Sue Barnes

[Taxpayer Information, December 6th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I am pleased to table, in both official languages, the report on the security incident concerning taxpayer information found in surplus filing cabinets.

[Violence Against Women, December 6th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, today in communities across Canada, men, women and children are gathering to remember the horrific events which occurred seven years ago at l'École Polytechnique in Montreal. On that December 6, 14 bright young women lost their lives in a senseless act of violence. In my community of London, Ontario there are several events planned to mark this anniversary and to remember all women who suffer violence.

We must help to end the violence with better understanding and education through governmental and non-governmental assistance. We must also do our part as legislators to pass relevant legislative measures.

I commend those who strive every day not only to reduce violence against women but who work with the victims of violence including the husbands, wives, children, siblings and friends who also become victimized, sometimes to the extent that later in life cycles of violence are repeated.

One day a year is set aside to recognize Canada's national day of remembrance and action on violence against women. Today the flag on the Peace Tower is flying at half mast. I strongly urge every Canadian-

[Excise Tax Act, December 4th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the short answer is that I am very proud of my government because it responds to the needs of Canadians. It has travelled across the country and has listened to people. If the hon. member had listened to my speech, many examples were given to him. There are 130 exact examples in this legislation which he can read. Constituents in all ridings, I do not care in which province, will benefit from this legislation.

[Excise Tax Act, December 4th, 1996]

It is incredible to listen to people heckling while one is trying to complete a speech but that is part of standing up and debating in this House.

We have to understand that this bill accomplishes a major step in replacing the GST as it was. In my opinion it is moving toward a better system. I would like this country at some point in time to be a fully harmonized system but life is not perfect, we as members of this House are certainly far from perfect, and other legislatures are far from perfect also.

What we do is make improvement and gradually things move in the right direction and maybe one day we will have the perfect solution for people who think there are perfect solutions. Right now we are working toward improvements.

[Excise Tax Act, December 4th, 1996]

Madam Speaker, I am going to speak about improvements to Canada's federal goods and services tax. There are over 130 improvements and the government is introducing them to simplify the GST and to increase its fairness. These changes do go a considerable way toward replacing the GST as we know it with a better system.

The GST as we know has been a source of much controversy. There is nothing as topical as something everyone dislikes and no one likes taxes. That is not surprising.

It was not long ago in this country that nobody paid taxes because there were none. At the turn of this century there were no national income, corporate or sales taxes for anyone to pay, rich or poor. Believe it or not, in 1900 Ottawa got most of its revenues from customs duties. I suspect that this could be the reason our political ancestors promoted Canada as a great trading nation.

But we live in a different time and in many ways a much different country, a country cited as one of the finest in the world in which to live. One of the distinguishing features that makes this country of ours the envy of others is the priority we place on quality of life. We are known the world over for social programs we have devised to ensure a decent quality of life for everyone.

Taxes unfortunately are the duties and dues that we pay for the privilege of membership in this country and this society. The taxes we pay ensure a common richness. And let us face it, the GST is a tax that brings in $18 billion a year, or 13 per cent of the total federal revenues. Without a tax like it, our social programs would be in jeopardy, our debt problems would be deadly, and our national advantage as an international economy would be at risk.

Having said all this, I want to say also that the government has been correct to criticize the GST as it was. In so doing, we were responding to what Canadians told us. Canadians told us that the GST was poorly conceived. They told us it was an outrageous example of overlap and duplication that came out of bureaucracies. They told us that the GST was cumbersome and that in particular it cost small business too much time, too much energy and too much money.

The legislation being introduced now both simplifies and clarifies the application of the GST and also streamlines the administration. In doing this it introduces a greater fairness in the system and lays the foundation for a national harmonized sales tax. Taken together, the measures that we see in the bill represent a major step toward replacing the GST as we have known it. They respond to what Canadians have been telling us.

In looking at alternatives to the GST, the all-party finance committee of the House went to Canadians for advice. It listened to nearly 500 witnesses and read more than 700 briefs from consumers, professionals, businesses and individuals. What did the Canadian people tell us?

Canadians told us to do what is sensible. They told us to fix the problems that were there. They told us not to run off and create some other new or strange scheme to adjust to, to do the same job as the GST and risk the same complexities. They said: "We need the $18 billion, we understand that. The thing is in place now so fix the problems and get rid of the irritants. Fix the duplication and create sales tax harmonization. Fix the headaches that we have by

clarifying the rules and making it simpler and fairer". This is precisely what this legislation starts doing. In so doing, it shows what can be accomplished by simply responding to what Canadians have told us to do.

Our other colleagues in the House will speak to the issue of sales tax harmonization which is in the legislation respecting three of the maritime provinces. Today I do want to comment more on the measures that address the headaches that affect all Canadians in this legislation and which are also being dealt with at the same time.

In developing the changes, many of which are technical and sector specific, this government went straight to many of the groups, organizations, sector leaders and professional associations affected by the tax. We told them we had the tax and asked them what we could do with it to make their life somewhat easier. We wanted to know what we could do to fix their problems with this legislation.

What we heard in response resulted in this legislation with about 130 different changes affecting multiple sectors of our society. The package introduces measures to simplify the operation of the tax for many businesses and non-profit organizations. It introduces measures that make compliance easier and clarify confusing aspects of the tax. It also introduces measures to improve the fairness of the tax both for the consumers and for businesses.

I wish to elaborate on a few points. First, well over one-third of these proposed modifications are aimed specifically at simplification. These include streamlining the tax treatment of charities and non-profit organizations. They include a simplified calculation of employee and shareholder benefits for Canadian businesses. Businesses can now make a one step tax calculation using the same information they use for their income tax purposes. The modifications include measures which simplify transactions related to used or second hand goods, which have become a significant part of the economic activity in this country.

The package also includes proposals to clarify the application of the tax and, in particular, to ease the burden of compliance for small businesses. These changes were done to ensure that there is more precision in the application of the GST and that it does not complicate administration unnecessarily.

They clarify certain educational services such as those provided and what we are now defining as public colleges and vocational schools as well as universities. They involve streamlining the administration of tourist rebates, something that is very important in this country as an industry, and extend the eligibility to these rebates to non-resident businesses.

There is also the much needed clarification of the GST in areas relating to financial services, to trusts and estates and changes to existing partnership rules.

Finally, this package of measures restructures the GST to make it fairer for all Canadians. This is accomplished by ensuring competitive equity among businesses and applying the tax equally to all consumers. A variety of modifications restores the international competitiveness of Canadian service providers, equalizes the tax treatment of health care services and introduces a fairer application of the GST to housing rebates.

The themes are simplification, clarification and greater fairness. These have all been the guiding principles in developing these changes. Many of these measures being proposed are technical and strategically aimed to deal with specific problems in certain sectors.

In the amount of time I have here today it would be impossible for me to review each adequately or in sufficient detail. I know all the members have access to that material. Consequently, I would like to draw the attention of the House to some general examples of the improvements which are in this legislation.

I should first remind the House and its various members of the invaluable contribution being made to the well-being of our Canadian society by Canadians and Canada's charitable organizations. However, when the GST was established the rules were developed to address the activities of the largest charities. Many smaller charities have found these rules to be too onerous for their use. Yet combined together these small charities, precisely the smaller charities, do much of the charitable work in the country.

This legislation proposes new and simpler rules for all charities but, in addition, new rules were specifically designed for smaller charities which will simplify compliance for the GST for the smaller charitable group. As a result of these changes significantly fewer charities, about 10,000 fewer to be exact, will have to register for the GST at all. For those that do remain registered, 10 to 12 per cent of all charities, the rules will be simpler, particularly for fundraising activities, for filing returns and for claiming rebates. I think that is very important and very positive. This will help our charity sector increase the range of its activities in a time that fiscal restraint is forcing many to become more dependent on the network of goodwill that exists among our volunteers and our community based organizations.

Further, a number of changes are proposed to make the federal sales tax system fairer in its application in the health care sector. We all know especially with our aging population how important

the health care sector is to Canadian society and how much more important it will be in the future.

There will be changes to the treatment of services provided by health care practitioners who are not medical doctors or dentists. A greater degree of fairness is being introduced to exempt from GST the services these practitioners provide. For example, the list of exempt health care practitioners will be extended to include dietitians who meet the criteria for health care professionals in five provinces. As a result, using that example, dietitians will be able to provide their services exempt from federal sales tax to individuals, health care facilities and public sector bodies starting January 1, 1997.

An added advantage of this measure is that it increases professional regulation of health care practitioners who are requesting an exemption. This makes their services more financially accessible to the public.

A number of changes are also proposed to extend or clarify the zero rating provisions as they apply to certain medical devices and associated services. For example, the zero rating of hospital beds will be extended to purchases by all health care facilities, including long term health care facilities. Currently the sale of hospital beds is zero rated only when purchased by a hospital or by an individual with a written order from a medical practitioner. I think we can see that there are positive elements in the legislation.

The zero rating of the cost of modifying a car, for instance, to meet the needs of an individual using a wheel chair will also be expanded. Orthopaedic devices will be zero rated when they are made to order for an individual or when they are supplied under prescription.

These are sensible changes which are being introduced at an appropriate time, as I said before, when the needs of an aging population are increasing. I do not think there would be any argument in this House that these are beneficial to certain segments of Canadian society.

I go to another sector, the municipal sector. We used to have various complications concerning the GST, for instance, garbage collection. These will be alleviated under this new legislation. The collection of garbage will now be exempt from GST when it is provided by a municipality or by a government.

Similarly, services to remove snow, ice and water, maintain water distribution, sewage or drainage systems or repair and maintain roads and streets and sidewalks, these all will now be exempt from GST when they are supplied by the municipality. This government proposes also that the collection of recyclable materials be included in the exempt provision for the collection of garbage. That is important when we are trying to help our environment in this country. These efforts, simplification and clarification in the application of GST, will have a beneficial effect for the environment and for different levels of government, namely the municipal level.

There is another sector this provision has a beneficial effect on, the agricultural sector. Here again the list of zero rated supplies is being expanded to include automated and computerized feeding systems, specified mulchers, crop shredders, transportable conveyers and elevators, and certain wagons and trailers.

It is always important when we develop legislation that we treat all the sectors across this country, whether it is industrial, agriculture, municipal levels of governments or health care sectors, that there is something that is going to help a number of the organizations in this land.

There are changes to the existing rules for the benefit of builders of subsidized residential complexes to ensure that they also have equitable treatment for themselves as builders, together with non-subsidized housing.

There is a broader range of goods and services relating to international transportation which can and will also be zero rated, as will services provided by purchasing representatives to non-resident businesses.

These things are technical. I do not think they are the most exciting but I know to the people who are concerned with this legislation they are important changes. They will have a benefit in areas where people were complaining to us before. I know the members of the finance committee heard these complaints, and this legislation is the response.

There are many other proposed changes to the tax treatment of international transactions that will improve the administrative efficiency and the competitive advantages of Canadian businesses. I could go on with more examples but these changes address the inequities, the complexities and the unnecessary obstructions that have made the GST so unpalatable to Canadian citizens, Canadian businesses and different levels of governments.

They bring needed simplicity, clarity and fairness where issues sometimes were cloudy. In making these changes, this government has responded in large measure to not what a government wanted, or the government side of this House wanted, but what Canadians told us were problems.

In addressing these technical amendments to the GST, we are not talking only about the harmonized provinces. We are talking about across Canada. It is a response to the irritants in a system of a badly designed tax and we are trying to improve it. This is not a perfect world. There is no legislation that is perfection that I have ever seen in this House any former House or probably any future House. But we are moving forward with improvements.

That is what legislation does. That is our job as responsible people trying to administer fair taxes, simpler taxes and equitable taxes in a country.

[Questions On The Order Paper, October 29th, 1996]

Since Revenue Canada has no way to identify the clients who were affected by the passage of Bill C-31, an act to amend the Indian Act, the department is unable to provide numbers with respect to any applicable refunds or reassessments.

[Small Business, October 22nd, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for Lincoln not only for this question but for his very hard and continuous work on the issues of small business.

Yesterday at the start of small business week, the Minister of National Revenue announced a new simplified T4 short form that will significantly reduce compliance costs for small businesses. This will allow small business owners to spend less time filling out tax forms and more time growing their businesses for the benefit of all Canadians.

This is the end product of the work of the small business advisory committee through which Revenue Canada consults small businesses across this country.

The new T4 short form will be mailed out directly to those businesses that have six employees or less. It will also be available at all our tax offices.

This is government working at its best, as it should be.

[Mental Illness Awareness Week, October 11th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, next week is Mental Illness Awareness Week. One out of five Canadians is affected by mental illness at sometime in their lives. It is time to destigmatize mental illness.

I salute the Canadian Psychiatric Association, its partners and the volunteers in this year's campaign of teamwork in service delivery. I support medical research and urge every Canadian to do so.

Last week in my riding a functional magnetic resonance imaging research facility opened. It is the first of its kind outside the United States. This facility will map brain activity at the cellular level and will contribute to the vital medical research being carried out at the institute. We will gain a greater understanding of Alzheimer's, schizophrenia, vision and other brain related disorders and issues.

To those who continue to work tirelessly on the institute's discovery fund campaign, I offer my thanks and congratulations. I am confident that staff, researchers and the benefactors of this institute will add to their list of accomplishments. Their research will benefit the world and all Canadians. Bravo.

[Supply, September 30th, 1996]

Madam Speaker, unfortunately with only one minute I have to advise the hon. member opposite that tax policy is done by finance. Revenue Canada is the administrative arm and we do our job well. We make sure that taxes are collected in a fair and equitable way across the country.

[Supply, September 30th, 1996]

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased that we have some eyes open from our member across the way here and he agrees that there is a drug and smuggling problem in British Columbia. That is why Revenue Canada has the responsibility for customs. It is a responsibility that we take very seriously.

I must tell the member about organized crime. They do not exactly open their books to Revenue Canada and that is why it is very necessary that we have intelligence. The intelligence that we have is not only from our own resources within customs Canada but between our border crossings, between those different points where Canadians, Americans and other world travellers enter and depart our city.

We have the RCMP under the responsibility of the Solicitor General of Canada. We work very closely in Revenue Canada through our customs agents and customs department in making sure that we have the best intelligence. We co-operate not only with the RCMP but police forces across this country. We make sure we are getting the use of and putting our resources into the highest and best technology available. We are putting in extra money, not decreasing. We have added 30 customs officers, for instance, in the Vancouver airport alone.

We are also involved specifically with drugs and I have been with RCMP members when they have brought the drug dogs along. We use dogs not only in our airports but in our vessels and we use them because they are an effective method. We are going to continue to train our personnel because we think it is important.

Last year the minister of revenue was in Halifax where there was a new marine facility established so we could better train our officers in search. These are very important issues. They should not be taken lightly. They are important issues to Canadians to make sure that when we target our high risk we put the appropriate resources in the right places and with the right magnitude. This is not something we are going to announce here in the Chamber that we are going to be somewhere tomorrow because it does not work that way with organized crime. Drug smugglers do not send us a telegram saying they are going to bring their shipments across.

Unfortunately the other side fails to understand this. There is not only intelligence needed in this House on the other side, we also need it to do our job effectively and properly. We will continue to do so despite what the other side says.