Evidence of meeting #125 for Health in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cra.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:25 a.m.
Conservative
Len Webber Conservative Calgary Confederation, AB
Absolutely. I have a list of the provinces that do have registries, and the ones that don't.
9:25 a.m.
Conservative
Len Webber Conservative Calgary Confederation, AB
Saskatchewan doesn't have one. I hope that after this legislation goes through, it will incite and encourage them to do it.
November 27th, 2018 / 9:25 a.m.
Liberal
Doug Eyolfson Liberal Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Congratulations for doing this. In my opinion, this is a very elegant solution to a problem. There have been some suggestions that there be more consent, and this sort of thing, put in on this. Having worked in the medical system, I know different portions of it. They worry about mission creep. When they say that there is some portion of it.... I'll give you an example. It's sometimes thought that because the emergency department is always open and it's always there, you could also use it as a central area for people to come and get their immunizations. It's not an emergency, but it's always open, so you can always do it.
They want to make sure that's not adding to the workload for doing something that's not part of their mandate.
Would you not agree that adding all these extra things—asking for the consent and all these things that are normally done by the province—would add to mission creep, whereas simply sending this to the provinces, which is what you have here, would avoid that? Would that make sense?
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
Len Webber Conservative Calgary Confederation, AB
That's exactly what I'm asking for in this bill, just to have a simple, two-question...one that we can collect, and then also for CRA to be able to transfer it to the provinces. They'll go into negotiations to have that happen. That's what the bill is all about.
Getting detail to get actual consent does require a lot more, and it may not be in the purview of the CRA to do that. I'm just asking for two questions on the actual document. When it comes to the e-file, there could probably be more questions asked there, just to get that authorization. Then they transfer the information to the provinces.
9:30 a.m.
Liberal
Doug Eyolfson Liberal Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB
Thank you.
To the staff at CRA, would you agree that restricting it to this would avoid the mission creep phenomenon of adding more to the CRA than what's really your job?
9:30 a.m.
Director General, Legislative Policy Directorate, Legislative Policy and Regulatory Affairs Branch, Canada Revenue Agency
I'm not exactly sure what mission creep is. The way you've explained it, our responsibility is to collect tax and benefit information. We would be able to facilitate the simple transmission of whether or not someone wants to receive information on organ donation.
9:30 a.m.
Liberal
Doug Eyolfson Liberal Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB
Thank you.
I should just clarify what that is. It's jargon that we have used in my profession for years. I forget that it's not used a lot outside my previous bubble. For instance, you would have an organization that, because of its placement, is a good conduit or vehicle for something, like using the emergency department for immunizations or as a conduit for someone to access social work, because it's always open. That actually happens.
They find that by not pushing back on that, departments get overloaded with work that wasn't part of their original mandate. It gets established and you're having to expend resources on things that you weren't created to do. This is what we mean by mission creep.
That was my thought when I heard.... I didn't really think there was much of that in this. You're just ticking yes or no boxes and sending it to the provinces, whereas putting all these extra things—getting consent and having your lawyers do it.... Someone might say, “If we can do this for organ donation, let's do it for something else. Let's do it for registering kids for vaccinations” and this sort of thing.
That's what I meant by it. I'm satisfied by the answers given that it tends to avoid that with this rather simple and elegant solution to this. It seems very straightforward. I don't have any further questions on this.
Thank you.
9:30 a.m.
Liberal
9:30 a.m.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
I have a kind of quibbly question. In the bill, proposed subsection 63.1(2) says, “in their last return of income, that individual authorized...” and so forth. Given that we're talking about people who are dying—or are potentially dead at some point—“their last return” is somewhat ambiguous. Do we mean the most recent return, or do we mean their actual last return, which typically would be filed by their estate and not meaningful in this case?
I'm wondering if the word “last” is meaningful in this, or should it be dropped?
9:30 a.m.
Manager, Legislation Section, Stakeholder Relations Division (Individual Returns Directorate), Assessment, Benefit and Service Branch, Canada Revenue Agency
I think I get what you're saying. In terms of that last return, you are asking whether it is the final return for someone who has passed away or just the annual tax return.
We have understood the intention of the bill to be the annual tax return that a person would file. For the last one, the reference would be the last tax year for which they have filed a tax return.
Does that help to clarify it?
9:30 a.m.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
It just seems ambiguous in this context. I was wondering whether taking away the word “last” would be reasonable.
9:35 a.m.
Manager, Legislation Section, Stakeholder Relations Division (Individual Returns Directorate), Assessment, Benefit and Service Branch, Canada Revenue Agency
Or, how necessary is it?
With the way it's proposed to be handled, where we're collecting consent to provide personal information to the province, that question would be on the return every year. A person can tick “Yes, I want to receive it” one year. Once they've received the information from the province and become an organ donor, it wouldn't really be necessary for them to tick the yes box again.
9:35 a.m.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
One could say, “That wasn't my last return, because I'm still alive, so I haven't actually authorized you to give this information.”
9:35 a.m.
Manager, Legislation Section, Stakeholder Relations Division (Individual Returns Directorate), Assessment, Benefit and Service Branch, Canada Revenue Agency
Yes, so maybe you want to look at the wording there.
Our understanding, just so you're clear, is that we intend to put the question with each tax return that a person would file.
9:35 a.m.
Liberal
9:35 a.m.
Pat Kelly Calgary Rocky Ridge, CPC
Thank you.
Again, I'll add my voice of thanks to you, Len, for your contribution, not only with this bill but also in Alberta, where you were instrumental in the establishment of the Alberta organ donor registry when you were a member of the legislative assembly.
I'm going to focus my questions on the CRA officials.
Mr. Vermaeten, can you tell me if this can be done for the 2019 tax year? Can the forms and the interaction with the necessary provincial bodies be done for the 2019 tax year?
9:35 a.m.
Assistant Commissioner, Assessment, Benefit and Service Branch, Canada Revenue Agency
Yes, we believe it can be done for the 2019 tax year, starting February 2020.
9:35 a.m.
Calgary Rocky Ridge, CPC
Great, that's perfect.
In any of these draft T1 general layouts that you may have seen, is there any reason not to add it either above or below the current Elections Canada tick box? Is there any problem with that?
9:35 a.m.
Assistant Commissioner, Assessment, Benefit and Service Branch, Canada Revenue Agency
The front page is certainly a crowded page, especially when you move into the French version of it. That being said, we believe we can put it in that first page. That would be our intention.
9:35 a.m.
Calgary Rocky Ridge, CPC
Excellent.
The space constraints are not the same in electronic filing. I presume there's no real obstacle to having that on the electronic file.
You mentioned that you thought there might be some sensitivity or an issue with the 60% of filers who have theirs done by a professional. Is it really any different from the authorization for Elections Canada? You're just authorizing the transfer of data for the purpose of addressing the question.
9:35 a.m.
Assistant Commissioner, Assessment, Benefit and Service Branch, Canada Revenue Agency
We don't think that, as envisaged, there would be a problem.
9:35 a.m.
Calgary Rocky Ridge, CPC
Great.
Are there any essential deadlines or time frames that Parliament needs to be aware of? Obviously, this bill hasn't passed; we hope it will. If this bill does pass, certainly it is the will of Parliament to have this implemented as soon as possible. I don't think any sooner than 2019 is possible. But are there any key deadlines that we need to be aware of?
