Publication Search

Thank you.

Madam Minister, at committee we've spent almost 30 hours wading through a ton of incredibly complex tax changes while studying the BIA. Everyone agrees that the tax act is overly complex. As a matter of fact, it's so complex that even your own team at the call centres gave Canadian taxpayers false or erroneous information 30% of the time, so even your own people don't understand it.

Small businesses are spending an exorbitant amount of money and time trying to comply. Under your watch, it has become even more difficult and leaves small business owners in constant fear of accidentally being non-compliant.

Would you commit today to Canadians to simplify the system so that they can stop wasting their precious time trying to wade through piles of incomprehensible tax rules?

I'll pass it on to my colleague. I find that an absolutely unacceptable answer.

Dr. Lemmens, Dr. Downie just told the committee there's no slippery slope here, and that we're not going beyond Carter. Could you respond to that? Do you agree with that statement?

Thank you.

I understand that MAID assessments are sometimes being done over the phone, with the doctor never even meeting the patient. Is there any chance in your mind that such an assessment would be able to detect things like elder abuse or coercion by family members? How is it possible that we have not seen a single instance of prosecution, with this going on?

Right. Absolutely.

The 2019 report on medical assistance in dying laid out various reasons Canadians would request MAID. Those reasons included things like fear of pain, loneliness and feeling like a burden on family. Does it make sense that we're ending people's lives for the kinds of reasons that could easily be addressed by palliative care? How difficult would it be to ensure that a patient got regular visits so they didn't feel so lonely, rather than taking the extreme measure of ending their lives?

I have one more question.

It's Tamara. I forget how to....

I can't wait until you can come and join us.

I'm just wondering about number three. It almost sounds like you want to have all the files that KPMG has on every Canadian client, so I just wanted to confirm. It's in regard to the beginning of the motion. I think it's number three where it says that.

Mr. Bilodeau, you described a system that you called a risk management committee, which is a way in which KPMG ensures that their people are acting ethically and remain in compliance with the law. Is that correct?

Thank you.

Does KPMG U.S.A. have the same system of anti-tax avoidance through a risk management committee?

Where would KPMG Canada have come up with the system of risk management that you described?

Wouldn't it make sense that the American KPMG would have the same system? I would imagine that it's just as concerning to follow the law in the U.S. as it is here in Canada. It seems odd to me that you have no idea how KPMG does their risk management in the U.S.

Yes, exactly.

I'm just curious, because obviously, whatever risk management system they have in place didn't seem to have worked in this case.

You mentioned that you're retired, but for some reason you decided to go into the KPMG office today to be a witness. Why did you decide to go to their office since you're retired, and as I understand it, haven't been working there for many years?

My understanding is that you have legal counsel with you there right now. Are you paying for that yourself, personally, or is that a KPMG expense? Are you paying for that personally?