Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Bill C-230, an act to amend the Financial Administration Act and to make consequential amendments to other acts.
I want to thank the member for Simcoe North for putting this forth. I, too, share some of the core values that I think are expressed in the bill, one of which is a commitment to tax fairness. That is very important to me, as is a commitment to transparency and accountability. That is why our government put forward the national anti-fraud strategy recently, as well as committing to a financial crimes agency, among some other commitments we have made. Some of the legislative efforts and initiatives of our government demonstrate an intersection or an alignment of values.
The government is committed to being transparent and accountable in its operations. At its core, the bill aims to make government finances more open and accountable, particularly when large debts owed to the federal government are cancelled or forgiven.
One of the ways it proposes to do this is by creating a public registry showing major financial obligations owed to the government by corporations, trusts and partnerships that have been forgiven or settled without full repayment. However, the bill would require specific conditions to be met before a debt can be included in the registry, which is important.
First, a debt must be owed by a corporation, trust or partnership. This means that the registry would focus on significant financial obligations involving organizations. Second, the current iteration of the legislation notes that the debt must be valued at $1 million or more. Third, the debt must arise under an act of Parliament. Lastly, the debt must be waived, written off or forgiven in whole or in part.
I would note that the bill does not propose to change the criteria or authority under which debts may be forgiven. Those decisions would continue to be made under existing laws and policies.
In order to create this registry, the bill includes consequential amendments to several other acts, including the Income Tax Act, the Excise Tax Act, the Excise Act, the Softwood Lumber Products Export Charge Act, the Digital Services Tax Act and the Global Minimum Tax Act. However, these amendments would provide the CRA and other relevant bodies with the ability to share confidential taxpayer information with the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat for the purpose of populating the registry.
I would note that this may have important privacy implications, as I think the sponsor of the bill has noted. However, the bill attempts to strike a balance between transparency and privacy. It is my hope and my belief that striking a correct balance will be one item we will discuss when examining the bill in even greater detail, because it is indeed a delicate balance that needs to be carefully assessed.
While I believe that all members of the House support the high-level aims of the bill, I must raise a few concerns the government has with the proposed legislation.
One issue is that the bill does not distinguish between a writeoff of a debt or obligation and a waiver or forgiveness. If an online public registry were to be established, it would need to draw a clearer distinction between debts that are written off and those that may be waived or forgiven, just as they are presented in the public accounts. The types of debts to be included in the registry would therefore need to be clarified.
There are also potential privacy implications, as I have mentioned, with the legislation. The bill focuses on corporations, trusts and partnerships, and as a result, it does not identify individuals, which is a good thing. We support this. However, it is possible that in the case of partnerships, the name of an individual could be disclosed, in which case the Privacy Act could be engaged. The bill would therefore need to address these privacy concerns by explicitly prohibiting the disclosure of the names of any individuals.
On this side of the House, we believe that the proposed $1-million threshold for reporting debts is also quite low. The government believes that this threshold would need to be increased in order to reduce the administrative burden of maintaining the registry.
It would also follow the same materiality principles already used in government financial policies to help reduce the risk of reputational harm. For example, publicizing smaller writeoffs could discourage businesses from engaging with government programs. That being said, a new proposed registry must leverage existing reporting mechanisms so as not to strain resources and to remain consistent with current documents and procedures.
The government believes that Bill C-230 is an important piece of legislation that could potentially strengthen financial reporting and transparency. I would like to again applaud the member for Simcoe North for advancing this legislation. One of the features of Private Members' Business is that it often advances priorities that have broad support in this House.
In conclusion, in that spirit, as with any proposed legislation, it is essential to carefully examine the bill. Those of us in this House must consider not only its intent but also its practical implications for government operations, stakeholder interests and Canadians at large.
Should the House vote in favour of this bill, I trust that we will do the work of scrutinizing it at the committee stage. I look forward to working on that with the member across the way, hopefully finding a way to get another private member's bill through the House of Commons. Again, I appreciate him for his good faith attempt to address an issue that he and many government members care about deeply.