Evidence of meeting #25 for Public Accounts in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cra.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

Members speaking

Before the committee

François-Philippe Champagne  Minister of Finance and National Revenue
Serjak  Assistant Commissioner, Assessment, Benefit, and Service Branch, Canada Revenue Agency

Tom Osborne Liberal Cape Spear, NL

Thank you.

I was going to ask about CRA, but seeing as how we've gone on a different track, I am delighted to ask about this. In OGGO, I asked the Parliamentary Budget Officer if he had calculated into his analogy the fact that we are getting new trade deals, that we are breaking down interprovincial trade barriers and that we have the national defence and infrastructure plan to go with that. I asked if he had factored that into economic growth and some of the numbers he had calculated. He admitted that he had not.

I also looked at the previous parliamentary budget officer, who made comments on this budget. He said that he agreed with the direction and that it's not time for an austerity budget.

Using my previous experience, I had three budgets in Newfoundland as a finance minister. I was put in charge of finances at a time when we could not borrow. Based on some of the spending we made, we were then able to borrow again.

I have great confidence in the budget you put forward and in the track record of Prime Minister Carney. I want you to speak for a bit about how you see the projection of the trade agreements, the breaking down of trade barriers, the strategic spending—Build Canada Homes, for example—and how that will reflect on improving the economy and making life better for Canadians.

François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

You have a unique perspective as a former finance minister. You know nothing is easy, but you have to make choices.

I want to go back to what Ms. Kusie was saying—

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Stephanie Kusie Conservative Calgary Midnapore, AB

It's “Mrs.”

François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

Mrs. Kusie. I'm sorry.

What I was trying to say is that, on the one hand, we have a budget that provides a vision to 2030, with strategic investments to grow the economy, which has been applauded by a former parliamentary budget officer, by the markets, if you look at the bond markets, and by Canadians. Two-thirds of Canadians have said the plan.... They see why. We're rebuilding housing, and this is a key affordability measure. If you can have a home that you can afford, it's less a part of your disposable income.

The fact that we're investing in infrastructure is much-needed. I'll give you a sense of perspective, because I think that's helpful to everyone.

If you look at the largest infrastructure plan in the G7, many were referring to the German plan, which has 500 billion euros over 12 years. If you put that in Canadian dollars, you would be at $800 billion over 12 years for Germany. Compare that to the Canadian plan. On a cash basis, we're at $450 billion over five years, so we have one of the largest infrastructure plans in the G7, and I'm not even adjusting it for the size of the economy. The German economy is twice the size of Canada's.

That's why the G7 realizes and why international institutions have said that if you have the fiscal capacity and have a AAA credit rating.... There are two countries that can afford that: Germany and Canada. These two countries have decided to do smart things in infrastructure, housing, productivity innovation and, in our case, defence. You have the building blocks.

Why did we do the grocery benefit? We did it because it's part of our Canadian values, in a sense. We know families are hurting and it's a tough time, so we looked at the excess food inflation since COVID—$782. We said we were going to give a boost for one year so that people could capture that. We're going to give them a bridge before the economic impacts of our plan are felt in the economy, because it obviously takes time.

We have the Major Projects Office and the one Canadian economy. You saw a report recently that said if we removed all the barriers between the provinces, we would add $210 billion to the Canadian economy.

This is a work in progress. Buy Canadian and the defence industrial strategy are going to be levers to build our country. We can't control what's going on south of the border or anywhere else, but what we can do for ourselves is build the most resilient economy and have the strongest economy in the G7. By the way, we have the second-fastest growing economy in the G7.

When you look at that, I say it's a matter of choice. I respect my colleagues who were asking questions, but if you have the fiscal capacity to help people in a time of need, I think you need to do it.

We know that affordability and food are the key. You have three things. You have rent and the cost of shelter and food. Then you go to cars and car loans, and then you go to student loans. We have been trying to act on all these levers to make housing more affordable and to make sure we can help structurally as well.

My colleagues will appreciate that we talked to farmers. Farmers said to me, “It's good that you helped fund structural improvements.” That's why we put in $500 million for more abattoirs, more cold rooms and better transportation systems. They wanted us to have a national food security strategy and grow more. Canada imports about 30% of its produce. When you get to winter, it's 80% to 90%. There's a reason things spike. It's because we're subject to currency fluctuation, climate change and tariffs, so we need to grow more in Canada.

Not only did we do something for families, but we did something structurally, which will help us have more food security and be more resilient as a nation.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative John Williamson

Thank you.

Mr. Lemire, you have the floor for three and a half minutes.

Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In its latest report, the CRA stated that it recovered $3.2 billion of the $12.3 billion overpaid to Canadian taxpayers.

Let's talk about Export Development Canada, which used to manage the Canadian emergency business account. It's a matter of principle that the former member for Terrebonne felt strongly about, and the Supreme Court recently confirmed that this member had her election stolen. However, Export Development Canada doesn't want to release to the public the names of companies that benefited from the Canadian emergency business account. The Auditor General estimates that $3.5 billion was paid to ineligible companies.

Why does your government refuse to treat companies on an equal footing with citizens?

François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

I'm trying to understand the nature of your question so that I can provide a better answer. You said—

Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

The same amount of energy isn't expended to collect the money overpaid by the Canadian emergency business account program. Some people benefited from this program, but should never have been able to do so. In the case of citizens, we know that the CRA will take considerable steps to recover even amounts of around $2,000.

François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

To my knowledge, Mr. Lemire, and I say this in all—

Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

It's $9 billion sitting idle and your government won't get it back.

François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

As you said, about $9.6 billion has yet to be recovered. The agency is working on it. We've even added investments until 2028 to address the situation and to provide more resources. It's a diligent effort. It's a difficult job in a number of ways. However, I think that we're doing it diligently.

If you have any specific questions, I'll certainly be happy to check with the agency and to give you answers later.

Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

Minister, the benefits delivery modernization programme, which uses Cúram software, is reportedly having problems generating T4 slips for our seniors. This information appeared in an article in La Presse.

What will the CRA do for our seniors who haven't received their T4 slips? Have you thought of a contingency plan for this? Will they be penalized for documents that they haven't received from the government? We're just a few days away from tax season, and we know that these documents haven't been sent.

François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

This is an important question, Mr. Lemire, especially for our seniors. Ms. Serjak told me that she could give a more detailed answer.

4:55 p.m.

Assistant Commissioner, Assessment, Benefit, and Service Branch, Canada Revenue Agency

Melanie Serjak

We're in constant contact with Employment and Social Development Canada regarding this issue. We're working closely together to see whether any individuals are affected and to plan how we'll manage the issue if necessary. This is on our radar and we're working on it.

Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

We would greatly appreciate it if you could submit the contingency plan to the committee.

Mr. Chair, I have a motion to table. It's being sent to you now:

That the committee report to the House to request that the government establish a public and independent inquiry into cost overruns on IT contracts, including Phoenix, ArriveCAN and Benefit Delivery Modernization.

These programs have been studied by this committee.

The motion has been tabled. I would be pleased to debate it now, if that's the will of the committee, and to have it adopted.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative John Williamson

Just give me one second, Minister.

Mr. Lemire, your motion doesn't concern the study that we're carrying out today. You can table the motion, but we can't debate it today.

You still have one minute to ask the minister your questions.

Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

Okay. We consider that the notice of motion has been given. We can indeed debate the motion at the next meeting.

5 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative John Williamson

Sure.

You have one minute.

Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

Minister, I had a meeting in my office with people from the National Golf Course Owners Association Canada. Today, I am taking the liberty of asking you their questions.

According to subsection 18(1)(l)(i) of the Income Tax Act, “the use or maintenance of property that is a yacht, a camp, a lodge or a golf course or facility” is among the items that are not deductible from income.

Minister, why can entrepreneurs deduct tickets to a hockey game, such as a Canadiens or Maple Leafs game, from their expenses, but can't deduct green fees for a round of golf?

I'm thinking of all the golf courses in my region or yours that are owned by non-profit organizations or municipalities. A directive like this from your department could help them attract business people to the course.

5 p.m.

Liberal

François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

Mr. Lemire, that's a very specific question. I would be happy to review it and send you a written response. I think it deserves one. Your question is very serious. This is something that needs to be looked at in terms of the interpretation of tax law. I think you will understand that, when it comes to tax interpretation, it is only natural for the Minister of Finance to be very precise. Obviously, taxpayers hearing today's testimony would like to know the precise answer. I think the best way to do that is to provide you with a written response.

Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

I would be grateful to you if you could.

Thank you very much.

5 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative John Williamson

Thank you, Mr. Lemire.

Up next is Mr. Kuruc, and then Ms. Yip will round us out.

Mr. Kuruc, you have the floor for five minutes.

5 p.m.

Conservative

Ned Kuruc Conservative Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON

I'd like to say thank you to the honourable minister for coming today as a witness, and to Madam Serjak as well.

You said earlier in answering one of the questions that you want to look forward. That's the concern I have. When I questioned Secretary Long, he said that he didn't accept the report findings. What do you have to say about your colleague's disregard for the Auditor General's report?

5 p.m.

Liberal

François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

Just so we're clear, when you said “the report”, you were talking about the Auditor General's report.

5 p.m.

Conservative

Ned Kuruc Conservative Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON

Yes, sir.