CANADA House of Commons Debates VOLUME 144 Ï NUMBER 020 Ï 2nd SESSION Ï 40th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Friday, February 27, 2009 Speaker: The Honourable Peter Milliken CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) Also available on the Parliament of Canada Web Site at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 1077 HOUSE OF COMMONS Friday, February 27, 2009 The House met at 10:05 a.m. That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 297. Motion No. 5 That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 298. Motion No. 6 Prayers That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 299. Mr. Thomas Mulcair (Outremont, NDP) moved: Motion No. 66 GOVERNMENT ORDERS That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 445. Motion No. 67 BUDGET IMPLEMENTATION ACT, 2009 That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 446. The House proceeded to the consideration of Bill C-10, An Act to Motion No. 68 implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 447. January 27, 2009 and related fiscal measures, as reported (without Motion No. 69 amendment) from the committee. That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 448. Ï (1005) Motion No. 70 [English] That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 449. Motion No. 71 SPEAKER'S RULING That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 450. The Speaker: There are 86 motions in amendment standing on Motion No. 72 the notice paper for the report stage of Bill C-10. That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 451. The motions will be grouped for debate as follows: Motion No. 73 That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 452. Group No. 1, Motions Nos. 1 to 6 and 66 to 86. Motion No. 74 That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 453. Group No. 2, Motions Nos. 7 to 31. Motion No. 75 [Translation] That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 454. Group No. 3, Motions Nos. 32 to 65. Motion No. 76 That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 455. The voting patterns for the motions within each group are Motion No. 77 available at the table. The Chair will remind the House of each That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 456. pattern at the time of voting. Motion No. 78 [English] That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 457. Motion No. 79 I shall now propose Motions Nos. 1 to 6 and 66 to 86 in Group That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 458. No. 1 to the House. Motion No. 80 [Translation] That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 459. Motion No. 81 MOTIONS IN AMENDMENT That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 460. Mr. Mario Laframboise (Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, Motion No. 82 BQ) moved: That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 461. Motion No. 1 Motion No. 83 That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 6. That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 462. Motion No. 2 Motion No. 84 That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 295. That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 463. Motion No. 3 Motion No. 85 That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 296. That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 464. Motion No. 4 Motion No. 86 1078 COMMONS DEBATES February 27, 2009 Government Orders That Bill C-10 be amended by deleting Clause 465. provinces. That is a fact. Once again, this is an encroachment into Mr. Mario Laframboise (Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, provincial jurisdictions. The report proposes various mechanisms to BQ): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in this House on behalf of implement the project without agreement from Quebec and the the Bloc Québécois to address the motions in amendment introduced provinces. by our party concerning Bill C-10. Furthermore, the report also proposes that the federal government Motion No. 1 in particular seeks to delete clause 6, which allows use legal recourse to force dissenting provinces to comply with the the use of tax havens. While the Conservative budget provides federal project. This does not fall under federal jurisdiction, yet it nothing to help the thousands of people who will be losing their jobs, wants to impose penalties on the dissenting provinces. The fact that and the industries and regions in difficulty, we have the Minister of this is being supported by members from Quebec, whether Finance allowing Canadian multinational corporations to use tax Conservative or Liberal, is appalling. As the saying goes, when it havens to avoid paying billions in taxes while at the same time comes to politics, you have to watch where you step. We see what encouraging investment and job creation abroad at the expense of the Liberals and Conservatives are doing in that regard. our local businesses. Clearly, the Minister of Finance is trying to favour his friends through such generous breaks. This approach has The Bloc Québécois would like to reiterate its opposition to the become commonplace since the Conservatives have gained the creation of a national securities commission. Instead, the Bloc support of the Liberals who regularly did that sort of thing. Québécois will support a harmonization of the rules governing the financial system through a passport mechanism, like that of the In his 2007 budget, the Minister of Finance said that the European community, in order to maintain the autonomy and government had to make sure that everyone paid their fair share. He jurisdictions of Quebec and the provinces. The Bloc Québécois will complained about how some foreign and Canadian corporations take continue to vigorously argue against the creation of such a advantage of the tax rules to avoid paying income tax. He said that commission and will continue to fully support the Autorité des every time that happens, workers and small and medium-sized marchés financiers du Québec, which has been doing its job. businesses end up having to pay more tax. He concluded by stating International experts have said that the existing system for that that was unfair. Now, not only is the economic situation even monitoring securities in Canada is among the best in the world. worse, but the government seems to have done everything in its power to exacerbate the unfairness. Ï (1010) Let us not forget that the Minister of Finance has already backed away from the fight against tax havens by giving in to pressure from We therefore cannot understand why the government is trying to Toronto financiers. He gave them a five-year grace period before he get rid of that whole system today. will implement his plan to fight tax evasion, then he convened an advisory panel whose independence and neutrality are debatable. When I was elected in 2000, one of the first issues I got involved in was bank mergers. The Bloc Québécois has always been fiercely The Minister of Finance reneged on his promise to fight tax opposed to bank mergers. At the time, if the Liberals had succeeded evasion by blindly accepting the recommendations of the Advisory in introducing this system of bank mergers with the Conservatives' Panel on Canada’s System of International Taxation. The group was help, our banks would be in a very bad financial position. The goal clearly set up to justify the minister's change of heart. Of the six was to merge in order to buy other banks, especially American ones. members of the panel, four are from private companies that may Some American banks are in dire straits today. have benefited from the strategy and still can. Luckily, the Bloc Québécois was here in 2000 to stand up to all Let me make it clear that the minister was getting advice from a the big Bay Street financiers. Once again, the focus is on Toronto. six-member advisory panel with four members in a position to But the fact is that the focus should not be on Toronto, especially benefit from tax evasion strategies. This is the Conservatives' new when it comes to securities, and the government is trying to impose way of doing things, an approach borrowed from the Liberals. It is this new system on Quebec, even though this is not the right way to no accident that they decided to support the latest budget. For go. example, one of the members is the former CEO of Scotiabank, which has more branches in tax havens than any other Canadian So every day, we are proud to get up in this House and defend bank. The authors of the report are clearly in conflict of interest. That Quebeckers' interests, which is something we do very well. And that is why we have asked that clause 6 be deleted. is why, election after election, Quebeckers send a large delegation of Motions Nos. 2 to 6 concerning securities call for the deletion of Bloc Québécois members to represent them in this House. clauses 295 to 299. The goal is to eliminate clauses relating to the creation of a single securities commission. With this bill, the It is always very interesting to follow politics. People who think government would establish a Canadian securities regulation regime politics is always dull and boring just have to listen to what the transition office with a $150 million operating budget. Prime Minister said yesterday. He talked about creating a secret $3 billion fund and about the possibility of heading to an election.