Martin Cauchon

[Human Resources Development, May 29th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I have said repeatedly in the House that one of the cornerstones of the Income Tax Act, one of the fundamental principles that the government will always defend, is the element of confidentiality.

I have also said repeatedly that when information was shared—specific information, not all the information on any one taxpayer—this was done in accordance with the Income Tax Act, section 241 in particular.

I would simply like to remind the opposition that the much-discussed press release that we tabled today quotes the privacy commissioner as saying that there was never any breach of confidentiality in the past.

[Mishtapew Awards Of Excellence Gala, May 18th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, of course I thank my colleague for his excellent and important question.

Yesterday evening, at the Capitole in Quebec City, the third gala of the Association d'affaires des premiers peuples was celebrated. It celebrated the absolutely extraordinary dynamism that characterizes the new wave of economic development.

The Canadian government was rather proud to renew its partnership in the context of this gala. We therefore announced that we will be providing an additional $1.5 million of support to the association, in order to enable it to provide other services to the first nations business community, such as services to entrepreneurs or—

[Human Resources Development, May 18th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, at the risk of repeating myself, the element of confidentiality is a fundamental element we will continue to protect.

I have said that there could be exchanges of information in the case of jointly administered programs. I briefly alluded to sections of the Income Tax Act authorized us to exchange this information, which is done with a view to improving government administration.

Once again, I think that the opposition should join with the government so that we can explain to the public that when we speak of confidentiality, privacy, it is something we do not take lightly.

[Human Resources Development, May 18th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I think that we must not start crying wolf.

One of the fundamental principles of the Income Tax Act is the confidentiality of information. This is a principle that we will continue to defend as long as the Liberal Party forms the government.

I said yesterday that information was exchanged with other departments in connection with jointly administered programs.

One example, to be a bit more specific than I was in my answer yesterday, is paragraph 241.4( d )( x ) of the Income Tax Act.

[Cinar, May 17th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I do not see how an exchange of information could be described as inappropriate when it is carried out in connection with programs jointly administered by Human Resources Development Canada and the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, particularly when this is all being done under section 214(1)(c) of the act.

[Cinar, May 17th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, at the risk of repeating myself once again, part one of the answer is that I cannot comment on a specific case, as the hon. member of the opposition has just done.

Part two is that I would like to tell the Canadian public that the element of confidentiality found in the legislation is a cornerstone, one we as a government are going to protect.

Part three is that, in reference to sharing information with Human Resources Development Canada, this is done according to the act, section 24(1)(c) in particular, for programs we administer jointly with Human Resources Development Canada.

[Cinar, May 8th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, there are two elements here.

What I explained to this House, and to all of the Canadian public, is that there are two elements to this. The first is that, on the one hand, we must protect the principle of confidentiality.

The second is that, when there are problems relating to taxation, investigations are carried out, very competently, by CCRA officials. This is very simple.

[Cinar, May 8th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, my response will no doubt sound redundant, but it is really the question that is, rather than the response.

I cannot comment on a specific case, because of a fundamental rule, the rule of confidentiality, which the government will always protect and which all Canadian taxpayers wish to see protected as well.

Second, in relation to this question, I have the impression that those on the other side have not looked at the RCMP press release of May 4, 2000. This press release states that there is a strong collaborative relationship between the two organizations, that the CCRA is co-operating with RCMP investigations according to the provisions allowed by the law, and that the RCMP is following the parameters—

[Cinar, May 8th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, it is a bit sad to see the opposition trying to make political hay of such important matters as the confidentiality rules of the Income Tax Act.

I repeat: there is still good co-operation between the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency and the RCMP.

Also, and this is important, the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency has general authority for tax investigations in Canada and only rarely do we turn to outside agencies.

Finally, I would again like to draw the House's attention to the press release issued by the RCMP last week, which speaks for itself.

[Cinar, May 8th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, once again, at the risk of repeating myself, because this question is becoming a bit redundant and I have told the House this several times, when a question concerns a specific file, as the minister responsible for the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency I am unable to comment.

As for the co-operation between the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency and the RCMP, I have always told the House that co-operation between the two organizations was exceptional in all files and that this co-operation must take place within the framework of the Income Tax Act, which protects confidentiality.

Finally, I wish to draw to my colleague's attention the press release—