Evidence of meeting #13 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was provincial.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Manager, Policy Section, Corporations Canada, Department of Industry
We've been very careful. This wording is as objective as you can get. It is purely a provincial issue, so whatever the provincial requirements are for a financial review, that is the qualification. There's no reference to any particular association and there's no reference to any favouring of a particular association. If you break down all 13 provincial and territorial jurisdictions, which we have on occasion, and try to figure out the requirements, it's actually a fairly complicated thing to do.
As I said, by introducing the requirement for a review engagement, we actually ran into a problem when we started talking about P.E.I. and Nova Scotia because it is not legislated provincially, whereas review engagements are in the other provinces and territories.
But no, there is no favouritism here; this is purely an objective standard.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Thank you, Madam Kirby.
Mr. Bouchard, do you have another question?
Bloc
Robert Bouchard Bloc Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
No. It is fine.
(Amendment negatived) [See Minutes of Proceedings]
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
We have a second amendment.
Mr. Wallace, would you care to move it, please?
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
I'll move the amendment to clause 181, which adds a couple of words on page 84. Perhaps the staff could comment on it.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
My understanding is that this amendment reconciles the English and French versions of the bill. It does not change the meaning of the bill.
Manager, Policy Section, Corporations Canada, Department of Industry
Correct.
(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]
(Clause 181 as amended agreed to)
(Clauses 182 to 209 inclusive agreed to)
(On clause 210--Rights preserved)
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
There is a proposal to amend clause 210. Do I have a mover?
Mr. Wallace.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
I will move that on behalf of the government and I will ask staff to comment on that change.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Madam Kirby, would you care to comment on the amendment to clause 210?
Manager, Policy Section, Corporations Canada, Department of Industry
The amendment would add a new paragraph, (a.1), coming out of comments from the Canadian Bar Association.
The issue is that when you amalgamate a couple of corporations, you deal with the resulting amalgamated corporation as though it were new. The Canadian Bar Association pointed out what we didn't deal with--namely, if you have three corporations going into the amalgamation, and one of them is soliciting, what is the effect on the resulting amalgamated corporation? Is it also soliciting? Is it not soliciting? How does it work?
The new paragraph simply clarifies the situation and makes it clear that if you are soliciting going into the amalgamation, you are soliciting coming out the other side. You can't use an amalgamation to get out of the soliciting status and therefore be able to get at the money.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Thank you, Madam Kirby.
(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]
(Clause 210 as amended agreed to)
(Clauses 211 to 258 inclusive agreed to)
(On clause 259--Appeal from Director's decision)
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
We have an amendment to clause 259.
Mr. Wallace, would you care to move that amendment?
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
I will move that on behalf of the government and ask staff to comment on those minor changes.
Manager, Policy Section, Corporations Canada, Department of Industry
This is a housekeeping amendment that comes out of the change to clause 161.
Paragraph 259(i) lists every section where the director has the power to issue an exemption. The amendment to clause 161 created a new exemption, and we have to add it to the list.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Thank you, Madam Kirby.
(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]
Bloc
Robert Vincent Bloc Shefford, QC
Did you receive the government amendments before it made them today, or did you get them at the same time as we did, before today's meeting of the committee?
Have you been able to think about these amendments already, have you studied them already, or did you get them at the same time we did?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
I can answer that question.
In our last committee meeting before the break, members of the committee asked Industry Canada to respond to proposed changes to the bill made by the Canadian Bar Association and by other witnesses. Industry Canada did respond by Friday of last week. That document was distributed to all your offices. In Industry Canada's response, they indicated that they were favourable to certain amendments that the Canadian Bar Association had proposed. The amendments that you have in front of you are in that document that you received last week on Friday.
Bloc
Robert Vincent Bloc Shefford, QC
I understand that, Mr. Chair.
But Mr. Wallace asked the officials their opinion on the government amendment to clause 259, and the answer came immediately.
The process seems a little quick to me. There seems to be a lack of transparency, in my opinion.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Okay. If there is no further discussion on this, I will call the question.
(Clause 259 as amended agreed to)
(Clauses 260 to 283 inclusive agreed to)
(On clause 284--Records of Director)