I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker, before you make your decision on the amendment. If there is any doubt on the acceptability of the amendment I refer you to Beauchesne's sixth edition, citation 568, which states:
It is an imperative rule that every amendment must be relevant to the question on which the amendment is proposed.
This omnibus bill deals with various tax acts including the Income Tax Act and the Canada Shipping Act. The registration of ships under foreign flag is in the shipping act which the bill amends. It is a matter of the Income Tax Act which the bill also amends. The bill deals with the closing of a tax loophole. I refer to the section of the bill that addresses the family trust issue. Flying flags of convenience is but another loophole of the rich that needs to be addressed.
The government should not go ahead with this bill but come forward with a bill that addresses all loopholes and the flags of convenience issue in particular.
I refer to Beauchesne's sixth edition, citation 733:
There are limitations on the types of amendments that can be moved on third reading. They must be relevant to the bill which they seek to amend.
My amendment is relevant to the Income Tax Act and the Canada Shipping Act which the bill seeks to amend. The citation goes further and says that the amendment:
-should not contradict the principle of the bill as adopted on second reading.
The bill addresses a major controversial loophole of the rich, that of the family trust. My amendment addresses a loophole of the rich as well. As I mentioned earlier my amendment addresses acts that are covered in the bill.
Citation 670 of Beauchesne's outlines some criteria for a reasoned amendment. Section 2 of the citation states:
It may not propose an alternative scheme.
My amendment does not do this. In fact I want to expand on the closing of tax loopholes for the rich. Citation 670(5) of Beauchesne's states:
It may express opinions as to any circumstance connected with the introduction or prosecution of the bill-
While we are looking at the Canada Shipping Act and the Income Tax, we should be looking at the issue of flying flags of convenience and close that loophole for the rich and powerful.
The amendment is in order because it relates to the bill. Yet it will open the debate on the issue of legally avoiding paying taxes. It may be legal but it certainly is not pro-Canadian. It is a loophole that must be looked at in the same light as the family trust issue.
It is shameful that some people in the country are willing to reap the benefits that are-