Finance Committee on April 27th, 2023

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

My question was what—

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

We're at the end of your time, MP Fast. We're well over time.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

All right.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Now we are going to MP Baker, please, for five minutes.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thanks very much, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to go back briefly to the Bank of Canada.

We were talking earlier about the Bank of Canada and the measures here touching on its retained earnings. I understand that there are a number of other central banks around the world that are in a similar position to the Bank of Canada. What happened to the Bank of Canada in running deficits or losses is a function of global forces and actions by the Bank of Canada. There were those same global forces and similar actions were taken by other countries, so other central banks are in a very similar position to the Bank of Canada as a result.

Can I ask you to explain if there are other countries taking the approach that we are with respect to this issue?

[Gloria Wong]

Yes, indeed. Our measures are very similar to the ones taken by Australia. In Australia, the governor of the Reserve Bank of Australia has secured the support of the treasurer to allow them to also retain profits going forward to offset their losses associated with quantitative easing.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you very much.

Would you say that's a similar approach?

[Gloria Wong]

It is a similar approach.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you very much.

A lot of Canadians are struggling with the cost of living and, frankly, are having these challenges exacerbated by predatory lenders. So I'm really pleased to see the government taking strong action on this file by reducing the criminal rate of interest from 60% to 35% and capping charges that payday lenders can place on Canadians. I think this is going to make a huge difference for some folks who are really struggling with the cost of living and who are very vulnerable.

I also understand that the government is launching consultations on lowering the criminal rate of interest even further through budget 2023.

Can I ask one of you to comment on who is most likely to benefit from these changes to the criminal rate of interest?

[Mark Radley]

Thank you for the question.

Again, I'm the acting director of the consumer affairs team at the Department of Finance.

Some server data by the—

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Can you move back or move your earpiece away from the mike? Maybe it's a cellphone or another device. We're getting some feedback here and it affects the interpreters. Thank you.

[Mark Radley]

Is that better now?

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Yes.

[Mark Radley]

According to some FCAC server data, they found that typically there's overrepresentation of indigenous peoples and newcomers to Canada, and people in lower-income quartiles who use high-cost loans and payday lending the most. We would expect that these groups would benefit the most from this measure.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Okay.

Can you just talk about what the impact of this measure would be on them in their daily lives and their cost of living?

[Mark Radley]

Absolutely. In budget 2023, we illustrated an example. We talked about an individual named Hannah, who took out a $5,000 loan with a two-year amortization period—paying it back over two years. At the new rate—lowered to 35%—as compared with the current rate, Hannah will have saved $775 over the course of the loan.

I spoke a little bit earlier about the impact of payday lending. It really depends on the province in which the individual lives.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

I appreciate that.

Previously, I was a member of the provincial Parliament in Ontario. At the time, I was parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Finance. We did a whole bunch of work at the time on behalf of the Government of Ontario when it comes to this issue. I became keenly aware through that of the degree to which this impacts people who are most vulnerable across our country, frankly, because of the amounts of interest that they pay.

I'm really glad to see that we've taken the steps we have. I hope that we can go further because I think this is going to offer major relief to folks who are already vulnerable and need that support. Thank you for that.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, MP Baker.

We'll now go to MP Ste-Marie for two and a half plus minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My next question pertains to the former Bill C‑208, which dealt with the intergenerational transfer of small businesses. This bill came from the opposition. As we know, the purpose of the bill was to stop hurting family transfers by making it no less profitable for a business owner to sell to their children or family members than to a stranger.

The bill received royal assent, but the government then refused to implement it. Wayne Easter was chair of the Standing Committee on Finance at the time. The committee convened during the summer with the aim of reminding the government that it had to implement the bill. The government then said it would do so. However, many family farms and businesses in Quebec are still waiting to make these transfers because the Canada Revenue Agency has not yet directed accountants and lawyers on how to proceed. This has been going on for two years.

During last month's in‑camera meeting, we heard presentations on the budget's legislative proposals, which seemed to include a new law that would replace the old provisions and finally get the ball rolling. I couldn't believe my eyes, however, when I looked through the hundreds of pages in Bill C‑47 and saw that it was nowhere to be found.

Obviously, I'm not going to ask you any questions about the political choices at play here. I'll save those for the Minister of Finance when she decides to appear before the committee. That being said, are there any technical reasons that can explain why the implementation of former Bill C‑208 is not included in Bill C‑47? The bill received royal assent two years ago, the government has committed to implementing it, and we know from the budget documents that the bill is ready.

[Galen Countryman]

Again, I am unable to answer that question, which should instead be directed to my colleague responsible for tax policy. I will take note and try to find an answer.

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

Thank you very much. My next question is regarding employment insurance, EI.

Bill C‑47 does propose some measures, but if you ask me, the most important one is not in there. During the pandemic, there were tremendous deficits and the government stepped in. One of the deficits brought on by the pandemic was in the EI fund, and we are asking the government to take charge of that deficit so that workers do not end up footing the bill with their premiums.

By law, the EI fund must be balanced every seven years. Given that Bill C‑47 does not include any such provision, can we infer that the government is choosing to pass on the bill for the pandemic EI deficit to those who pay into EI—the workers? Is that accurate?

[Galen Countryman]

Again, that is not my area of expertise, but I will take note of your question.

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

All right. Thank you.

My third, more technical, question is on dental care.

Bill C‑47 specifies that people covered by a private dental care plan—for example, union members covered by group insurance—are indeed excluded from the federal dental insurance program. Therefore, Bill C‑47 seems to send the message to unionized Canadians that they are not eligible for the Canadian dental benefit. Is that correct?

[Galen Countryman]

I have to give you the same answer again. I am not the expert on dental care, but I will take note of your question.

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

Okay.

Mr. Chair, I have many other questions.