Evidence of meeting #80 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was information.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Senior Director, Strategy and Innovation Policy Sector, Department of Industry
It's just “shall”, even if nobody has asked for it.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Thank you very much, Mr. Perkins.
Are there any more comments on amendment CPC-19?
I call the vote.
(Amendment negatived: nays 7; yeas 4. [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clause 4)
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
We’re moving on to clause 4.
Are there any other amendments, Mr. Perkins?
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
Mr. Chair, I'm assuming some of these were advance notices. If you're not ruling them out of order, I'm okay to move them.
On CPC-24—I'll give you a chance to catch up—it's back to the issue of real estate. It makes sure the street address.... If there's no address, a description of the location of the real estate and property is included in the registry.
I mentioned earlier that criminals use real estate, obviously, to launder money. We have a money-laundering problem. Real estate is a big part of it. Anything that provides greater transparency about where that money is or who owns that property would be beneficial to, I think, understanding and investigating where proceeds of crime are going.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Thank you, Mr. Perkins.
Are there comments on CPC-24?
Yes, of course, go ahead, Mr. Schaan.
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategy and Innovation Policy Sector, Department of Industry
I have no further comments on this one. I think it was clear to members that this would make public the information about beneficial owners and the land they own, which obviously, in our perspective, is what the registry is intending to do: provide some light on the actual person associated with the corporation.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Thank you, Mr. Schaan.
If there are no more questions or comments on CPC-24, I would ask for a vote.
(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We’re continuing with clause 4.
Are there any other amendments?
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
Amendment CPC-28, for reference, ensures that investigative bodies are able to access information that is collected by the director, but that is granted an exemption on being made public, and gives the reasons for its exemption.
As it stands, the only method for law enforcement to access non-public information from the registry is via the corporation's own register. This will ensure that law enforcement does not have to go to the corporation, potentially tipping off the suspect. It will also ensure that the only automatic exception be granted to minors—that's the only automatic exception—and that all other exemptions from the public registry be granted by an application under proposed subsection 21.303(3).
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Thank you very much, Mr. Perkins.
Are there any other comments or questions on amendment CPC-28?
Mr. Gaheer, you have the floor.
Liberal
Iqwinder Gaheer Liberal Mississauga—Malton, ON
Can we ask the officials what the effect of this amendment would be?
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategy and Innovation Policy Sector, Department of Industry
We would just bring the attention of the committee to the changes that were adopted in the Budget Implementation Act, 2022, No. 1, changes that preceded this on the beneficial ownership, where in section 21.301, there is a provision that reads:
The Director may provide all or part of the information received under section 21.21 to an investigative body referred to in subsection 21.31(2), the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada or any prescribed entity.
By our read, there is a capacity for the director to provide this information to law enforcement.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
I call the vote on amendment CPC-28.
(Amendment negatived: nays 7; yeas 4. [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Are there any other amendments members wish to move on clause 4?
I can wait one second, Mr. Perkins.
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
I'm sorry about that, Mr. Chair.
This is one of the ones we sent in today. It's the one that came out of the testimony of one of the groups that was here a little earlier to provide a little more transparency in the registry. That was part of the letter I think we all received on Friday. This was distributed by email to committee members today.
I move, that Bill C-42, in clause 4, be amended by adding after line 16 on page 3 the following: “(c.1) their jurisdiction of residence for tax purposes” and “(c.2) the name of the corporation”.
We have a hard copy that I think we can distribute.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Okay. Just for more clarity for members, this is the amendment referenced 12517837, if that's clearer for everyone. It's not a numbered amendment because it was sent after the deadline.
Are there any questions on the proposed amendment to clause 4 by Mr. Perkins?
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
Can we wait a second until everyone has the amendment?
Liberal
Liberal
Andy Fillmore Liberal Halifax, NS
Thank you.
Briefly, I wonder if we could hear from the officials on any impact they perceive from this amendment.
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategy and Innovation Policy Sector, Department of Industry
We would note two things about this amendment.
First, the notion of the “jurisdiction of residence for tax purposes” is a field that's already being collected, but it is not being made public. That's to make sure that's understood in terms of what the gist of the amendment is.
Second, on the name of the corporation, I want to be transparent about exactly what we intend to do with the registry. The Canada Business Corporations Act already makes public the names of the corporations that are incorporated under the Canada Business Corporations Act.
What the beneficial ownership registry will make public is the natural person who is the ultimate individual of significant control of that Canada Business Corporations Act corporation. By asking for the name of the corporation, that is not in keeping with the individual of significant control, which is at the heart of the beneficial ownership registry. What we are asking for is the human at the end of the chain who actually exercises control of the organization.
The name of the corporation, I assume to be in this particular case, is potentially the corporation of the individual of significant control, which is not the information we're asking for. We're asking for the natural person. Otherwise, it's the name of the corporation that is incorporated under the Canada Business Corporations Act, which is already public because it's part of the nature of the corporations registry.
That's our confusion on (c.2).
Liberal
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
This isn't a substitute for what you're collecting. It's additional information on the traceability. Then you can go back and search that name again within the registry, which you won't have if you just have the name of the individual.
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategy and Innovation Policy Sector, Department of Industry
What I want to be clear about is that what we've asked corporations to provide is the natural person. I would not know how to implement (c.2) because I don't know what is intended by the name of the corporation.
What we've asked for is a natural person, which by nature is not a corporation. Not all natural persons are necessarily incorporated or of a corporate nature. In fact, they can't be if they're a natural person, but they might be investing through one.