Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 331 - 345 of 150000
View Larry Maguire Profile
CPC (MB)
What happens if the government provisionally collects a tax that ultimately never becomes law due to Parliament amending the bill or the bill never passing?
Philippe Dufresne
View Philippe Dufresne Profile
Philippe Dufresne
2021-07-20 10:43
These are questions that ultimately can end up before the courts. If there is a dispute with respect to what was done, then the courts will look to the applicable law and precedents and will make their decision.
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
We'll go to Ms. O'Connell for five minutes. Then there will be a five-minute split between Mr. Ste-Marie and Ms. Mathyssen.
Go ahead, Jennifer.
View Jennifer O'Connell Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's good to be back here on finance.
I'm going to start with a couple of comments before I turn to you, Mr. Dufresne, but it's nice to see you again in what is probably a less contentious committee than our last one was, at health.
Let me start where Mr. Maguire left off. He spoke in hypotheticals about any future legislation and the possibility of its being retroactive. His pessimism is interesting. He thinks we're heading into a majority government and that the government would have the ability to make whatever decision it wanted, so that's interesting. I share his optimism about our electoral success into the future.
Also, with regard to his comments about any recourse from Parliament, that's interesting, because the opposition can't seem to take yes for an answer. Finance Canada clarified just yesterday. Mr. Fragiskatos confirmed again that the issues of coming into force were clarified. It's interesting that the Conservatives once again can't take yes for an answer.
I'd also like to read into the record to correct some issues.
I'm sorry. I hear a lot of chatter. I seem to be getting under the skin of some of the Conservative members, but I would like to read into the record after Mr. Kelly's comments about his famed outrage at the government. I'm really glad he wasn't here prior to 2015. He could speak to his good friend Mr. Fast.
Let me read into the record about the previous government. Here it says:
The Harper [Conservative] government became the first in Canadian history to be found in contempt of Parliament....
Even though it lost a court case and was ordered to comply, the Harper government nevertheless refused to share 170 times reasons and impacts for cuts with Canada’s independent budget watchdog, mocking Parliament’s right to control the public purse.
Thank goodness Mr. Kelly was not in government during the Harper days, because I think he would be quite outraged at the actions of his party.
Let's get back to the matter at hand, now that we've seen the Conservatives and the complete hypocrisy throughout this process and the fact that once again they write terrible motions—the government has to try to comply with their incoherent ability to write motions—and then try to feign some sort of wrongdoing by the government. To get back to this issue at hand, when it comes to the coming-into-force date, as I've already stated, the government and Finance Canada have clarified that.
Mr. Dufresne, I will come back to you now that I've kind of clarified the hypocrisy from the Conservatives. On the substance of this, I tend to agree with you. I spent a number of years on finance, and I want to focus on the examples you gave in your opening statement, because I think they are quite right. Whenever I did a budget implementation act, a fall economic statement, a budget, or any tax provisions, the coming-into-force date was always the date those were tabled. That was my experience in terms of the publication of those things, because the government—and rightfully so—didn't want any tax planning measures or anything to happen between the time of the printing of the document—let's say a budget—and the time of coming into force, or whenever the regulations could be developed. Given your opening statement, can you maybe clarify why you feel that this coming-into-force date needed to be at the time it received royal assent, and how that's consistent with other tax policy around the publications etc., and the rationale behind that?
Philippe Dufresne
View Philippe Dufresne Profile
Philippe Dufresne
2021-07-20 10:48
What I talked about is the practice that oftentimes when the government introduces proposed tax measures, it will start implementing them right away, and they are always subject to parliamentary approval. A government might announce that it will start to put it in place and implement something down the road, and then a bill is adopted with a date going back to the date of the announcement. That certainly can happen.
In this case the bill was adopted with no date, and therefore it comes into force on the date of royal assent as per the Interpretation Act.
View Jennifer O'Connell Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you.
Given yesterday's announcement, do you see Finance Canada as having corrected any possible confusion, and that the coming-into-force date is June 29, as established by royal assent?
Philippe Dufresne
View Philippe Dufresne Profile
Philippe Dufresne
2021-07-20 10:49
The communiqué confirmed it yesterday. It does clarify that, certainly.
View Jennifer O'Connell Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you so much. It was nice to see you again.
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
Thank you.
To finish this hour, we'll have two and a half minutes with Mr. Ste-Marie and two and a half minutes with Ms. Mathyssen. Mr. Fast, you will get the final five.
Gabriel.
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I will wait until Mr. Gerretsen is listening.
After what I just heard, let me remind you of the basic factors. We are here because something very serious happened. Parliament passed Bill C‑208, which is extremely important. When I first ran for office, it was the first issue people talked to me about. Farmers were saying that they had to choose between their retirement and their children, who wanted to take over the farm. The farmers would lose their pensions if they sold it to them, so they were wondering what to do.
Members from every political party brought this bill forward to the House. As I said earlier, after 527 days, it was passed and it came into force. The government issued a news release saying that it would come into force later. The Liberals are therefore saying that they will not honour the will of the House, which is very serious. That is why members from each party have asked for this emergency committee meeting today, to emphasize the seriousness of what is happening.
Much reference is being made to the news release issued yesterday afternoon, just prior to the committee meeting. I am sure that this correction made through the news release is directly related to the fact that the Standing Committee on Finance did its job and announced an emergency meeting. It is very important to remember that what is voted on in Parliament must be respected and that the government cannot act like a tinpot dictator by not implementing what it does not like. We live in a democracy, and that is not how it works.
Let me come back to you, Mr. Dufresne.
Yesterday, in the press release, the government announced its intention to make amendments in keeping with the spirit of the bill. The Liberals gave us their word. As they have said and as you have reiterated, this must be done through a whole new legislative process. In short, Parliament will have to pass a new piece of legislation.
Is that the case?
Philippe Dufresne
View Philippe Dufresne Profile
Philippe Dufresne
2021-07-20 10:52
Bill C‑208, which was passed by Parliament after three readings in the House and royal assent, is in force. So we are discussing introducing amendments. The news release does not propose to amend the bill in its entirety.
A bill that would essentially undo what has been done and say exactly the opposite would certainly raise a procedural question of whether it is possible to ask the same question in the House when it has already been answered.
However, that is not what is being proposed at all. We are making amendments to uphold the spirit of the legislation to correct what the government perceives as certain shortcomings.
View Gabriel Ste-Marie Profile
BQ (QC)
Actually—
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
We'll have to end it there. I'm sorry, Gabriel, but you're out of time.
Results: 331 - 345 of 150000 | Page: 23 of 10000

|<
<
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data