Finance Committee on April 25th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, MP Morantz. That's six minutes.

Now, we are going to the Liberals. I have MP Baker for six minutes.

Go ahead, please.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank all of the witnesses, the public servants, who are here with us today at this committee. Thank you not only for all of your work on the budget implementation act but also for your service in general to Canadians.

I'd like to start by asking a question around the grocery rebate. What is the benefit of delivering the grocery rebate through a system like the GST credit instead of creating a new program?

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Mr. Leblanc.

[Pierre Leblanc]

Thanks for the question.

Basically, when you use an existing platform, you can deliver it more quickly, and you can also deliver it at a cheaper administrative cost. Those are the main two advantages.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

For the folks at home who may not follow the pros and cons of the different approaches, such as doing it through GST versus a new program, could you talk about why it's more efficient cost-wise and why it's quicker?

[Pierre Leblanc]

It's the Canada Revenue Agency that would be delivering the proposed grocery rebate, and it would be doing so through the GST credit system. That's the system where the CRA is delivering the benefit four times a year to a large swath of the population. Currently, you have about 11 million individuals and families who are receiving the GST credit. Essentially, in terms of changes to their information technology systems, it's certainly easier to build on something that's already functional and to make the necessary changes rather than to start from scratch.

That also answers the second part of your question, I think, sir, about efficiency and the limiting of administrative costs as well.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

That makes sense. That makes a lot of sense.

Staying on the topic of the grocery rebate, one of the things I'm really pleased about is that the House agreed to expedite the delivery of the grocery rebate, which will support over 10 million Canadians who are struggling to put food on the table. The average support is $467 for families and $225 for seniors. I know you all know that, but for the folks at home, I think it's important to know that. I really think this is an important measure for those who are vulnerable, especially the seniors in my community, in Etobicoke Centre.

Is what I have just said correct? Am I correct in my understanding of how this rebate will affect Canadians? That's the first part of my question. The second part of my question is: When can we expect Canadians to receive that support? That's a question I get from my constituents all the time. When will it come?

[Pierre Leblanc]

Thanks for those questions.

For the first part, maybe what I would add is it would be a benefit of up to $467 for a family with two children. That's the maximum amount. Also, for a single individual without children, the maximum benefit would be $234. When the government talks about $225 for seniors, that's an average, recognizing that some individuals who are currently on the phase-out zone for the GST credit will receive a partial amount, so less than the maximum. I think you've captured it well with those amounts.

In terms of timing, I can just point to what's in the budget, that the government will endeavour to have the CRA pay this out as soon as possible following royal assent, if it's passed by Parliament.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you for that.

Getting royal assent and getting this passed is critical to making sure people receive this relief.

Moving on, I have about a minute and a half left, I think. The BIA moves forward with the development of the Canadian dental care plan. This is another element of the budget I know many of my constituents in Etobicoke Centre are really excited about. The question I have is: Will this benefit be taxable and will it impact other income-tested benefits, like the GST credit, for example?

[Pierre Leblanc]

No, it won't be taxable, and it won't be taken into account in income for the calculation of income-tested benefits like the GST credit.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Sorry, could you repeat that? It may be because I'm virtual, but I didn't hear it.

[Pierre Leblanc]

It won't be included in income. That means two things: first, it won't be taxable; and second, it won't be taken into account when calculating entitlement to benefits like the Canada child benefit, the GST credit and so on.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Okay. It won't impact people's taxes. In other words, when people receive the Canadian dental care plan benefit, it won't impact their taxes in any way.

[Pierre Leblanc]

You can ask further questions under part 4 of the legislation. We have an information-sharing provision in this part of the bill. Also, services will be paid for. It's not like the interim benefit where people are receiving a cheque or a payment. It's more that the government will be paying for either all or a portion of services.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

And there will be no further taxes paid on it. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, MP Baker.

Now we're going to MP Ste-Marie for six minutes, please.

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

Good morning, Mr. Chair.

I would like to say hello to my colleagues and thank all the senior officials for being with us to answer our questions.

I have numerous questions. Unfortunately, in preparing them, I didn't distinguish between the parts of Bill C‑47. If any of my questions happen to relate to part 4, I apologize in advance.

In fact, I am going to start with a question about part 4, so you can pass it on to your colleagues who will answer it later, at an upcoming meeting. It concerns division 31, which makes “Charles the Third, by the Grace of God King of Canada.”

I would like your colleagues to be able to check the section of the equivalent legislation, as it was worded the last time. I imagine we go back to the era of Queen Elizabeth II and the clause was submitted to Parliament in an omnibus budget implementation bill, toward the end of the bill. I would therefore like your colleagues to prepare an answer to my question for the next meeting. I would appreciate it.

My first question concerns both part 1 and part 4. Last Wednesday, we adopted Bill C‑46 at all stages. We have therefore doubled the amount of the GST credit, which we are calling the “grocery rebate”, even though groceries are not taxable, and the $2 billion in health transfers to the provinces.

Bill C‑46 was adopted at all stages on Wednesday. Bill C‑47, which provides for the same amounts, was introduced in the House of Commons on Thursday.

If Bill C‑47 is adopted without being amended, for example by removing those parts, we are going to find ourselves with two GST credits and an additional $2 billion for the provinces.

Is that correct?

Thank you.

[Lindsay Gwyer]

With regard to part 1 and the grocery rebate amendments, it's correct that the same amendments in this bill as are in Bill C-46. If both bills were to pass, it wouldn't double the amount of the credit. The amendments do the same thing. They would be effectively redundant.

I can't speak to part 4, but typically there are coordinating amendments in legislation that address a scenario where you have legislation in two different bills that would impact the provisions in the other bill. You have coordinating amendments that address that scenario where one passes or they both subsequently...or they both end up passing. There may be coordinating amendments that address part 4, but that would be a question to put to someone next week.

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

Okay, thank you for that very clear answer, Ms. Gwyer.

In the budget, $80 billion is allocated to the energy transition and going green.

My question is about the creation of the two institutions that would be responsible for administering the funds.

Is this covered in parts 1 to 3 or in part 4?

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Ms. Gwyer, I don't know if you captured that. Can you repeat it?

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

Please don't all answer at once.

[Lindsay Gwyer]

I think that is in part 4.

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

Okay, fine. So we will talk about it at a future meeting.

[Pierre Mercille]

It certainly isn't covered in parts 1, 2 and 3.

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

Okay, thank you.

Regarding employment insurance, is that covered in part 4 also?