House of Commons Hansard #53 of the 35th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was police.

Topics

Excise Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Excise Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:10 p.m.

Some hon. members

On division.

(Title agreed to.)

(Bill reported.)

Excise Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:15 p.m.

Portage—Interlake Manitoba

Liberal

Jon Gerrard Liberalfor the Minister of Finance

moved that the bill as amended be concurred in.

Excise Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:15 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the said motion?

Excise Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Excise Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

On division.

(Motion agreed to.)

Excise Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:15 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

When will the bill be read the third time? Now, with the unanimous consent of the House?

Excise Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Excise Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:15 p.m.

Portage—Interlake Manitoba

Liberal

Jon Gerrard Liberalfor the Minister of Finance

moved that the bill now be read the third time and passed.

Excise Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:15 p.m.

Vancouver South B.C.

Liberal

Herb Dhaliwal LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of Fisheries and Oceans

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to thank hon. members of the Reform Party and the Bloc Quebecois for supporting the bill.

I think the bill is an important bill because often we have had in the House both the Reform and the Bloc talking about duplication in government, talking about paper burden on small businesses and the administrative difficulty of managing the GST.

I think the government recognizes some of those concerns and this bill shows that we want to ensure that the government is aware of the concerns of small business in terms of the difficulties of the GST.

As someone who has been a small businessman, I think that doing things as simply as possible, as the hon. member said very well, we can help small businesses to be more competitive. We can help to ensure it is efficient and productive.

I want to thank the members for that and for the excellent comments that were made by the hon. member on how we as a government can work toward improving the environment for small business so it can be more productive, efficient, create more jobs and get this economy moving.

Excise Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:15 p.m.

Bloc

Benoît Tremblay Bloc Rosemont, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would agree with what the parliamentary secretary just told us, but the co-operation he received from the Bloc Quebecois shows that we are always ready to co-operate on sensible and useful bills. It is a very small step in the right direction and I think he could use what we just did as a model to tackle real problems such as the

overall review of government spending and the entire federal bureaucracy. We would be more than willing to co-operate.

Excise Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:15 p.m.

Reform

Jim Silye Reform Calgary Centre, AB

Mr. Speaker, as a point of protocol, I guess, I rise to indicate that we do support the bill in third reading. I hope that all the points we have exchanged here today do flow back to the Standing Committee on Finance and from the Standing Committee on Finance back to the House and that the government some day in the near future, perhaps in time for the next budget, can come up with comprehensive reforms in taxation that would improve the system that we have.

Excise Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:15 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Is the House ready for the question?

Excise Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Excise Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:15 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the said motion?

Excise Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Excise Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

On division.

(Motion agreed to, bill read the third time and passed.)

Income Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:20 p.m.

Cape Breton—East Richmond Nova Scotia

Liberal

David Dingwall Liberalfor the Minister of Justice

moved that Bill C-15, an act to revise certain income tax law amendments in terms of the revised Income Tax Act and Income Tax Application Rules, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Income Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:20 p.m.

Cape Breton—The Sydneys Nova Scotia

Liberal

Russell MacLellan LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-15 contains in its schedules a rewrite of the nine income tax amending acts passed between November 30, 1991 and July 1, 1993; that is to make them consistent with the revised Income Tax Act.

Amending acts passed prior to December 1, 1991 were incorporated in the revision of the Income Tax Act and the income tax application rules in the context of the statute revision exercise which forms the fifth and last supplement to the revised Statutes of Canada, 1985, which came into force on March 1, 1994.

Between November 30, 1991 and July 1, 1993 nine acts amending the Income Tax Act were passed. These acts amended the old version of the Income Tax Act, which was in force at that time.

In Bill C-15 the nine amending acts are being rewritten to read as they would have read if the revised version of the Income Tax Act had been enforced when they were passed. Each schedule of Bill C-15 revises one of these nine amending acts.

What needed to be done to bring the form of the amendments in line with the revised version is under question. In English, for instance, where the Income Tax Act once contained a large number of gender related terms, these have now been removed or replaced.

In the French version terminology and style have been improved and standardized to correspond as much as possible to the improvements in the language of the general statute revision of 1985.

The enactment of the bill will bring the revision of Canada's income tax law to a close. It will provide the citizen and the tax community with a uniformly revised, up to date version of the current income tax legislation.

I wish to stress the point that this bill does not amend the substance of the Income Tax Act. Indeed, Bill C-15 specifically provides that this bill shall not be held to operate as new law when it provides that the Revised Statutes of Canada 1985 Act will apply to these schedules.

This is a technical bill that does not create new law and I am seeking the co-operation of the House for its speedy passage.

Income Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:20 p.m.

Bloc

Maurice Bernier Bloc Mégantic—Compton—Stanstead, QC

Mr. Speaker, as I said in my speech on Bill C-13, Bill C-15, as was just noted again in this House, is intended to clarify several provisions of the Income Tax Act and does not make any new law. Accordingly, the Bloc Quebecois supports this bill.

My speech will be short. I want to come back to the point that I raised earlier, and I think that this bill shows it even more clearly than the previous one.

We have before us a bill that is over 650 pages long, with some 150 clauses that, I repeat, are intended to amend some previous legislative provisions in accordance with the legislator's desires or with amendments made to other laws so that all these amendments are in the Income Tax Act.

The point I want to make is as follows: although it is good occasionally to have bills that clarify previous provisions or do some housekeeping, this shows that legislators must act wisely in passing these laws the first time. Of course, I am not saying that once passed, a law must never be revised, but it should be changed for substantive reasons, to adapt it to new circumstances and to situations that prevail when the need for change arises.

This bill is meant to correct errors, if you like, that were made or adopted in some other legislative provisions. Especially at this time of year when everyone lucky enough to have a job must file an income tax return, it is easy to understand how hard it is for the ordinary citizen to make sense of all this mountain of legislation. We add to that complexity when we have to pass this kind of legislation.

Although it will be more understandable for specialists, ordinary citizens will still have difficulty making their way through it. That is what we want to emphasize to the government. When you present a bill, you should ensure that it is as easy to understand as possible for the citizens who will have to comply with it.

That said, I repeat that the Official Opposition will support the amendments contained in Bill C-15.

Income Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:25 p.m.

Reform

Jake Hoeppner Reform Lisgar—Marquette, MB

Mr. Speaker, if I am informed correctly I am the only speaker on this subject.

Today I rise in the House to comment on Bill C-15. This bill is intended to revise certain amendments of the Income Tax Act. I think the Reform Party generally supports the bill except for a few minor suggestions that I would like to throw over to the other side of the House. The bill does, however, provide this opportunity to criticize somewhat what the hon. members on the other side are doing with our tax money.

I was very surprised this afternoon in oral question period when we were criticized for using the telephone to gather information and opinion. I would like to suggest to the hon. members on the other side of the House that it is probably a lot more efficient than using Challenger jets to go and see individuals or small groups of people, and I think we get better information on certain subjects.

The Reform Party position on income tax includes a single rate tax, with larger personal and family exemptions so that families earning below a certain income would pay less tax or no tax. We would also eliminate most of the tax deductions and loopholes which are not general in application for most Canadians. As a party we are opposed to any increases in general income tax burden imposed on Canadians by the federal government.

The flat rate system would be simpler, more sensitive and fairer than the current system.

It helps to look at a few facts and figures since 1984. The Canadian tax burden has been the largest among the G-7 countries. In the fiscal year 1991-92 the personal income tax yielded $61.5 billion which accounts for 49.6 per cent of federal revenues.

The root cause of this serious overtaxation is the problem of government overspending. It seems incredible that government after government refuses to recognize this.

In 1984 the Liberal government was defeated by Brian Mulroney and the Conservatives on a platform of deficit reduction and political patronage. The same thing happened in 1993 when the Liberals defeated the Conservatives on deficit reduction and overspending.

Thank heavens there are 52 Reformers on this side of the House now to watch the spending, even if they cannot do anything on the revenue side. Therefore we have a little more balance which I hope will be positive in this House.

I wonder sometimes why the governments have tried in vain to get the government spending problem fixed by increasing taxes. The notion that a deficit can be reduced from government revenue increases alone is a misguided one.

Federally higher taxes have failed to reduce the deficit. They have in fact stalled the economy by cutting the spending power of the consumer, by dampening new investment and diverting growth into a flourishing underground economy.

In my riding of Lisgar-Marquette agriculture producers have seen along with the rest of Canadians a reduction in our country's international competitiveness. Our income taxes to our producers and businessmen have got to the rate that the Americans are a lot more competitive just on that one simple tax.

I urge the government not just for the farmers, but for the businessmen, private enterprise, entrepreneurs and constituents, to start thinking of lowering taxes and not raising them.

The evidence is across this country. University educated professionals leave Canada for nations where the income taxes and cost of living are lower. This is after we have paid to educate them.

The government should be looking at a tax break that would help our farmers, businessmen and consumers to increase their buying power, their productivity and our competitiveness.

I was shocked to learn recently that since 1961 Canada's tax freedom day has advanced 73 days. In 1961 the ordinary Canadian paid his taxes by May 5. Today that same taxpayer has to use his wages or productivity until July 15. This type of taxation whether it is corporate tax or income tax is unforgivable.

We are rapidly approaching a point where we will be working for governments full time just to pay for their debt-creating policies and bad spending habits. If we do not break this cycle soon and allow ourselves to implement useful, carefully considered tax breaks, Canadians will see their incomes taxed out of existence.

What direction should the Government of Canada take in its tax policy?

A good example is happening right now in Alberta. Since the election, the premier of Alberta has been on a crusade to eliminate his province's $2.5 billion deficit. He is on track to achieve a zero deficit within three years. This has been done with a commitment not to raise taxes. The message has gone out that he will not raise taxes.

It surprises me that where we live in our global economy technology and freer trade will reduce the importance of political boundaries. Investments and jobs will go to places with highly skilled workforces, good public services and competitive tax rates.

I can tell you what this means to my own province of Manitoba. Recently I have seen two companies move their Winnipeg operations to Calgary. A number of small businesses have moved their production facilities from the Morden-Winkler area to North Dakota. Why? One of the big reasons is income tax, sales tax. Alberta has no sales tax. Alberta has a lower corporate tax. The income tax in North Dakota is about two-thirds of what we pay.

The blunt fact is that Canada's political establishments have overspent and are on the verge of bankruptcy. Governments take 50 per cent of the average Canadian family's earnings. Multiple layers of government drain off the highest personal income tax burden in the G-7 countries and it seems not to be enough.

Reckless borrowing by government still continues as bond rating agencies prepare to downgrade our government credit ratings. Ridiculous tax levels are transferring people's spending power to unaccountable governments. That means retail sales and job growth shrinks and investment falls. It is a simple message that government should heed, or beware.

Income Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

Don Boudria Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Prior to your putting the question, I wonder if we could again seek unanimous consent after the question is put to proceed immediately to committee of the whole, followed immediately after committee of the whole stage by the third reading of the same bill.

Income Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:35 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Is there unanimous consent to do that?

Income Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:35 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Income Tax ActGovernment Orders

4:35 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Is the House ready for the question?