Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would like to move CPC-5. This particular amendment is to delay the implementation of the excise regime for wine, for example, to push it back until January 1, 2023.
As we know, COVID-19 has been extremely difficult for many businesses, but imagine you are a vintner. You have waited five years for your grapes to grow. You have been able to cultivate them, to bottle them, to do all the labelling and market the product, and then you find out that your most profitable area, your cellar door, has been slammed shut because of COVID.
Many small and medium-sized wineries have taken such tremendous damage because tourism, as you know, Mr. Chair, has dried up, and many people were loath to go out even if wineries were able to be open.
This is a sector that has also been hit especially hard by supply shortages. The supply chain, particularly for bottles, has been a huge challenge.
The government in capitulating to the Australians would say, “We said we would have it done by July 1.” Well, COVID has happened. The supply chains have happened, and if you don't bottle by the end of June, essentially you have to pay excise on the existing inventory in your wine barrels. Because it's not bottled, they will have to pay, and they will take a major hit.
The government is already reining in all sorts of revenue due to higher oil prices and higher inflation. Its user fees, which are also linked to inflation, are bringing in more revenue than they ever have. Quite honestly, I know that some Liberals might say, “Wait a second. We agreed to do this.” Well, you agreed to do this first of all without talking to the industry. You made the decision. Second of all, the Australians challenged the WTO because they were standing up for their industry.
Now this is the opportunity for us all to stand up for ours, to give them a little more time so that they can get their bottles and bottle their wine. This is not a huge ask. If members want to say that it's all about following through with our word, do you know what? I would simply suggest that if you say to the Australians that we are deferring this to give the industry a little bit of breathing room, they would understand.
Why? Let me explain one thing, just so members can understand. There is one vintage of one particular company in Australia the scale of which is larger than the entire wine industry put together, big and small—one vintage from Australia. They are major international players.
When Bill Morneau, the former finance minister, came to this committee, and I asked him if he had done any economic assessment on the excise escalator, he said no. When we asked about the trade implications, he said they hadn't considered them.
All of this has stemmed from the government continuing to mismanage this file. All we are asking for here in this amendment is simply to give a little breathing room to the industry to allow them to bottle so that these small and medium-sized wineries are not hit with a CRA excise bill, something that many of them have never had to pay in their existence. While the government gives them that time, it can also then introduce its replacement program, which it has been talking about for two years and has yet to unveil to industry.
This is a win-win for our industry. The Australians will just be satisfied because they are ultimately getting what they want. Canadian premium product is on the same level playing field as Australians'. I was actually fighting to say that because the Australians have huge support, as do the Americans, as do the French, as do the Spanish, for their wine industry, which pales in comparison to what we do for the Canadian wine industry.
That's what my intervention is. While I have the floor, Mr. Chair, I would like to ask the officials a question pertaining to this section if that's all right.
