Finance Committee on Oct. 8th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Good morning, colleagues. I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 53 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance. Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders. Members are attending in person in the room and remotely using the Zoom app.

I would like to remind participants of the following points.

Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. For those participating by video conference, which is all of our witnesses this hour, click on the microphone icon to activate your mic, and please mute yourself when you are not speaking.

For those on Zoom, at the bottom of your screen you can select the appropriate channel for interpretation: floor, English or French. For those in the room, you can use the earpiece and select a channel.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, June 3, 2026, and the motion adopted by the committee on Tuesday, September 22, 2026, the committee will resume consideration of Bill C-31, a second act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on November 4, 2025.

I would now like to welcome our witnesses for this hour.

From Ecojustice Canada, we have Bronwyn Roe, lawyer and program director, healthy communities. From March of Dimes Canada, we have Amanda MacKenzie, director, public affairs, advocacy and strategic communications. From United Way Centraide Canada, we have Anita Khanna, vice-president, government relations and public policy.

You will each have five minutes for your opening remarks.

Ms. Roe, we will begin with you.

[Bronwyn Roe, Lawyer and Program Director, Healthy Communities, Ecojustice Canada]

Thank you, Madam Chair, and good morning, honourable committee members.

My name is Bronwyn Roe. I'm a lawyer and the director of the healthy communities program at Ecojustice, Canada's largest environmental law charity. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to highlight Ecojustice's concerns about the proposed amendments to the Pest Control Products Act in Bill C-31. I would also refer you to our written brief, which was submitted jointly with 19 other Canadian health and environmental organizations.

The proposed amendments would eliminate mandatory 15-year cyclical re-evaluations of pesticides and replace them with weaker assessments, relying only on available information and applying an undefined standard. Removing the mandatory requirement for cyclical re-evaluations would weaken federal oversight of pesticides and undermine the primary purpose of the act, which is to prevent unacceptable risks to health, future generations and the environment from the use of pesticides.

Re-evaluations are the primary mechanism under the act for comprehensive postmarket review of pesticide risks. Scientific knowledge and methods evolve, patterns of use change and long-term or cumulative harms may become apparent only over time. Cyclical re-evaluations provide a mandatory checkpoint to ensure that the health and environmental risks of registered pesticides remain acceptable based on up-to-date scientific evidence and methods and according to the standards set out in the PCPA. Re-evaluations regularly identify health and environmental risks that were not recognized in earlier risk assessments, leading to restrictions on the use of the pesticide, additional risk mitigation measures and, in some cases, cancellations to protect human health and the environment.

There are several weaknesses in the proposed assessment scheme in comparison to mandatory re-evaluations. For one, an assessment is limited to available information, and there appears to be no requirement for Health Canada to request or gather information. Emerging science about health and environmental risks could be missed entirely. In contrast, on a re-evaluation, the minister is empowered to request up-to-date scientific information from the registrant of the pesticide and from other federal and provincial government departments and agencies.

It has been suggested that the pesticides regulatory directorate's continuous oversight policy may answer this concern at least in part, but it's important to note that the continuous oversight policy was designed to complement and improve, not replace, re-evaluations. Continuous oversight is far from being fully implemented. Health Canada has initiated continuous oversight monitoring for only nine pesticide active ingredients out of over 650 registered active ingredients.

On a re-evaluation, Health Canada is required by the act to follow a scientifically based approach, to make a determination about whether the risks of a pesticide are acceptable based on the legal standard in the act, to consider aggregate exposures and cumulative health risks, to engage in public consultation on a proposed decision, to publish final re-evaluation decisions with reasons and to respond to any notices of objection that may be made. The proposed assessments have none of these requirements. Where it is determined that a re-evaluation is required, the additional step of an assessment prior to initiating a re-evaluation will almost certainly result in further delays of necessary risk mitigation.

These proposed amendments come at a time when pesticide use in Canada is rapidly increasing. Over the 20 years for which annual pesticide sales data have been available, pesticide sales in Canada have increased a staggering 453%, from 26 million kilograms of active ingredients sold in 2005 to more than 144 million kilograms in 2024. They also follow amendments to the PCPA that were passed this spring in Bill C-30, further weakening Canada's pesticide oversight. Combined, these amendments may make it more difficult for Canada to meet our international obligations in the Kunming-Montreal global biodiversity framework to reduce the overall risk from pesticides by 50% by 2030.

Cyclical re-evaluations are not just bureaucratic exercises. They are vital mechanisms for public transparency, for accountability and for scientific scrutiny. They ensure that Canadians have a voice in decisions that affect their health, food and ecosystems. I urge this committee to reject the amendments to the Pest Control Products Act in Bill C-31 and reaffirm Canada's commitment to strong, science-based pesticide regulation that Canadians can have confidence in.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Thank you, Ms. Roe.

We will now continue with Ms. MacKenzie, from March of Dimes Canada, for five minutes.

[Amanda MacKenzie, Director, Public Affairs, Advocacy and Strategic Communications, March of Dimes Canada]

Good morning. Thank you so much, Madam Chair and committee members, for the invitation to appear this morning.

My name is Amanda MacKenzie, and I'm the director of public affairs, advocacy and strategic communications at March of Dimes Canada. I was here in June, but I'll remind you that for 75 years, March of Dimes Canada has worked alongside people with disabilities and their families and caregivers to deliver attendant care, employment services, children's programs, home and vehicle modification programs, and much more across the country.

When I'm talking today about some unclaimed federal benefits, I'm talking about the actual people we serve. We very much support the automatic tax filing measures in Bill C-31. We welcomed them when they were announced, and we told the Canada Revenue Agency so last year. We undertook a consultation with our community, and there is a huge amount of support for this measure in the bill.

I want to explain why this matters for people with disabilities and what we're asking the committee to strengthen. For people with severe disabilities, the risk of living in poverty is twice as high as for people without disabilities. Much of the federal government's disability income support is built on a tax return. The Canada disability benefit, the disability tax credit, the Canada workers benefit disability supplement, the child disability benefit, and government grants and bonds in a registered disability savings plan all depend on a filed return. When a person with a disability does not file, they don't just miss a refund; they miss the benefits that were designed for them.

In our 2023 report with Prosper Canada, called “A Benefit without Barriers”, people told us that filing feels like a low priority when you rely on income supports at the provincial level, unless a benefit actually depends on it. Billions of dollars in disability benefits go unclaimed each year as a result of people not having access to tax filing. Automatic tax filing is one of the most practical tools that the government has for changing that, but how it's done will decide whether it works. We have four recommendations.

The first is to tell people very clearly and protect their benefits. Notices must be repeated and accessible in plain language, large print, braille, audio and sign language. People must know that a return will be filed for them and must be able to opt out. We share the concerns the taxpayers' ombudsperson raised, including that the bill sets no dates for notice or filing. We ask the committee to fix this through amendments rather than lose a pathway for people who have fallen out of the system and cannot easily use an online account.

The second is to have no cliff. The ombudsperson also pointed out that people with disabilities could eventually lose eligibility. For a person with a disability, a benefit that quietly stops is not ideal. People need a supported transition before eligibility ends, and the rules must allow for changing circumstances.

Third, keep a human being in the system. Automation cannot replace a conversation. People need agency staff who are trained to support many different kinds of disability, with no time limit on the call—by phone, in person and online. Trusted community organizations, including disability organizations, must be resourced to help. ESDC's social development partnerships program's disability stream, or SDPP-D, is right now funding benefit navigation services where automatic tax filing could be added.

Fourth, use what government already knows and measure results. The CRA knows who holds a DTC certificate. Those people should be a priority for outreach. The agency should be reporting publicly on uptake, opt-outs and benefit increases, including for people with a disability, and should have people with living and lived experience helping to design and test the system. March of Dimes Canada already works with Service Canada in user-testing its products. We'd be delighted to do so with the CRA on automatic tax filing.

We support this measure in the bill. Done right, automatic tax filing is how a benefit reaches the person it was written for. We'd be glad to work with the committee to get it right.

Thank you so much. I welcome your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Great. Thank you very much, Ms. MacKenzie.

Ms. Khanna, we'll continue now with you for five minutes.

[Anita Khanna, Vice-President, Government Relations and Public Policy, United Way Centraide Canada]

Thank you, Madam Chair and honourable committee members, for inviting United Way Centraide Canada to the committee today. We serve as the national office for Canada's United Way Centraide network.

United Way Centraide is Canada's largest non-government funder of community services. With deep local expertise and trust, we fundraise annually over $600 million and invest in 3,800 partner agencies to serve eight million people. We work in 5,000 communities to address immediate needs and tackle the toughest social issues so that everyone in every community can reach their full potential. This includes supporting and delivering financial literacy and personal financial counselling programs. In 2025, we invested $8 million in serving 155,000 people.

We welcome the provisions in Bill C-31 to automate tax filing by the CRA for those who are eligible.

I have three main points that I will cover today. First is underscoring the importance of this initiative. Second is the opportunities for even more people to benefit. Third is the importance of community service infrastructure so that no one falls through the cracks.

The tax system is certainly a critical gateway to income supports like the CCB, the Canada groceries and essentials benefit and the Canada workers benefit. According to StatsCan, systemic and personal barriers prevent about one in five people with low incomes from tax filing and accessing income benefits and credits. This is alarming, given that these benefits and credits are the main source of income for 62% of low-income households.

Recent national United Way Centraide research conducted by Leger showed that 60% of respondents reported feeling financially anxious due to the high cost of living, which has been impacted by the trade war and economic uncertainty. Financial pressures are taking a measurable toll on basic well-being and daily function in our communities. In our research, 38% struggled with food insecurity, 40% reported difficulty sleeping and 34% said financial stress made it harder to concentrate at work or school. Rates of financial anxiety are even higher among those in low-income, lone-parent households, among newcomers and among youth.

This is the time for governments at all levels to take proactive steps to improve income supports, to improve access to in-demand careers, including within the care economy, and to reduce poverty. Automated benefits will help to ensure that people living with low incomes are not leaving any of the benefits they're entitled to on the table.

We support all avenues that will improve program design. United Way Centraide Canada and partner organizations like Maytree, Prosper Canada and Momentum have recommended improving eligibility for the program so that it reaches more people, ensuring easier access to the program for those receiving social assistance and investing sufficiently in the delivery of this program, including in public education in multiple languages and in accessible formats.

The success of the automated benefits program will only be further bolstered by investing in community-based supports so that no one falls through our social safety net. The government's investment in the community volunteer income tax program is a great example. It is important because it is a real-life touchpoint for hard-to-reach community members and people with complex tax situations.

Sustained collaboration with frontline providers can bring critical design questions to the surface, identify service gaps and inform program adaptation so that it can be even more effective. Relatedly, further investment in vital community service infrastructure—services, programs and community navigation—will only enhance outcomes for people in vulnerable circumstances.

Our national survey on financial anxiety highlighted the critical importance of a strong community safety net, showing that when people access community organizations for support, they do receive real relief, as 40% reported a positive impact on their financial situation, 36% said the organizations helped them manage their anxiety and 76% of those who accessed community housing assistance found it extremely helpful. Right now, Canada's community service infrastructure is under strain due to a trilemma of high service demand, financial instability and an overburdened workforce. Resourcing support within these organizations so that tax filing can be undertaken and people can access the benefits they are entitled to will be very important for the success of the program and in moving individuals and families from poverty to possibility.

Thank you for the time today and for considering my three points.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Thank you, Ms. Khanna.

We will begin now with Ms. Jansen for six minutes, please.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Thank you so much.

Ms. MacKenzie, Canadians living with disabilities should absolutely receive the benefits they're entitled to without having to fight their way through a complicated tax system. Your organization has raised some important issues about how automatic filing would actually work for people whose lives aren't always straightforward.

I'd like to better understand what happens when the information that CRA has doesn't match the reality of someone's life. You talked about people with disabilities who may be moving between temporary housing, dealing with changing income or struggling to maintain a fixed address. Isn't it quite possible that CRA could prepare a tax return using information that's already out of date?

[Amanda MacKenzie]

I suppose it is possible that it would happen, but there is the opt-in. People are getting a letter saying that they're being asked to participate in the program. I think we could find a way to make sure out-of-date information isn't being used.

It's a really good question. I think that's something that would need to be worked out in the details of the program.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

How would that person even know there was a mistake if they don't have, say, reliable Internet access or a permanent address?

[Amanda MacKenzie]

Those are two really important issues that we see in our community and that I'm sure Anita sees in the community that the United Way serves.

Anita is probably in a better position to answer that question than I am. We don't have a lot of folks with a non-permanent address or who are getting lost in that system, as it were. I think Anita is probably better equipped to answer that.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

I'm going to keep on going, but I appreciate that.

For someone living on a very limited income, even a small interruption in benefits could mean not having enough money for groceries, rent or medication. If CRA prepares an incorrect return, could that result in someone losing the benefits they're entitled to receive?

[Amanda MacKenzie]

Yes, I suppose it could, and I think the details of this program have to be worked out to make sure we account for all the issues you're bringing up. There are solutions in other programs and in other jurisdictions as well. Automatic tax filing is new to Canada, but it's not new to countries around the world. We can take some lessons from other countries, other jurisdictions, that are doing this and doing it really well.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Who should be responsible for ensuring that a person doesn't suffer financially while CRA corrects its mistakes?

[Amanda MacKenzie]

Who should be the person responsible? I don't know the answer to that question.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

I'm just worried there's not nearly enough detail in the way the program is written and that it's headed for a train wreck.

[Amanda MacKenzie]

Passing the measure is really important for making sure the program continues. Pilot programming is beginning I believe this tax year, and I think we need to take lessons from that for the full program.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

One of your recommendations was that CRA should continue providing trained staff who can actually help people. Why is that so important? I know there's a senior in my riding who has been fighting with CRA for four years. Let me tell you, she has spent so much time on the phone. This lady is amazing. She's willing to just sit on the phone and wait, as many Canadians have to do when there are mistakes in their filings. Maybe explain to us why having actual staff, a person and not just a phone line, is necessary.

[Amanda MacKenzie]

Having actual staff matters a huge amount for people with disabilities, given the different types of circumstances in which an automated system like an AI-based system—and I'm going to be very careful of that—could have barriers attached to it. People are able to break down barriers and solve problems in those types of phone call situations. It's also really important for people with communication disabilities, such as aphasia, or with intellectual disabilities to speak to an actual human being who can resolve the issues.

One thing that is very important about this is that there's a positive obligation for the staff who are on the phone to be very well trained and to be there to say yes and resolve issues instead of saying no and creating more barriers.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Were you aware of what the Auditor General's report said about phone calls to CRA and the level of errors that people were receiving?

[Amanda MacKenzie]

I read about it in the news, actually. That has been a big issue. In my view, CRA staff training, particularly to support seniors and people with disabilities, is incredibly important.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

You've recommended that CRA publicly report on how automatic filing is working. Would you agree those reports should tell Parliament not only how many returns CRA processes but also how many contain errors, how long corrections take and whether anyone loses benefits in the meantime?

[Amanda MacKenzie]

I totally agree with that, yes.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Should there be a specific service standard for correcting mistakes that affect someone's benefits?

[Amanda MacKenzie]

Yes. I think we have service standards across all different types of sectors and industries. There's no reason why, particularly for a program that could potentially fulfill millions of tax filings every year, there should be—