House of Commons Hansard #400 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was leader.

Topics

Supreme Court Appointments ProcessPrivilegeGovernment Orders

4:35 p.m.

NDP

Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am rising on a question of privilege related to my work as deputy justice critic for the New Democratic Party. My question arises out of that role in the process of making recommendations for appointments to the Supreme Court of Canada. I will be very brief.

I am concerned about the implications for me as a parliamentarian arising out of the inappropriate and likely illegal leak of very sensitive information in that context about a prospective appointee, namely the chief justice of the Manitoba superior court. As a consequence, I was given access, under a non-disclosure agreement, to a number of very sensitive documents and to very sensitive personal information in respect of that prospective appointee. While this deeply disturbing matter is now officially being investigated by an officer of Parliament, the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, my question of privilege relates to my role as a parliamentarian.

Mr. Speaker, I know you have heard many questions of privilege in the last while, so I will not waste your time on—

Supreme Court Appointments ProcessPrivilegeGovernment Orders

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

I would remind members of the Standing Order that provides that members are not to walk between the person speaking and the Chair. I would ask members to be aware of this and to abide by it.

The hon. member for Victoria.

Supreme Court Appointments ProcessPrivilegeGovernment Orders

4:35 p.m.

NDP

Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC

Mr. Speaker, I know that you have heard many questions of privilege over the past while, and I will not waste your time or the time of the House with lengthy quotes about what the privilege means or why it is important. In this case, my reputation as a member has been damaged as the result of speculation about the source of the unprecedented leak of this personal information about this prospective member of the Supreme Court. Until the party who did the leak is found, there remains doubt about who leaked the information in question. We have asked the Attorney General to investigate this, with no reply. Both the hon. member for and I are under a cloud of suspicion. We are essentially collateral damage as a consequence.

I will cite one relevant section of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, by Bosc and Gagnon, at page 112.

It is impossible to codify all incidents which might be interpreted as matters of obstruction, interference, molestation or intimidation and, as such, constitute prima facie cases of privilege. However, some matters found to be prima facie include the damaging of a Member’s reputation,

This was also dealt with by Speaker Fraser who, on May 5, 1987, at page 5766 of Debates said:

The privileges of a Member are violated by any action which might impede him or her in the fulfilment of his or her duties and functions. It is obvious that the unjust damaging of a reputation could constitute such an impediment.

In conclusion, I believe the leak, wherever it originated, has shown a distinct contempt of Parliament and has had a direct impact on me and my privileges as a parliamentarian. Should you rule in my favour, Mr. Speaker, I will be prepared to move the appropriate motion to have the matter investigated at the standing procedure and House affairs committee.

Supreme Court Appointments ProcessPrivilegeGovernment Orders

4:40 p.m.

Conservative

Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON

Mr. Speaker, I do not look forward to anything like this, but the hon. member for Victoria has made an excellent point as to what has taken place.

This is a process that was put together by the existing government in which it wanted a number of members of Parliament to participate in this process to make recommendations with respect to the Supreme Court justice. I remember that the government wanted to be careful about this. My office was told that we were going to have to swear that we were going to keep it secret. My staff pointed out that I had top security clearance as a former foreign minister, in other positions and as a member of the Privy Council. However, when I heard this, I said that it was fine and I would swear to keep quiet anything we did and any contents of the meeting.

The meeting was very small, involving several members of Parliament. The member for Victoria, the then justice minister, who we made recommendations to, and I were the only people who knew this. It was something that was given to the Prime Minister's Office. Therefore, what we hear, as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice said on Friday, and the Prime Minister and others, is that, no, neither the Prime Minister nor anyone in his office leaked this. Okay. Then the justice minister said that no, nothing came from his department. Then who was it? Let us face it. There were just a couple of us involved with this.

This is why I have found it very concerning. It seems to me that it weakens people's trust in this institution. We ask people to swear that they will keep something quiet, secret, and not divulge this information, and then when we see something like this, we want to see something done.

A number of us asked the justice minister last week, in I think four questions in a row, to please investigate this. Would you not want to investigate this, Mr. Speaker? If you believed that the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office or the Department of Justice had anything to do with this leak, would you not want this investigated? I think most people looking at this would say yes, it only makes sense to do that, and it is the right thing to do.

I am asking, Mr. Speaker, that you have a look at this, because this certainly impacts all of us who want to participate and be part of this process here. That, I believe, has been compromised by this. It should be changed, and it should be put to rest by a proper investigation.

Supreme Court Appointments ProcessPrivilegeGovernment Orders

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

I thank the hon. member for Victoria for raising the matter. I thank the hon. member for Niagara Falls for his comments. I will examine the matter and come back to the House in due course.

The House proceeded to the consideration of Bill C-82, An Act to implement a multilateral convention to implement tax treaty related measures to prevent base erosion and profit shifting, as reported (without amendment) from the committee.

Multilateral Instrument in Respect of Tax Conventions ActGovernment Orders

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

There being no motions at report stage, the House will now proceed, without debate, to the putting of the question of the motion to concur in the bill at report stage.

Multilateral Instrument in Respect of Tax Conventions ActGovernment Orders

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

Multilateral Instrument in Respect of Tax Conventions ActGovernment Orders

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Multilateral Instrument in Respect of Tax Conventions ActGovernment Orders

4:40 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

No.

Multilateral Instrument in Respect of Tax Conventions ActGovernment Orders

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

Multilateral Instrument in Respect of Tax Conventions ActGovernment Orders

4:40 p.m.

Some hon. members

Yea.

Multilateral Instrument in Respect of Tax Conventions ActGovernment Orders

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

All those opposed will please say nay.

Multilateral Instrument in Respect of Tax Conventions ActGovernment Orders

4:40 p.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.

Multilateral Instrument in Respect of Tax Conventions ActGovernment Orders

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

In my opinion the yeas have it.

And five or more members having risen:

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #1286

Multilateral Instrument in Respect of Tax Conventions ActGovernment Orders

5:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

I declare the motion carried.

When shall the bill be read a third time? By leave, now?

Multilateral Instrument in Respect of Tax Conventions ActGovernment Orders

5:20 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Multilateral Instrument in Respect of Tax Conventions ActGovernment Orders

5:20 p.m.

Liberal

Ginette Petitpas Taylor Liberal Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB

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

Multilateral Instrument in Respect of Tax Conventions ActGovernment Orders

5:20 p.m.

Louis-Hébert Québec

Liberal

Joël Lightbound LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak today about the importance of tax fairness and to join the debate on Bill C-82. I would like to use my time to explain how the bill would become an important new tool in the government's arsenal to combat aggressive international tax avoidance.

Tax fairness is fundamental to our democracy. It is a cornerstone of our government's plan to grow the middle class and spur economic growth so that more people can join it. In each of our government's last three budgets, we introduced measures to enhance the integrity of Canada's tax system. We continue to do work and take action in this regard so that Canadians can have confidence that their tax system is working and is fair.

As part of these actions to improve tax fairness, we introduced Bill C-82. The bill is a response to a profound challenge. When some Canadians choose not to pay their fair share of taxes, all of us are affected. What does this mean for Canadians? It means less money for important social programs to help new parents take care of growing families, workers find skills training or seniors live in independence. It means less money for vital infrastructure such as the roads, railways, ports and airports that help people and goods move safely and on time to where they need to go. As well, it means less money for policing our communities, health care and the environment. I could go on and on.

This is why it is important to make sure our tax system is and remains fair—

Multilateral Instrument in Respect of Tax Conventions ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I want to remind members that there is a debate going on. If they wish to take their conversations outside, it would be much appreciated.

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

Multilateral Instrument in Respect of Tax Conventions ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

Liberal

Joël Lightbound Liberal Louis-Hébert, QC

Madam Speaker, our government believes that all Canadians deserve to reap the benefits of a strong and vibrant economy. It goes without saying that this is made possible through a fair tax system.

Now I would like to talk about the bill before us in detail. Bill C-82 will give Canada better tools to fight what is known as tax base erosion and profit shifting, which is also known domestically and internationally as BEPS. The issue is tax avoidance strategies that wealthy companies and individuals use to exploit loopholes in the tax system. They take advantage of these loopholes to avoid paying tax or to shift their profits to low- or no-tax jurisdictions.

These schemes enable wealthy companies and individuals to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. They rob Canadians of the tax revenue that pays for the services and benefits that make Canada a good place to live and a more just and equitable society.

We have worked hard to combat that loss of tax revenue. In particular, I would highlight the work we have done on this with our international partners. We have worked with our partners at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the OECD, and other G20 nations to identify ways in which our current tax treaties are vulnerable to potential abuse.

Those organizations then developed measures that the countries can choose to include in their tax treaties to directly address those vulnerabilities. This new approach also addressed the fact that it would take a long time to renegotiate existing tax treaties one by one.

The approach I just described has been included in this bill. This is called a multilateral convention, also known as a multilateral instrument or MLI. This instrument is the result of a global initiative and the work of more than 100 countries and jurisdictions, including Canada. The multilateral instrument allows participating jurisdictions to adopt measures with respect to BEPS agreed to by the OECD and G20 without having to renegotiate each tax treaty.

By supporting Bill C-82 and implementing the multilateral instrument, the Government of Canada is taking action to preserve the integrity of our tax system and stop people from abusing our tax treaties. In addition, implementing the MLI will demonstrate Canada's desire to take concerted action with our treaty partners to combat aggressive international tax avoidance.

The fact is, at a time when companies and capital are increasingly globalized and interconnected, no country can fight tax avoidance single-handedly. In order to implement effective reforms, it is more vital than ever to collaborate with our international partners, such as the OECD and the G20. With this bill, we are taking one more step in that direction.

On the home front, the government is also aggressively pursuing those who promote tax avoidance schemes. In the last fiscal year alone, we imposed roughly $48 million in civil penalties on these third parties.

We are also gaining better access to information on Canadians' overseas bank accounts with the implementation of the common reporting standard, or CRS. CRS is a new system that will let Canada and more than 100 other countries exchange financial account information. This information will help us identify instances in which wealthy Canadians hide money in offshore accounts to avoid paying their taxes.

We have also hired more specialist auditors who focus on the high net-worth individual taxpayers. These teams include about 250 auditors, who are responsible for examining high-income earners and more than 800 high net-worth individuals and their webs of corporate structures.

In addition, the Minister of Finance and his provincial and territorial counterparts have committed to ensuring that Canadian authorities know who owns which corporations in Canada. They are also committed to better harmonizing corporate ownership record requirements between various jurisdictions.

Building on that agreement, we amended the Canada Business Corporations Act to require federally incorporated corporations to maintain beneficial ownership information. The government's previous budget, in 2018, enhanced the income tax reporting requirements for trusts so that beneficial ownership information would be more available and accessible.

Data of this kind helps Canadian authorities act against those engaging in international tax avoidance and criminal activities, such as tax evasion.

Thanks to the latest available data and our government's targeted investments, the Canada Revenue Agency is now armed with better tools and approaches that enhance the integrity and fairness of our tax system.

These tools help the CRA collect valuable information and allow its agents to work smarter and more effectively to ensure all Canadians pay their fair share.

For example, Canada is a member of the Joint International Taskforce on Shared Intelligence and Collaboration, or JITSIC. This expanded network of 38 countries works closely and actively with other tax administrations to coordinate tax compliance activities across the spectrum of international tax risks. This expertise has allowed the CRA to participate in and lead JITSIC expert working groups, including in the development of a strategy to identify and stop promoters of abusive tax schemes.

Canada has also taken steps to coordinate its criminal investigation by joining Australia, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States in the Joint Chiefs of Global Tax Enforcement, or J5, group. The J5 will share intelligence and criminal investigation strategies with each other and conduct joint operations in the fight against those who commit, promote and enable international tax crimes, money laundering and cybercrimes.

The CRA has also been automatically accessing all international electronic fund transfers for more than $10,000 entering or leaving the country. As of March 31, 2018, teams have analyzed more than 187,000 of these transactions, amounting to more than $177 billion. Reviewing these types of transfers helps identify transactions for which taxes should potentially have been paid and better risk assess individuals and businesses.

Through these efforts, Canada is taking concrete measures to secure tax fairness for Canadians. That includes continuing to work to maintain and improve our enforcement of tax compliance, so we can have a society that works for all Canadians.

In closing, I would like to point out that we are carrying out our work to ensure tax fairness in a context where the Canadian economy is well-positioned to continue to grow. The government remains committed to investing in people and what they care about the most, namely, good jobs, strong communities, a cleaner environment and better opportunities for future generations.

Almost four years ago, one of the first things we did was to ask the wealthiest 1% to pay a little more, which enabled us to lower taxes for the middle class.

Our government then implemented the new Canada child benefit, which, compared to the previous child benefit, is simpler, more generous, completely tax free and better targeted to help those who need it most.

In order to ensure that the Canada child benefit takes into account the ever-rising cost of living and helps those who really need it, the government indexed the benefit as of July 2018, two years earlier than planned. A typical middle-class family of four is now receiving approximately $2,000 more a year than in 2015 thanks to the tax cut I mentioned and the Canada child benefit. The OECD pointed that out this summer in a very interesting report that I encourage all members of the House and all Canadians to read.

When we add up the impact of measures such as the Canada child benefit, our government's new and more generous Canada workers benefit, and our support for seniors through the guaranteed income supplement, which was enhanced in our first budget, we are on the right track to help lift approximately 650,000 Canadians out of poverty. Actually, we are more than just on the right track since we have already lifted 825,000 Canadians out of poverty; according to Statistics Canada, that represents a 20% drop in poverty in Canada.

That is thanks in part to an approach very different from that of the previous government. We asked the wealthiest 1% to do its part so we could lower taxes for the middle class and those who need it most. We created the Canada child benefit, which lifted many families out of poverty and actually reduced child poverty by 40% in this country. I think that is something we should be proud of. Making sure our tax system is fair and equitable made that possible. That is a priority for us, but unfortunately, it was not a priority for many past governments, including the one that was in power prior to the October 2015 election.

We have been making great strides toward creating stronger, more resilient communities, and our major infrastructure investments are one reason why. Since 2016, we have approved over 30,000 infrastructure projects through the investing in Canada plan. The vast majority of those projects are under way and are creating good jobs for the middle class. They are also improving the lives of Canadians from coast to coast to coast, which is, after all, the ultimate goal.

These significant and concrete achievements have bettered the lives of many Canadians across the country.

Our plan is working. Over 850,000 more Canadians are employed today than in 2015. The unemployment rate is near its lowest level in 40 years. Our economy is one of the fastest growing in the G7.

We are committed to building an economy that works for everyone, where every person has a real and fair shot at success. Moreover, we are committed to making these investments to our economy for the long term, while we continue to bring down the federal debt to GDP ratio.

To continue on the trajectory of growth, Canada's economic health needs everyone to pay their fair share of taxes. The legislation before us, Bill C-82, gets Canada closer to meeting that goal.

I encourage all members of the House to support the legislation before us.

Multilateral Instrument in Respect of Tax Conventions ActGovernment Orders

5:35 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary skips over the fact that this was originally started with the OECD under the previous government. That being said, it is helpful to know that a government can recognize when it is in its interests to pursue what a previous government had done and building on that. Therefore, I am happy to see that happen.

The member mentioned a number of examples to fight tax evasion and money laundering internationally. While it is important to have these rules put in place, I would point out that on this very day, the solicitor general of British Columbia, David Eby, has called out the federal government for not supporting the RCMP so it can do the work that is required to tackle money laundering.

A tremendous amount of documentation in the German report has come out, yet the Liberal government does not fund the important part of enforcement.

Does the member realize that having rules is important, but there also needs to be a commitment to having boots on the ground to make a meaningful difference and to ensure we have a system that works for everyone?

Multilateral Instrument in Respect of Tax Conventions ActGovernment Orders

5:35 p.m.

Liberal

Joël Lightbound Liberal Louis-Hébert, QC

Mr. Speaker, it is appropriate to acknowledge the efforts of the former government, which joined the concerted international efforts as part of the BEPS project. It is true that this began under the former government, and yet we could have passed this bill much more quickly with the support of the opposition, as we have been working on it for quite some time. However, the opposition sometimes plays political games that affect and delay the process. Nevertheless I do want to point out that this was an initiative of the previous government.

With respect to my colleague's question about funding for the RCMP and the means at its disposal to combat tax avoidance and evasion in Canada, I find it somewhat surreal to hear this from a Conservative member because the Conservatives made cuts in this area. The former minister of national revenue under Stephen Harper, Mr. Blackburn, clearly said in an interview that the fight against tax evasion and avoidance was not a priority for them.

It is better late than never, but it is rather odd to have a Conservative member come to this realization and state that it is important to fight tax evasion and avoidance. He should also acknowledge that we have provided the Canada Revenue Agency with almost $1 billion in additional funding in the past three budgets to support these efforts to fight tax evasion and ensure that everyone pays their fair share. He voted against these measures.

I therefore tip my hat to the Conservative member, who has finally realized what we in the Liberal government have known for a long time.

Multilateral Instrument in Respect of Tax Conventions ActGovernment Orders

5:40 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Mr. Speaker, there seems to be a huge gap between what Canadians would expect and what the government is actually doing. A few days ago the minister for the Canada Revenue Agency continued to say that it had hired hundreds of new auditors to deal with the massive tax evasion that the government had, in a very real sense, encouraged.

We found out that instead of hundreds being hired, there was just a scant few dozen because of all the retirements that had taken place in the agency. We are also well aware that the government has absolutely and steadfastly opposed having in place a publicly accessible beneficial ownership registry that would be a key tool in fighting money laundering.

I want to ask the parliamentary secretary these two questions. First, why did the Liberals mislead the House and the Canadian public about the number of auditors they had hired at the Canada Revenue Agency? Second, why are they absolutely opposed to a publicly accessible beneficial ownership registry?