A point of order, Mr. Chair.
Evidence of meeting #9 for Finance in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was mclean.
A video is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #9 for Finance in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was mclean.
A video is available from Parliament.
9:40 p.m.
Liberal
Terry Beech Liberal Burnaby North—Seymour, BC
It's from the television in the sky.
I have not received the draft. I don't know if members there locally have, but I have been refreshing my P9, and I have not received it yet.
9:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca
Okay. You weren't on the list. You'll be on the list now.
We are also trying to get Ms. D'Souza, if she's available, in case you have any questions.
9:40 p.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Sure.
I think probably what happened is that somebody lapsed back to when the Liberals had said they wouldn't have parliamentary secretaries on committee. They must have been in that frame of mind, and then they accidentally left him off the list. They probably forgot that you guys had gone back on that commitment. Some of us remembered, though. It's okay.
9:40 p.m.
Liberal
Terry Beech Liberal Burnaby North—Seymour, BC
I can confirm, Mr. Chair, that I now have a draft. I'm reading it now.
9:40 p.m.
Liberal
Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON
Just looking at the revised subclause 1(18.1), I see there is still paragraph (b). Did we not delete that or eliminate that in an earlier vote? If we did, I just don't know why it is still there. Was it inadvertently left there?
9:40 p.m.
Legislative Clerk
Yes, you're right. Paragraph (b) was taken out, but Isabelle didn't know because she was not—
9:40 p.m.
Liberal
Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON
Okay. I just wanted to make sure that we're all clear on that, if that's okay.
9:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca
Philippe, perhaps you could let us know exactly what Isabelle did here.
9:40 p.m.
Legislative Clerk
What Ms. D'Souza explained to me is that they basically translated Mr. McLean's proposal into legislative terms. In terms of the fiscal effects, it would be more for the officials to answer.
9:40 p.m.
Liberal
Yvan Baker Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Thanks very much.
On this revised amendment, do the officials have a copy of this?
9:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca
No, the officials do not have a copy.
The clerk is just about to send it to them.
9:40 p.m.
Liberal
Yvan Baker Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
I wanted to ask our officials to help us understand what the implications of this would be. Maybe I will give the clerk a second to do that.
My concern is understanding.... Now that we have this new language—and I know it was developed with the best of intentions—what are the implications? I'm not a tax lawyer, but let me ask this. Is it possible that the language in yellow—“taxable dividends to an individual who is a holder of common shares of the company or of the subsidiary of the company”—would in any way inadvertently capture funds that were meant for business operations? Would that inhibit a company from operating a business in any way?
9:45 p.m.
Liberal
