HERI Committee Meeting

STANDING COMMITTEE ON CANADIAN HERITAGE

COMITÉ PERMANENT DU PATRIMOINE CANADIEN

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Tuesday, October 17, 2000

• 1138

[English]

The Chair (Mr. Clifford Lincoln (Lac-Saint-Louis, Lib.)): We will hear from Monsieur de Savoye.

[Translation]

His motion reads as follows:

That the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage support the principle of a harmonization of Canadian revenue policies with those of the province of Québec in matters related to authorship income and recommends to the Minister of Finance that the feasibility be evaluated.

Go ahead, Mr. de Savoye.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye (Portneuf, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Do we have a quorum?

The Chair: Yes, we do.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: As we know, Mr. Riis' motion...

[English]

The Chair: Andrew, hang on a minute to give us quorum, please.

Mr. Dennis Mills (Toronto—Danforth, Lib.): We need nine.

The Chair: That's okay, thank you.

[Translation]

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: Mr. Riis' motion, which called for very favourable tax treatment for creators' copyright, was defeated in the House. I was among those who opposed the motion because it would have resulted in a number of problems from a tax standpoint. Government members were of a similar opinion.

However, the fact remains that our authors need encouragement in certain instances. As you know, Mr. Chairman, Quebec has developed an appropriate fiscal approach to this matter. As members of the committee, we have a duty to our authors and creators and I think we should ask the Minister of Finance to give this matter further consideration and to weigh certain options by looking to what Quebec has done in this area.

• 1140

[English]

This is not a binding motion for the Minister of Finance. It's only a way this committee takes to ring a bell and say: Our authors need something to be done, fiscally speaking. Quebec has done something. The Riis motion was defeated because it couldn't provide for all the aspects of fiscality we're concerned about. Is there really nothing we can do? Minister of Finance, could you do something about this? Have a look, please. We would inscribe ourselves positively as members of the heritage committee for our authors.

The Chair: Ms. Bulte.

Ms. Sarmite Bulte (Parkdale—High Park, Lib.): Let me begin my comments by saying that I don't disagree with you, Mr. de Savoye. However, there are other options available. One of the things the Writers' Union of Canada has presented in the past to the Standing Committee on Finance—and I believe they will be making the same presentation to the Standing Committee on Finance—deals not only with a proposal that is similar to the Quebec legislation, which I'm quite familiar with, but also they are looking at combining that with income averaging, which is also a very big concern. So there's not just one thing.

There's also the Irish legislation, which is very important to look at. It also deals with creators, but in the broader sense of not just writers, creators in the sense of visual art. There are four specific areas. There are very particular requirements of this.

Instead of just saying use the Quebec model—and again, there's nothing wrong with the Quebec model—I think there are other avenues and areas we should look at, and we should not just limit ourselves to the $15,000, which is in Quebec, and the declining scale based on the amount of income. There are other options we should examine.

I fully support our creators, more so than you can imagine. I think we really need to look at it in a much broader sense. That is my opinion. I have done research in this area, and I think there are a lot of things we can do to help our creators. I truly believe that without our creators there are no libraries, no television shows, etc. We need that creative process, and we need to look at how we can foster that creative process in Canada.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: Would you accept that I second your amendment to my motion in that sense?

Ms. Sarmite Bulte: I just want it wider.

The Chair: In other words, would you agree if there was some sort of amendment that said “with models such as those in the province of Quebec, Ireland, and elsewhere” or something, and a suggestion by the—

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: Other measures such as income averaging.

Ms. Sarmite Bulte: Income averaging is very important to the writers, and also section 31 of the Income Tax Act, which has to do with whether or not it's a hobby. This affects a number of motions. I don't know. Can we make it that the standing committee look at what we can do to foster our creators? Maybe there's other legislation elsewhere. Those are the ones I'm familiar with.

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: I agree with you. But I think this committee should feel uncomfortable with what happened to Mr. Riis' motion. It has been wrongly interpreted. We will be pointed out, each one of us, in our ridings and across Canada as not having done the things that should have been done. With your amendment to my motion, we could as one without partisanship put forward something for the Minister of Finance to look at. I think that would be a positive action.

The Chair: Mr. Scott.

Mr. Andy Scott (Fredericton, Lib.): I don't think Nelson believed his motion was going to pass. I think what Nelson wanted was to bring people out in terms of the issue and to raise some profile. I think we're building on that. I supported it, so consequently my sentiments are obvious. I think it's more than just call upon the government to look at this, but that we would even support the spirit of the intent. Many people didn't support the practical application of that spirit.

• 1145

With regard to the idea that we should do more to support creative people in Canada, I would be prepared to support that spirit and to call on the government to look at ways to do that, including Mr. de Savoye's suggestion and other suggestions that have been made. I think it would be a wonderful legacy to a new committee to say let's not lose track of that particular suggestion and those who supported it.

The Chair: Ms. Bulte.

Ms. Sarmite Bulte: I would just go on from what Mr. Scott said. Maybe it's not something the finance committee should examine. This is something this standing committee should look at, as ways to foster our creators, not just the writers but also along the.... I'm using the Irish model, because they're very specific as to the creators that are included in there. So we don't just shift it off to the finance committee, but we undertake on behalf of this committee to look at the best way to foster that creative process in Canada.

The Chair: Mr. Muise.

Mr. Mark Muise (West Nova, PC): Mr. Chairman and colleagues, I think even those of us who didn't support Mr. Riis' motion didn't vote against it because of what he was trying to accomplish but more because it was too wide and too focused on one group while ignoring other groups. I think what Madam Bulte and Mr. Scott are saying is let's make it a bit wider. Let's not say exactly what it should be but look at how it can be done to encourage creativity not just by writers, visual artists, and performers but—

Ms. Sarmite Bulte: They're not performers; they're creators.

Mr. Mark Muise: —creators. Exactly. That discussion can be there to foster growth and the creative aspect of these people.

The Chair: I would make a suggestion, after listening to all of you who spoke. Perhaps, Mr. de Savoye, there could be an amendment to the motion that this committee study as soon as possible the various methods of incentives available to help creators, such as the Quebec, Irish, and other models, with a view to making recommendations to the Minister of Finance as soon as possible, or something like that.

Ms. Sarmite Bulte: Perfect.

Some hon. members: Agreed.

(Motion agreed to)

The Chair: Okay. I think that will do it.

We don't have legislation or resolutions to study. What is the wish of the committee, to have a meeting on Thursday or just leave it off?

Mr. Andy Scott: I would say that we would wait until—

The Chair: Yes, I would say that we'll just kind of waive it.

Ms. Sarmite Bulte: And then start on our study.

Mr. Mark Muise: Let's sit on Tuesday and go from there.

Mr. Rick Limoges (Windsor—St. Clair, Lib.): Let's defer our meeting until next Tuesday.

The Chair: Okay.

[Translation]

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: Mr. Chairman, before we adjourn, I'd like to inform members of this committee that I decided last week - and I also made a public announcement - that I will not be seeking a third term of office.

[English]

The Chair: Oh, too bad.

[Translation]

Mr. Pierre de Savoye: Therefore, this is probably one of the last, if not the last, time that I will have the pleasure of serving with you. I have also been privileged to serve with some of you on other committees. Committee work is an opportunity for us to get to know and appreciate our colleagues. It's been a pleasure for me to serve on the Heritage Committee with all of you and with those who were members of this committee up until last spring.

[English]

To each and every one of you, whatever the outcome of the future election, the very best to you all.

Some hon. members: Hear, hear.

[Translation]

The Chair: This is news to me, Pierre. I wasn't aware that you weren't planning to seek re-election. It's our loss. I think your work on this committee has been first rate. You have participated in an open, constructive manner to the debate.

[English]

I'd like to thank you very much for your contribution. I think I can say without exaggeration that most of the people I've spoken to who have dealt with you have always found you to be a real gentleman in every sense.

Some hon. members: Hear, hear.

The Chair: The meeting is adjourned.