Evidence of meeting #32 for Natural Resources in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was million.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
I think he explained in his answer that there's an awful lot of debate as to whether things are tax breaks or not.
Monsieur Dupont, is it really possible for you to provide meaningful numbers when that debate is there, when it's something that civil servants really aren't expected to get involved in?
Deputy Minister, Department of Natural Resources
Mr. Chair, I'm not sure of the protocol. I'm more than happy to check.
As I mentioned, the Department of Finance would be the authority best able to bring forward that information. As for whether I try to get it from them and send it over to the committee or whether the committee asks the Department of Finance, I'm not sure what the protocol is. But that is the source of the expertise in regard to the tax system.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Okay. Thank you very much.
Monsieur Gravelle, you have your answer.
Mr. McGuinty.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Just on that point, Mr. Chair, there is a tax policy unit at Finance Canada. There is very well established nomenclature and there are descriptions as to what constitutes a subsidy and what does not.
I would suggest, perhaps, for your consideration that you write to the Minister of Finance as chair of this committee and ask the Minister of Finance to provide this committee with a detailed written briefing as to what constitutes a subsidy for a particular sector, particularly the oil and gas sector—according to the request that was made, I think we're talking about the oil and gas sector—and that the document be delivered up to this committee for its consideration.
Conservative
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
I think it would be very helpful for us, Mr. Chair, for you to make that request on our behalf so that the numbers are transparent, so that the nomenclature is transparent, so that we all understand that we're talking about apples and apples, not apples and oranges, and so that these numbers are available. In fact, they're available, because they're provided each year to the OECD.
Conservative
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
If this is as well established as Mr. McGuinty says, and it's as available as it is, perhaps the NDP can do their own work. The committee doesn't need to be doing their work and sit to establish their talking points. I don't think we're going to find agreement on this anyway. Perhaps they can do their own work.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
We haven't been given direction from the committee to do this. We can get into this process or we can get back to the main estimates and the votes on the main estimates.
If we can go to the votes on the main estimates, there are seven votes, plus the vote on whether the main estimates should be reported to the House.
NATURAL RESOURCES
Department
Vote 1—Operating expenditures..........$718,655,000
Vote 5—Capital expenditures..........$6,839,000
Vote 10—Grants and contributions..........$832,277,000
(Votes 1, 5, and 10 agreed to)
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited
Vote 15—Payments to Atomic Energy of Canada Limited for operating and capital expenditures..........$102,143,000
(Vote 15 agreed to on division)
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
Vote 20—Program expenditures..........$29,302,000
(Vote 20 agreed to)
National Energy Board
Vote 25—Program expenditures..........$52,593,000
(Vote 25 agreed to)
Northern Pipeline Agency
Vote 30—Program expenditures..........$3,103,000
(Vote 30 agreed to)
Shall I report the votes under Natural Resources, less the amounts voted in interim supply, to the House?
Conservative