Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thanks for that rousing applause from my colleagues here.
I do appreciate all of the witnesses appearing today. I want to thank you for taking the time to speak with the committee.
Bill C-8 is an important piece of legislation, which is obvious, but I do find it interesting.... My questions will be focused on Bill C-8 primarily and I'll try to stick to the bill as much as I can. It's interesting to me in a sense that we're meeting today discussing anything but the emergency measures act. I've been sitting here and I've been thinking this all week, and I'm not sure if it's relevant to the bill.
If it was truly national security, why was I permitted as a member of Parliament to walk seven or eight blocks through demonstrators every evening to get a cab? If my life was in danger, wouldn't I have armed guards with me or a bulletproof vest? Wouldn't they find a different way for me to get home at night?
I have four kids, and I'm going to be honest. I've walked through that demonstration for two weeks now, and I've never, ever felt threatened walking through it. If it actually is a national security issue, I think it's important that members of Parliament are not at all protected in that situation. I wanted to say that today.
The part of the legislation that I'm most drawn to is part 2, the underused housing tax act. As it pertains to my role as shadow minister for national revenue and pairing that with the latest report of inflation from Statistics Canada and the Parliamentary Budget Officer's reaffirmation that home prices are steadily climbing, I have a great deal of concern that this is simply a tax grab for the government that will mostly likely have zero impact on Canadians being closer to affording a new home. I also have concerns that other countries will impose the same tax on Canadians like snowbirds, who are already facing 30-year-high inflation.
My question is for Mr. Giroux.
I appreciate your being here today. How did you first come to the conclusion that this tax would generate $134 million while the government was suggesting it would generate $200 million? Obviously there's a 33% difference between the two, and I was just curious to see how you came up with your number and how it looks today.