Evidence of meeting #83 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 amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategy and Innovation Policy Sector, Department of Industry
I can't speak for the minister, but I would suggest that there is great urgency to proceed with the changes to this act.
Conservative
Brad Vis Conservative Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC
I'm just trying to figure out what I want to....
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
We're on clause 23.
Mr. Vis, if you don't have any questions, we'll proceed to a recorded vote on clause 23.
(Clause 23 agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0)
(On clause 7)
That brings us back to clause 7, which we had stood in our previous meeting.
There was a subamendment to amendment CPC-2 that was moved by MP Gaheer. Just to be sure that we're all on the same page, the subamendment that had been moved by Mr. Gaheer when we decided to stay the review of clause 7 is the subamendment referenced 12540657, if I'm not mistaken.
I will yield the floor to Mr. Gaheer to speak to his subamendment to CPC-2.
Mr. Gaheer, go ahead.
Liberal
Iqwinder Gaheer Liberal Mississauga—Malton, ON
Thank you, Chair.
There are actually three different clauses that our amendment would affect. It would affect clause 4, clause 7 and clause 8. We can take it in three parts because there were three amendments.
With CPC-2, the issue that we had was that it would probably lead to legal challenges and retaliation against Canadian investors such as Canadian pension funds. This was supported by testimony from the officials, as well, last time.
Our compromise was three-fold. First of all is the need to change the period of time prescribed for the subsections in section 15 because it's not enough time. The subamendment would replace 21 days with 45 days, which would match other relevant review periods in the act. This would impact clause 4, and we would need unanimous consent to go back and amend clause 4, as well.
The reference is 12543001, and it was shared with the committee.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Mr. Gaheer, I think we got a little confused because the amendment you're proposing is not on clause 7, which is what we're debating right now. You're moving an amendment to clause 4, and you're right, it would need unanimous consent, but that will have to be dealt with after we first dispose of the clauses that were stayed in a previous meeting.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
The clauses that were stayed.... We have clause 7 first; new clause 8.1, which is NDP-2; and then we have clause 12, which is CPC-5, CPC-6 and Lib-0.3. Then we can move to the amendment you're proposing on clause 4, which will require unanimous consent.
Right now, we're on clause 7, and I believe the subamendment that you had on clause 7, if I'm not mistaken, is the one referenced, so the reference number—
Liberal
Iqwinder Gaheer Liberal Mississauga—Malton, ON
It's 12540657.
All three of these relate to CPC-2. That's why I brought them up initially. We can proceed with—
Conservative
Brad Vis Conservative Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC
Let's do them in the right order. It's super confusing.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
They do relate to CPC-2, which relates to clause 7, which is why we're debating it now.
Liberal
Iqwinder Gaheer Liberal Mississauga—Malton, ON
Do I need to move it again or has it already been moved?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
I believe you were not moving the subamendment that we're discussing, so yes, you would need to move the subamendment.
Liberal
Iqwinder Gaheer Liberal Mississauga—Malton, ON
I'd like to move a subamendment to CPC-2. The reference is 12540657, which is the one we're discussing. Again, we're changing the time prescribed to 45 days from the 21 days. It will bring it in line with other review periods in the act, and it will give Canadian Heritage and Treasury Board the actual time that's needed for review. We can ask the officials if they have comments on that.
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategy and Innovation Policy Sector, Department of Industry
Briefly, Mr. Chair, as we understand it, this subamendment would do a couple of important things. One, as noted, it would amend the time frame in which the review would take place. It changes it to 45 days as noted. We need to issue the notice to the investor. We need to consult provinces and territories, and then actually conduct the review of the relative net benefit of the investment, so 45 days is reasonable. Twenty-one days, in our view, is too short.
The second portion is reducing the overall scope of state-owned enterprises that would be subject automatically to a net benefit review, regardless of threshold, by removing those that constitute a “trade agreement investor”, which is a defined term in the act that also relates to the threshold that's set.
Conservative
Brad Vis Conservative Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC
In the context of what Mr. Schaan was saying—because I think this is an important point—it's a non-Canadian state-owned enterprise that is a trade agreement investor.
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategy and Innovation Policy Sector, Department of Industry
That's unless the non-Canadian is a trade agreement investor—as in, they are subject to a trade agreement with Canada.
That narrows the scope, which, as we noted at the previous meeting, reduces the overall trade risk, notwithstanding that there are others with whom we have other trade obligations. This simply ensures that we can send that non-Canadian investment a notice for review.
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
On a point of order, can I take a couple of minutes? I just want to compare things.
Can we suspend for a few moments while we check this against the act?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
We'll suspend briefly so that you can compare it to CPC-2, which is what this subamendment is changing.
We'll suspend briefly.