Finance Committee on June 8th, 2026

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Clarke, ON]

Go ahead, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Do you want me to speak to it? I don't think you want me to.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Clarke, ON]

I'm sure you'll love this. I'm fully confident.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

I'm not sure. Please go ahead, Mr. Lawrence.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Clarke, ON]

All right.

I'm moving that Bill C-30 be amended by adding after line 25 on page 11 the following new clause:

Annual Report

18.1 Within one year after the day on which this Division comes into force and every year after that, the Minister of Finance must publish a report on

(a) the investments exempted from the application of the Investment Canada Act as a result of the provisions enacted by this Division; and

(b) the number and type of foreign bank-related investments affected by the provisions enacted by this Division.

To give a couple of comments in support of this important amendment, it is consistent with the theme of asking for greater accountability.

We have attempted on a number of occasions to work with the Department of Finance, the Canada Revenue Agency and the government to enable greater accountability while not being overly taxing on government officials and making sure, of course, that we respect privacy and confidentiality. I suspect that the government will, for bogus reasons, once again oppose this. They may state that the PBO provides these documents, that someone else should do their job or that there was an estimate made in 1984 that could be used, if we could find the document.

These are very reasonable amendments. We would just look for a partner in the government to enable us to have further accountability metrics, and it doesn't have to be perfectly the language we want.

We just want to ensure greater accountability for Canadians, but we know we'll hear reasons such as that there is a projection out there when, in reality, what we're looking for is the actual numbers. Those are two different things. The continuing conflation and attempt to demagogue is frustrating, but Conservatives will continue to work in the best interests of Canadians.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Thank you, Mr. Lawrence.

Go ahead, Mr. Kelly.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Crowfoot, AB]

Thank you.

I agree with the amendment. I think it's really important to have this kind of reporting on something as important as the decisions the government might make in making exemptions to the applications of its own laws.

This is an approach that is new. It was just about this time last year that we passed Bill C-5, the bill that created the Major Projects Office. Rather than repealing all the regulations that prevent private investors from investing in the Canadian economy, it allowed the government to set up an office and empower it to exempt certain businesses from Canada's laws. It's not the right approach to basically invite political interference by saying, “We'll let the minister and the government decide in which cases the laws of Canada will apply and in which cases the laws of Canada will not.”

Given the government's penchant for this approach.... Rather than getting rid of the red tape that kills jobs and kills production of projects and resource extraction in this country, it has chosen to simply give itself the power to decide when and if it wants to make exemptions to these laws. In this particular case, this call to report within one year of when this division comes into force and publish a report on “the investments exempted from the application of the Investment Canada Act” is a prudent addition to this bill.

It's what we're here to do: to make better laws, to propose solutions and to help the government make better laws when it introduces them and they pass through Parliament. I support this amendment, and I hope that my colleagues will too.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Thank you, Mr. Kelly.

Mr. Turnbull, go ahead.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

It almost sounds like the member opposite is trying to be constructive here, although I have a hard time believing that these suggestions are put forward in good faith, especially when the member opposite talks about cutting red tape. However, every amendment the Conservatives have proposed are adding red tape, which would have a negative impact. In the previous budget we passed through Parliament, the Conservatives were the only party that opposed regulatory sandboxes and limited and narrowed the scope of those, which were specifically designed to reduce red tape for businesses across our economy.

I take issue with something that Mr. Lawrence said, calling the rationale that members opposite provide for their perspectives as “bogus”. I don't think that's parliamentary, but I'll leave it at that.

In terms of this particular amendment, we feel that it would be inconsistent with the existing provisions in the Bank Act that protect the confidentiality of the information the government obtains from the financial sector, including foreign banks. Investment review decisions are made by the Minister of Finance on a case-by-case basis and are unlikely to obtain all the information necessary to implement the proposed reporting requirements that are implied by this amendment.

For those reasons, we're opposing the amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Thank you, Mr. Turnbull.

Mr. Kelly, go ahead.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Crowfoot, AB]

I asked to get back in because Mr. Turnbull mentioned the regulatory sandboxes. He may recall that he and his colleagues agreed with the opposition, ultimately, to amend the bill to reduce its scope. If I remember correctly—and I'd have to look up the parliamentary record here—the reduction of the number of rules and laws that the so-called “regulatory sandboxes approach” would take was too broad. It was recognized by most observers and, I think, recognized by the government that they had gone too far. That bill was amended.

This is what this committee is here to do: to make better bills by debating the issues, and to do so just as we're doing tonight in our clause-by-clause review. I thought I should make that point. He acknowledged that he thinks I'm trying to be constructive, trying to come up with ideas here to make this law better. That's what we're doing here tonight.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Thank you, Mr. Kelly.

Shall CPC-8 carry?

(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 4)

(Clauses 19 and 20 agreed to on division)

(On clause 21)

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

We're on CPC-9. Who's speaking on this?

Mr. Kelly.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Crowfoot, AB]

I move the that Bill C-30, in clause 21, be amended by adding after line 23 on page 15 the following:

30.51 The Bank must, every year, publish a report that includes the following information:

(a) the assessment fees collected from entities subject to assessment fees under this Act;

(b) the administrative costs associated with the entities subject to assessment fees under this Act;

(c) service standards and annual performance against those standards for activities funded through assessment fees; and

(d) internal audits completed in relation to cost recovery activities.

Once again, this bill does a lot of things, and that requires increased accountability on behalf of the government. That is why we propose this amendment. I hope that this is one the government won't object to and may agree to accept.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Mr. Turnbull.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

The government will be opposing this. It's outside the scope of the measure, which is intended to consolidate existing cost recovery authorities, not introduce substantive new requirements. The amendment would create inconsistency with other federal financial sector cost recovery regimes, which do not include comparable legislated reporting obligations.

The amendment is also, we feel, unnecessary, as the Bank of Canada has established reporting mechanisms already, including its public annual report. In addition, the Bank of Canada's board of directors is accountable for oversight of the bank's financials, including its annual budget. For those reasons, it is unnecessary and creates other cost recovery authorities that are inconsistent with the scope of the measure.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Thank you, Mr. Turnbull.

Mr. Lawrence, go ahead.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Clarke, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

In our relentless efforts to convince the government to work with us to increase accountability, I have a subamendment to propose. Of course, we have proposed paragraphs 30.51(a), (b), (c) and (d). I would propose to add “(e) any material changes to the methodology used to calculate assessment fees.”

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Okay. Please send that in writing.

We'll briefly suspend while we translate that.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Clarke, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Colleagues, we are back. I know that you were all anxious to get back. You now have the translated subamendment in your inboxes.

Shall the subamendment to—

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Clarke, ON]

I want to speak to it. Normally you get to speak to it, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Yes, I know.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Clarke, ON]

I'm not really stretching the bounds too far.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

You have to let me know. I was looking around.