. I have more questions I'd like to put to these witnesses.

I have a feeling this motion will pass, so I would ask for the indulgence of my colleagues to push this towards the end of the meeting and finish off this round of questions with these excellent witnesses. I would like to continue to question them.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, MP Davies. We do have excellent witnesses.

MP Davies, MP Chambers asked to pass this with unanimous consent, and I heard a no. Therefore, that's not possible.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Okay. That's too bad.

Thank you to the witnesses.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

We are still on the point of order.

MP Hallan.

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary Forest Lawn, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Davies, for bringing that up.

I think, on our end, we would be more than willing to pull our names from the talking list and go to a vote on this right now. That way, we can hear from the witnesses.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Okay.

I don't know if you caught that, MP Davies.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

I am happy to do that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Okay.

I have a speaking order. I have PS Turnbull.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

I am very encouraged by the Conservatives wanting to push forward government legislation to help us pass it speedily. That's a very great sign. I think having a prestudy on this is something we would certainly welcome.

I agree with Mr. Davies that we can probably deal with and dispense with this motion quickly, but I have a couple of amendments I'd like to propose. I hope they'll be friendly amendments.

Let me read them into the record. I'll read in English what I'm proposing, which I think is very consistent with what the Conservatives put forward here:

That the committee hold no fewer than four meetings devoted to a prestudy on the ways and means motion introduced in the House of Commons on June 10, 2024, that at least one meeting be held prior to June 25, 2024, that witnesses be submitted by each party prior to Friday at 5:00 p.m., that this study be deemed the committee's priority in the fall, that all evidence gathered as part of the prestudy be considered as evidence in the committee's study of capital gains legislation upon its referral to committee, and that clause-by-clause consideration of the bill start no later than one week following the bill's referral to committee.

That's what I would propose as an amendment. Hopefully, it's a friendly amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Is there anyone who wishes to speak about this?

Mr. Chambers.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Mr. Chair, I understand Mr. Davies would like to get back to the witnesses.

In an effort to be as collaborative as possible, we will take them all, except for the last one. We can talk about the last one over the summer.

How does that sound?

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

If we want to defer that to after the witnesses, I'd be happy to do that. If we want to defer that to the end of the meeting—

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

We'll subamend.

Oh, I apologize. I didn't mean to interrupt. I'm sorry. I thought you were done, Ryan.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

I agree with Mr. Davies. I'd like to hear from the witnesses.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Is this is an official amendment?

Yes.

MP Chambers.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

I will subamend it to strike the last thing about clause-by-clause, so we can get back to the witnesses. We could have a vote on this right away.

We'd be more than happy to discuss a reasonable clause-by-clause start date. I don't think we have to pick that in June, since we don't even have the final legislation yet. We know carve-outs are coming. Hopefully, they might be coming for some of the witnesses here today. We don't want to program all the way to legislation that we haven't seen yet, with a clause-by-clause start date.

We're happy to accept everything else.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, MP Chambers.

PS Turnbull, go ahead.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

I will say that I think I'm opposed to that subamendment, but we can go to a vote. If the members of the Conservative Party want to just vote on the subamendment, we can. Maybe we can dispense with this quickly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

We're voting on the subamendment, members.

(Subamendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5)

The subamendment is defeated.

MP Lawrence, go ahead.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

I would like to bring an additional amendment, if I can. Is that in the rules? I mean subamendment. I apologize.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Yes, it's an additional subamendment.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

Yes. I guess a different—