Finance Committee on Feb. 22nd, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

—it would maybe reduce the cross-talk to help the interpreters.

You have right now 22 seconds. I did stop the time.

[Jake Stewart, Conservative, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

Thank you.

I wanted to say that the Canadian government gave a settlement of $10.5 million to Omar Khadr, who shot and killed our U.S. allies. Trudeau said that we can't water down Canadian citizenship because a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian. But now we're picking—

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

I have a point of order, Chair.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

There's a point of order.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order about relevance. There are many instances where one could have called a point of order. Our colleague was interrupting the witnesses from answering. I held off because it seemed to have been corrected.

On this point especially, how it's relevant to the topic at hand, really is beyond me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

We will stick to the emergency measures.

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

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Go ahead, Mr. Ste‑Marie.

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

I want to throw in my two cents. For a while now, certain members have raised points of order in the course of our meetings because they felt the comments of the member who was speaking were off topic. Both in the House and in committees, the member who is speaking is usually given a good bit of leeway. If a member isn't allowed to say two sentences that segue into the topic in hand, how can we debate anything?

I would ask this of you, Mr. Chair. When someone raises a point of order because they don't think the member's comments are germane to the subject before the committee, the member should be allowed to speak and given more leeway. It's ridiculous to interrupt the debate every single time someone feels a member has gone off topic.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, Mr. Ste‑Marie.

I do allow for some leeway. We were well over the time with Mr. Stewart. I take your point.

We are moving now the the Liberals and MP Chatel for five minutes.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank the witnesses for joining us today and for providing clear answers.

I want to make sure that I understood something. Mr. Stewart asked a good question. He asked what happened to the donations made on the GoFundMe platform before February 15. I think that the answer was clear. The media clearly reported that GoFundMe would give the money back to the donors. I want to thank the witness for providing the answer.

Ms. Jacques, you gave very specific answers to the questions. The committee members greatly appreciate it.

There was talk of making certain measures permanent. These measures empower FINTRAC, among other entities, to obtain certain information on payment service providers. However, there was a void in the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act.

We know that banks and financial institutions are already required to report to FINTRAC. These emergency regulations mean that crowdfunding platforms and their payment service providers must now do so as well.

How could this legal void be permanently filled, if that's the goal? Could we use the legislative route, as we did in 2000 when we created this legislation, and move amendments to fill this legal void? I must admit that this legal void took me by surprise. We filled a void in 2018, I believe, with respect to cryptocurrency. Now it's clear that crowdfunding platforms are being used for illegal purposes.

Could you share your opinion on this?

[Isabelle Jacques]

Certainly.

We worked closely with our colleagues at the Department of Justice. We can permanently fill this void through legislation or regulation. We're working on that right now to make sure that we permanently fill the void with respect to crowdfunding platforms and payment service providers.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you, Ms. Jacques.

I guess that we aren't the only ones in this situation. Are there any discussions about this matter in the financial action task force, or FATF?

[Isabelle Jacques]

[Technical difficulty—Editor]

I know that you'll be speaking to our FINTRAC colleagues on Thursday, but one of my colleagues here may want to comment.

One thing is for sure. We're participating in these meetings and we're always looking for ways to improve the measures in place.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

When the government made remarks when the Emergency Measures Act was invoked, the Deputy Prime Minister also pointed out that certain activities weren't covered by the act. Again, that's somewhat concerning.

Could you elaborate on the shortcomings that must be addressed in the long term?

[Isabelle Jacques]

One shortcoming was that we lacked information. Crowdfunding platforms and payment service providers weren't included, so they didn't need to provide that information. We broadened the requirements. We believe that, as a result, we'll receive more information.

That said, we'll continue to review the measures in place to see whether we can do more. We'll be working closely with FINTRAC in this area.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

This relates to the current work on the concept of the ultimate recipient. Where do these funds go when they're distributed? That's what we want to know. Where did these funds come from? We're very concerned about the interference of some foreign donors.

Will this enable us to obtain the information?

This question could be addressed to the FINTRAC officials.

[Isabelle Jacques]

This question could be addressed to FINTRAC, but also to the Department of Industry, the department responsible for looking after this issue. We're working with these people and that will certainly help us.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you.

Thank you, MP Chatel.

We are moving to our third round, starting with the Conservatives and Mr. Lawrence for five minutes.

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

Thank you very much.

My questions will once again be for the Department of Finance.

I want to talk about the proclamation's second paragraph (c). In there, it gives the government the authorization to regulate property, including any crowdfunding or payment processing. Has that been done or will that be done?

[Isabelle Jacques]

I apologize. It has been done via the order, but we're also looking at taking measures to do it in a permanent fashion.

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

Okay. You would need additional legislation, though, to do that permanently, correct?

[Isabelle Jacques]

Yes, we can do it via legislation and/or regulation.

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

Okay. But that would have stopped....

I guess, regulation....

So that's ongoing as you're continuing to look to pursue—