Mr. Speaker, I would like to intervene on this point of order, but not to reiterate the excellent arguments of my colleague from St. Paul's.
I will focus on two very specific points. The first is the matter of the ways and means motion as it pertains to a tax rather than a levy. The second point concerns the criteria associated with the levy.
Today, Mr. Speaker, you will have to decide whether a levy or a tax is involved. When a bill proposes a levy and not a tax it is exempt from certain prerequisites. A ways and means motion must be concurred in before a bill imposing a tax on the public can be introduced. There is no such requirement for a bill proposing a levy.
It serves no purpose to repeat that a ways and means motion may be moved in the House only by a minister of the crown. According to the traditions in this House, a levy must meet three very specific criteria.
The first one is that the levy is imposed on the industry. The second one is to serve an industry purpose. The third one is that the funds from the levy never form any part of the government's revenue.
Mr. Speaker, yours is the role of judge. As you said earlier, you want our opinion. Other opinions, including legal ones, have been or will be submitted to you, no doubt. You yourself will also seek other opinions, I am sure.
I close on the comparison, which was used earlier by the government House leader, between Bill C-32 on copyright and Bill S-13 before us. Unlike the government leader, I see a lot of similarities between the two bills. Bill C-32, which includes the levy on blank cassettes, did not require a ways and means motion and royal assent, because it essentially involved a levy.
This bill must be passed and debated by this Parliament, which will judge it on its merits. I believe this bill meets all the criteria necessary to proceed.
With your permission, I would like to table in this House legal opinions to this effect, which I hope will help you in your consideration of the matter.