Jane Stewart

[Taxation, June 10th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is patently wrong. There is action by this government. The issue has been sent directly to the committee on finance for advice and for information to come back to the minister for his consideration.

This is nuts because quite frankly the committee is doing a very expeditious job hearing witnesses from across the country on this very important aspect of the Income Tax Act and we do look forward to their recommendations.

[Family Trusts, June 5th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I will say again that parliamentary committees have full authority to determine their own agendas.

It is my understanding that the finance committee is looking at these aspects as they relate to the Income Tax Act. If there are other issues that are of concern to the members of Parliament and the recommendations that are coming forward, they will be at public accounts committee.

[Family Trusts, June 5th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding, and I am sure yours, that parliamentary committees are the masters of their agendas.

I am glad that the committee is reviewing the file that the hon. member has referenced. We will look forward to the recommendations.

[Taxation, May 28th, 1996]

No, Mr. Speaker.

[Family Trusts, May 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that the deputy minister indicated he had no clear understanding that there were any tax rulings which preceded or came after 1991. I would recognize again, as the hon. member points out, that 1991 was a time previous to our government and we are taking action to deal with this very critical aspect of income tax law right now.

The hon. member has a very good opportunity to listen to the witnesses who come before the finance committee to understand the complexities of this part of the Income Tax Act. It is complex. It does affect all Canadians. I would encourage him to listen closely to the testimony and be part of a good and fulsome recommendation to the Minister of Finance.

[Family Trusts, May 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, as the House knows very well, my department took the report of the auditor general very seriously and responded immediately. He was concerned about documentation of rulings, and we have responded to that. He was concerned about whether rulings were made public, and we have responded to that.

We have also responded by making sure that these very important points of law are reviewed by the finance committee. While this important review is going on, out of respect for the work of the committee, we will suspend any further rulings that have to do with this particular aspect of income tax law.

[Taxation, May 17th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, let us set the record straight for the umpteenth time.

The decision was a decision of a former government. It was drawn to our attention by the auditor general. We acted immediately, the day of the report, to draw attention to the House and ask that the matter be put before two public committees, the public accounts committee and the finance committee, for a full consideration and review.

I did not get here by defending a former government. I do not expect to do that in the future, but I sure as heck expect to get things right for the Canadian public. We have acted with urgency and have put it in the public domain. The member himself is a member of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts and we look forward to his recommendations.

[Taxation, May 17th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I will just say that the laws as they are written apply to all Canadians. I cannot imagine any more public venue than two committees of the House of Commons to look at these particularly important issues.

[Capital Gains, May 17th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member participates in the process where there is full co-operation and officials from my department and finance providing advice, outside witnesses perhaps coming to explain the position as well as chartered accountants who are Canadians and understand the system and perhaps individual Canadians, we will have clarity on this topic.

I continue to believe that having the discussion in an open forum where members of Parliament can listen to witnesses and experts and then provide advice to the government makes the most sense in this case.

[Capital Gains, May 17th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, as I said at the outset, my job is to ensure fairness and equity for all Canadians.

As the hon. member participates in these open reviews, and I understand he is a member of the finance committee, he will come to understand that this aspect of the law does have implications not only for rich Canadians but also for Canadians of more modest means.

I look forward to his response and the report. I encourage him to continue his participation.