Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 48
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
You can do that, if you want to.
Do you need a motion? It is a motion. Okay. It's been moved.
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
Okay. We were debating it at a previous meeting and it was amended several times. You're wanting to lift off the table the motion on the proposed study on open banking. That's your motion.
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
Here's the amended motion. This is where we were, Mr. Richards:
That the Standing Committee on Finance undertake a study on open banking and report back to the House on: a) whether open banking could provide benefits to Canadians; b) how potential risks related to consumer protection, privacy, cyber security and financial stability could be managed; c) what steps, if any, the Government should take to implement an open banking system; that the Committee dedicate up to four meetings to the hearing of witnesses in Ottawa; that the Committee examine opportunities to travel to jurisdictions that have implemented a framework for open banking, including the United Kingdom; and that the Committee report its findings to the House no later than Friday, June 7, 2019.
There was an amendment moved by Mr. Kmiec:
That the motion be amended by adding after the words "open banking system” the following: “d) current data security risk and threats posed by domestic and foreign actors to the private data information of Canadians; e) how best the government can ameliorate such risks and threats posed to the private data of Canadians; f) the appropriateness of government bodies collecting the personal banking information of Canadians; g) the current landscape of the financial services sector in Canada, the major actors, levels of competition, and the sufficiency/stringency of regulations governing financial institutions; h) how the market share of Canada's banking and financial services industry compares to other jurisdictions around the world and how an expansion or concentration of such market share might impact Canadian consumers; i) how the development of new Canadian fintech innovation has been advanced or curtailed by broader government policies including, but not limited to the levels of taxation imposed on small and medium-sized enterprises, corporate welfare, payroll taxes, openness to foreign direct investment, and the retention of skilled labour; j) how open banking could impact the process of applying for a loan or mortgage, and why such processes ought to be improved in Canada; k) how open banking should be prioritized for the current government, considering the Minister of Finance's mandate letter that was given to him by the Prime Minister in 2015 and the various priorities that were outlined for the Minister in this letter; l) what the appropriate level of government regulation over Canadian financial service providers ought to be, considering the history of the Canadian context as well as that of other jurisdictions around the world; m) how the principle of financial transparency latent in the idea of open banking ought to be applied more broadly to the public accounts of the Canadian government.
That's the motion with the amendments, and we're supposed to do all that in four days.
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
Each person has the right to vote how they see it.
It's on the floor. I have to deal with it as a question procedurally.
We are voting on Mr. Fergus's motion to lift the data I read and debate it.
(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
The Chair: The debate is open.
I'll go to Mr. Dusseault.
I believe Mr. Richards had his.... Yes, Mr. Richards.
Okay.
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
I call the meeting to order.
We are debating a motion by Mr. Sorbara and are currently on an amendment. The motion was moved and now there is an amendment on the floor. We'll start where we left off at the last meeting. Mr. Kmiec had the floor.
The floor is still yours, Mr. Kmiec.
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
I'm wondering, Tom, about the last part, “that the Committee not travel outside Ottawa”. That changes the intent of the first amendment.
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
Yes, I guess it doesn't. It would have to be restructured, because you couldn't allow it if it changed the intent. The other problem with the amendment would be that it should fit in after (c) on the original motion.
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
Can you withdraw your subamendment and propose a new subamendment, “that the committee dedicate up to three meetings...?" Then we can debate that and the amendment.
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
What is on the floor is a subamendment to the amendment, which is in black on your original paper you have before you:
That the Committee dedicate up to three meetings to the hearing of witnesses in Ottawa; that the Committee not travel outside of Ottawa for the purposes of this study, but welcome experts and stakeholders from outside of Ottawa to appear before the Committee through teleconference; and that the Committee report its findings to the House no later than Monday, April 1, 2019.
That's a subamendment to the reading:
That the Committee dedicate up to four meetings to the hearings of witnesses in Ottawa; that the Committee examine opportunities to travel to jurisdictions that have implemented a framework for open banking, including the United Kingdom; and that the Committee report its findings to the House no later than Friday, June 7, 2019.
The subamendment is proposed to that amendment.
It's open for discussion. Do you want to start, Tom?
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
We are really on the bottom paragraph and not the (a) to (j). I allowed the discussion to continue because we have agreed that we will discuss the (a) to (j) later. Can we at this time stick to the subamendment that “the Committee dedicate up to three meetings”, etc.?
Mr. Dusseault.
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
We're going to deal with it later anyway. It would be best if we could stick to the subamendment.
All right. All those in favour of the subamendment that the committee dedicate up to three meetings etc., and report back no later than Monday, 1 April.
(Subamendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
The Chair: We are back to the amendment. I'm going to take it that you're proposing another subamendment where your (a) becomes (d) and then down the list. After Mr. Fergus' amendment, we're agreed we come back to this and it could be put after (c).
On Mr. Fergus' amendment, all those in favour.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
The Chair: The amendment is carried, and now I understand there's a new subamendment or amendment.
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
If I could add to Tom's question, Francesco, do you anticipate travelling for this study? What would the deadline be to have it done? I mean, where is the open banking concept in place already, or where has it started, or whatever?
What you anticipate in terms of travelling and hearings is I guess what I would add to Tom's question.
View Wayne Easter Profile
Lib. (PE)
I call the meeting to order.
Pursuant to Standing Order 81(5), the committee will deal with supplementary estimates (B) 2017-18, vote 1b under Canada Revenue Agency.
Appearing today is the Minister of National Revenue, the Honourable Diane Lebouthillier.
As well, from the Canada Revenue Agency, we have Mr. Hamilton, commissioner; Ms. Janique Caron, acting assistant commissioner; Mr. Ted Gallivan, assistant commissioner at the international, large business, and investigations branch; and Mr. Frank Vermaeten, assistant commissioner at the assessment, benefit, and service branch.
Welcome, all.
I know that both the minister and the commissioner have remarks. Before we get to that, we have a request for a supplementary project budget for our pre-budget consultations. This is normal in the pre-budget consultation process. It will end up being about the same amount of money as we have spent in previous years. The request is before you. It's for an additional $29,900. Do we have a mover for that?
It is moved by Mr. Fergus.
(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
The Chair: As it states on the sheet, that is for the witnesses who have come forward.
I have just one other thing before I get to your point of order, Tom.
I want to recognize 43 students from École nationale d'administration publique, who are here with Mr. Rémy Trudel, a professor and former member of the Quebec National Assembly. They are here to see how things operate.
Thank you all.
There was a call for a point of order. The floor is yours, Mr. Kmiec.
Results: 1 - 15 of 48 | Page: 1 of 4

1
2
3
4
>
>|
Show both languages
Refine Your Search
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data