Evidence of meeting #21 for Finance in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was information.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Clerk of the Committee  Mr. Alexandre Roger
Sophie Amberg  Director, Review and Analysis Division, Charities Directorate, Canada Revenue Agency
Isabelle Jacques  Assistant Deputy Minister, Financial Sector Policy Branch, Department of Finance
Manuel Dussault  Senior Director, Framework Policy, Financial Institutions Division, Financial Sector Policy Branch, Department of Finance
Samantha Maislin Dickson  Assistant Deputy Minister, Public Safety, Defence and Immigration Portfolio, Department of Justice
Julien Brazeau  Director General, Financial Crimes and Security Division, Financial Sector Policy Branch, Department of Finance

2:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 21 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance. Pursuant to the motion adopted in committee on Thursday, February 17, the committee is meeting to study the invocation of the Emergencies Act and related measures.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House order of November 25, 2021. Members are attending in person in the room and remotely using the Zoom application. The proceedings will be made available via the House of Commons website, and just so you are aware, the webcast will always show the person speaking rather than the entire committee.

Today's meeting is also taking place in a webinar format. Webinars are for public committee meetings and are available only to members, their staff and witnesses. Members enter immediately as active participants. All functionalities for active participants remain the same. Staff will be non-active participants and can therefore only view the meeting in gallery view. I'd like to take this opportunity to remind all participants at this meeting that taking screenshots or photos of your screen is not permitted.

Given the ongoing pandemic situation and in light of recommendations from the health authorities, as well as the directive of the Board of Internal Economy from October 19, 2021, to remain healthy and safe, all those attending the meeting in person are to maintain two-metre physical distancing and must wear a non-medical mask when circulating in the room. It is highly recommended that the mask be worn at all times, including when seated. We must maintain proper hand hygiene by using the hand sanitizer provided at the room's entrance. As the chair, I will be enforcing these measures for the duration of the meeting, and I thank members in advance for their co-operation.

To ensure an orderly meeting, I'd like to now outline a few rules to follow.

Members and witnesses may speak in the official language of their choice. Interpretation services are available for this meeting. You have the choice at the bottom of your screen of the floor, English or French. If interpretation is lost, please inform me immediately and we will ensure interpretation is properly restored before resuming the proceedings. The “raise hand” feature at the bottom of the screen can be used at any time if you wish to speak or alert the chair.

For members participating in person, proceed as you usually would when the whole committee is meeting in person in a committee room. Keep in mind the Board of Internal Economy's guidelines for mask use and health protocols. Before speaking, please wait until I recognize you by name. If you are on the video conference, [Technical difficulty—Editor]. For those in the room, your microphone will be controlled as normal by the proceedings and verification officer. When speaking, please speak slowly and clearly. When you are not speaking, your mike should be on mute. I will remind you that all comments by members and witnesses should be addressed through the chair. With regard to a speaking list, the committee clerk and I will do the best we can to maintain a consolidated order of speaking for all members, whether they are participating virtually or in person.

This meeting is scheduled for a longer duration. In consideration of the fact that our witnesses may not get an opportunity to leave their virtual set-up, at around the halfway duration mark of the meeting, I will suspend the meeting for a five-minute health break.

Members, before we go to the witnesses, I have committee business. Our subcommittee met earlier today and had an opportunity to go over the schedule of a number of studies before us, be it the PBC [Technical difficulty—Editor].

2:35 p.m.

Liberal

Annie Koutrakis Liberal Vimy, QC

Mr. Clerk, is Mr. Fonseca's connection frozen for us all? He's in Gatineau.

2:35 p.m.

The Clerk of the Committee Mr. Alexandre Roger

Yes, he's frozen for us all. He's had technical difficulties all day. I believe we will have IT call him. He will probably join us by phone.

We don't have Mr. McLean as the vice-chair.

2:35 p.m.

Conservative

Adam Chambers Conservative Simcoe North, ON

[Inaudible—Editor]

2:35 p.m.

The Clerk

Mr. Ste‑Marie, as second vice-chair, you can decide whether to adjourn the meeting or go ahead with it.

2:40 p.m.

Bloc

The Vice-Chair Bloc Gabriel Ste-Marie

Mr. Clerk, do I have the authority to suspend the meeting briefly, just so that we can contact Mr. Fonseca?

Seeing that I do, I'll suspend momentarily.

2:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca

I call the meeting back to order.

I apologize to everyone for the technological difficulties that I'm experiencing.

As I was saying, just before we bring on our witnesses, our subcommittee, by unanimous consent, agreed to our subcommittee report, which spells out a schedule to look at our pre-budget consultations, Bill C-8, the Emergencies Act, as well as our inflation study.

I believe the clerk has distributed that schedule to all members.

There were a few minor changes that were made to the schedule to accommodate a number of things, which actually make this committee much better.

We will have the pre-budget consultations on March 3 and a second meeting from 6 to 8 p.m. This is if we have the consent of all members to have them work, through their whips, to prioritize FINA over other committees and to allow for that meeting. On the deadline for members to submit recommendations regarding the Emergencies Act study, members agreed to Friday, March 11.

On the Emergencies Act study, members agreed to add 30 minutes to one hour to the last witness of the meeting. The tabling of the Emergencies Act study will be moved to Monday, March 28. We will shuffle the March 24 meeting with the March 21 meeting to help out the analysts, and give them more time for that report. We will have the RCMP and FINTRAC come before us this Thursday. Regarding the Canadian Bankers Association, Desjardin and the big five banks, we'll see if they can come before the committee on March 7.

Clerk, did I capture everything?

2:45 p.m.

The Clerk

Yes, sir. That is my understanding, unless there is a member who heard something different.

2:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca

Could you let me know if there is any show of hands for that?

Is there agreement to adopt this report?

2:45 p.m.

The Clerk

You are getting thumbs up, sir.

2:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca

Excellent, thank you very much, members. That is very helpful.

It is my pleasure now to welcome our witnesses.

From the Canada Revenue Agency, we have Sophie Amberg, director, review and analysis division, charities directorate; from the Department of Finance, Isabelle Jacques, assistant deputy minister, financial sector policy branch; Julien Brazeau, director general, financial crimes and security division, financial sector policy branch; and Manuel Dussault, senior director, framework policy, financial institutions division, financial sector policy branch

From the Department of Justice, we have Samantha Maislin Dickson, assistant deputy minister, public safety, defence and immigration portfolio.

We'll commence with the Canada Revenue Agency, for up to five minutes.

2:45 p.m.

Sophie Amberg Director, Review and Analysis Division, Charities Directorate, Canada Revenue Agency

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, and thank you for the invitation to appear before you today.

My name is Sophie Amberg, and I am the director of the review and analysis division of the charities directorate within the Canada Revenue Agency.

Through the clerk, the CRA has provided a copy of my full remarks for the committee's attention, which provide an overview of the CRA's specific role in this area

In the interest of time, Mr. Chair, I will summarize my remarks by noting that the CRA's contribution is administered by two distinct areas: the charities directorate, the area I represent, which has a particular focus on determining whether the charitable registration system is being abused; and the criminal investigations directorate, which supports the anti-money laundering efforts.

With that, Mr. Chair, I'll be pleased to answer any questions the committee may have.

2:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca

Thank you for your opening remarks.

Clerk, did you say we would have opening rounds by some of the other witnesses?

2:45 p.m.

The Clerk

No. There are none.

2:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca

There are no further remarks.

We will move to the members. I have MP Lawrence from the Conservatives up first.

Each party will have up to six minutes for their questions in this first round.

Go ahead, MP Lawrence.

2:45 p.m.

Conservative

Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair, including for for fighting through your technological difficulties. We've all experienced that throughout the pandemic.

I want to start with a general statement and I will welcome anyone who wishes to respond. I suspect it's the Department of Finance that would be best positioned to do so, but if any of the witnesses want to respond, that would be great.

The invocation of the Emergencies Act has given government the right to freeze the bank accounts of individuals. This exposes individuals to potential financial ruin for, as the Minister of Justice said, supporting causes that the government does not believe are acceptable.

When you freeze someone's bank account, you are effectively removing them from society. They may not be able to pay for food to feed their children, put gas in their car to go to work or even pay for electricity to heat their homes.

I want to walk step by step through the emergency measures orders respecting the financial provisions, so that Canadians can clearly understand the financial implications. I believe there's a great deal of misinformation out there right now.

We'll start here. Pursuant to the emergency measures order, financial institutions can effectively debank someone as a designated person. Under the emergency measures regulations, a designated person is defined as anyone who has participated or supported an unlawful assembly. This gives the government incredibly broad powers. As Professor Paul David said, the debanking provisions are so broad that literally a clerk at a Quickie market, who sold a propane canister to a protester, could have his account frozen.

Witnesses, members, Canadians are afraid. Members of Parliament have received thousands of calls and emails from Canadians who are concerned that even a small contribution to a then-legal cause could result in their financial ruin.

I'm going to ask the witnesses some clear and succinct questions. I would very much appreciate their response, not for me, but for the rest of Canada.

To the witnesses, what specific acts could or would result in the freezing of a bank account?

2:50 p.m.

Isabelle Jacques Assistant Deputy Minister, Financial Sector Policy Branch, Department of Finance

What would lead to the freezing of a bank account under the order that came into force on February 15 is someone directly or indirectly funding illegal activities as set out in the regulations that came into force. For example, if somebody was giving money to a third party to enable them to participate in the illegal blockades that were occurring on the Hill, that person could be captured.

2:50 p.m.

Conservative

Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

To be clear, if a passerby gave an individual a cup of coffee, they could have their bank account frozen.

2:50 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Financial Sector Policy Branch, Department of Finance

Isabelle Jacques

No, not for a cup of coffee.

We had a process in place that had two prongs. The first was that our colleagues in the RCMP had lists of individuals [Technical difficulty—Editor] were shared with the financial institutions. That's one way in which those individuals could be captured. The other one is if a financial institution, using there found algorithms, found that there were any issues and, further to verification, found out that they were involved in—

2:50 p.m.

Conservative

Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

I apologize. I don't mean to be rude, but my time is short.

To be clear, a financial contribution either through a crowdsourcing platform or directly could result in a person's bank account being frozen?

2:50 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Financial Sector Policy Branch, Department of Finance

Isabelle Jacques

Yes, it could, to the extent—

2:50 p.m.

Conservative

Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

They did not have to actively be involved in the protest? They didn't have to be here in Ottawa or at one of the blockades?

2:50 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Financial Sector Policy Branch, Department of Finance

Isabelle Jacques

No, not themselves. It could be indirect.

2:50 p.m.

Conservative

Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

So if someone gave $20 to the Freedom Convoy through a crowdsourcing platform, they could have their bank account frozen?

2:50 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Financial Sector Policy Branch, Department of Finance

Isabelle Jacques

If that person gave the money after February 15, it is possible although very unlikely in view of the circumstances. I say this because the banks or financial institutions relied heavily on the information that was provided by the RCMP further to their own internal processes and verification, so they take, basically, take a risk-based approach. Although it's not impossible that someone who gave $20 would be captured and have their bank account frozen, I find that scenario.... I think it would happen in rare circumstances.