Finance Committee on June 8th, 2026

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

(Clause 6 allowed to stand)

(On clause 7)

We will move to CPC-5.

Mr. Kelly.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Crowfoot, AB]

I'm sorry. Are you talking about clause 7 or the amendment?

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

It's clause 7 and it's amendment CPC-5.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Crowfoot, AB]

I'm sorry. I get my numbers confused a little bit between the number of the amendment and the number of the clause.

I move to amend Bill C-30 in clause 7 by adding, after line 25 on page 4, the following:

(6) Within one year after the day on which this section comes into force and every year after that, the Minister of National Revenue in collaboration with the Minister of Finance must publish a report on

(a) the number of taxpayers who claimed the special allowance allowing the immediate expensing for eligible greenhouse buildings;

(b) the fiscal cost of the eligible greenhouse special allowance; and

(c) the geographic distribution of eligible greenhouse special allowance claims.

I will say again, although members are perhaps becoming familiar with the arguments we are making around transparency, that this government in so many cases over the last 11 years has lacked transparency. Anything we can do to get the information to inform policy-makers so that Canadians can judge whether or not their policies have actually helped people—and, if so, how many—and whether this was a good idea that exceeded expectations and created positive policy outcomes or not, or whether it was just an announcement or something that was plugged into a bill, these are the things we need after the fact to be able to judge the government.

I was elected in 2015, as you were, Chair. Your party promised to be the most open and transparent government in Canadian history. It hasn't happened. There's been a trend in the opposite direction towards secrecy and a refusal to give information to parliamentarians. Even the access to information system is as broken as ever. There is a real need and a real appetite among Canadians for openness and transparency in their government.

That is why we have moved this amendment in addition to other amendments that the committee has heard so far.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Great. Thank you, Mr. Kelly.

Mr. Turnbull.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

For similar reasons, the government is opposed to this amendment. The type of information being requested is in fact already published annually in the report on federal tax expenditures, which is customarily tabled in the House of Commons under the main estimates. If members really want an independent, non-partisan analysis at any point, they obviously always have access to the Parliamentary Budget Officer and could make a request through the PBO.

It's also likely not possible for the government to table reports within the required parameters in the initial years because of the lag of data and information that comes in. As I think was indicated in the previous discussions we had on other amendments, the Conservatives seem to be eager to get the information without realizing the way that the tax system works. Those reporting requirements come later.

In essence, it's duplicative. The information is already regularly annually reported within the federal tax expenditures. It's not exactly what's being asked for, but it's close enough that there should be some transparency there that should satisfy the members opposite.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Thank you, Mr. Turnbull.

Mr. Hallan, go ahead.

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

I want to see if the relevant department could answer a few questions on this amendment.

This is based on the three paragraphs 7(6)(a), (b) and (c). Let's ignore the top part.

Did you have a chance to read the amendments?

[Shane Baddeley, Director, Economic Development, Department of Finance]

I have.

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

I just want to know, based on what Mr. Turnbull is saying, if these exact things are provided as per the government, yes or no?

[Shane Baddeley]

Thank you for the question.

My name is Shane Baddeley. I'm the director of economic development at the Department of Finance in the tax policy branch.

I can confirm that the information called for in paragraphs 7(6)(a) and (b)—when this measure is implemented—would normally be in the report on federal tax expenditures. It's typical that you have the fiscal cost of the measure, as well as the number of beneficiaries. Normally, the geographical distribution is not something that's published.

I will note, though, for the member that StatsCan does have a greenhouse sod and nursery survey that it puts out annually that does track the change in square footage of greenhouse area by region and by type of product, etc.

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

First, Mr. Turnbull was not exactly correct in saying that this is already provided.

If we're asking for the information in paragraph 7(6)(c), I imagine that it would be helpful to have it all in one place, rather than going through another report, for whatever government is making future decisions on whether the program is feasible or whether it's working out or not. Is that correct? Would it be helpful?

[Shane Baddeley]

I can't speak to whether it would be more helpful. I can only speak to what's normally published in the report on federal tax expenditures.

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

It's just more of a comment, then. For that part, it would be helpful to have it all in one place.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Mr. Turnbull, go ahead.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

What I heard the gentleman from the finance team say here is that the information called for in paragraphs (a) and (b) is actually included in the measures that are normally published in the federal tax expenditures, and that paragraph (c), the geographic distribution, is not published there, but there is greenhouse square footage by region in another area. In fact, the Conservatives would have access to the information that they're requesting already. Therefore, the amendment here is duplicative.

If they didn't want to do the work of looking in multiple places, they could ask the PBO to draw it together and do some analysis for them. Essentially, this is duplicative. It's information that's already tracked. I'll grant that it's in two different departments, but I don't see why that should be a barrier. Transparency is already there, so we'll be voting against.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Mr. Lawrence, go ahead.

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

I'm the eternal optimist here.

It's Mr. Turnbull's assertion that one reason you couldn't publish the report called for in the amendment is that the information required for the report wouldn't be ready, but what's called for in paragraphs (a) and (b) is published in the tax expenditures report. When is the tax expenditures report published?

[Shane Baddeley]

Normally, that's published with the main estimates in March or February, depending....

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

With respect to the “special allowance allowing the immediate expensing for eligible greenhouse buildings”, would that information for 2026 be available in the tax expenditure report for 2027?

[Shane Baddeley]

Normally, it would be available in the tax expenditure report of 2029. Right now, for the 2026 tax expenditure report, we're running off of tax data for the 2023 tax year.

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

There does need to be that two-year gap. Does your department have the geographical distribution of eligible greenhouse special allowance claims?

[Shane Baddeley]

By “geographical distribution” do you mean by province?

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

Yes, let's say by province.