FINA Committee Meeting
Notices of Meeting include information about the subject matter to be examined by the committee and date, time and place of the meeting, as well as a list of any witnesses scheduled to appear. The Evidence is the edited and revised transcript of what is said before a committee. The Minutes of Proceedings are the official record of the business conducted by the committee at a sitting.
For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
Minutes of Proceedings
The committee resumed consideration of the motion of Rachel Bendayan moved on Monday, November 6, 2023, which read as follows:
That the Chair of the committee immediately report to the House, that the committee:
- Celebrates the Canada Pension Plan as the foundation of a secure and dignified retirement for tens of millions of Canadians and a pillar of Canada’s economy;
- Recognizes the important contribution of the Quebec Pension Plan which was established independently at the same time as the Canada Pension Plan; and,
- Stands with the majority of Albertans who are opposed to Premier Danielle Smith’s dangerous plan to withdraw from the Canada Pension Plan that threaten the pensions of millions of seniors and hardworking Canadians from coast to coast.
Philip Lawrence moved, — That the motion be amended by replacing the paragraph 3 with the following "This Liberal government’s policies, such as the carbon tax and C-69, are leading to greater division in our country.".
Debate arose thereon.
At 5:59 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 7:01 p.m., the sitting resumed.
The debate continued.
At 8:32 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 11:01 a.m., on Thursday, November 23, 2023, the sitting resumed.
The committee resumed consideration of the motion of Rachel Bendayan moved on Monday, November 6, 2023, which read as follows:
That the Chair of the committee immediately report to the House, that the committee:
- Celebrates the Canada Pension Plan as the foundation of a secure and dignified retirement for tens of millions of Canadians and a pillar of Canada’s economy;
- Recognizes the important contribution of the Quebec Pension Plan which was established independently at the same time as the Canada Pension Plan; and,
- Stands with the majority of Albertans who are opposed to Premier Danielle Smith’s dangerous plan to withdraw from the Canada Pension Plan that threaten the pensions of millions of seniors and hardworking Canadians from coast to coast.
and of the amendment of Philip Lawrence moved on Monday, November 20, 2023, which read as follows:
That the motion be amended by replacing the paragraph 3 with the following "This Liberal government’s policies, such as the carbon tax and C-69, are leading to greater division in our country.".
At 11:20 a.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 12:12 p.m., the sitting resumed.
The debate continued.
At 1:00 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 4:00 p.m., on Monday, November 27, 2023, the sitting resumed.
The Minister Chrystia Freeland made a statement and, with Miodrag Jovanovic, answered questions.
At 5:02 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 5:05 p.m., the sitting resumed.
The Minister François-Philippe Champagne made a statement and, with Mark Schaan, answered questions.
At 6:02 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 6:07 p.m., the sitting resumed.
Samir Chhabra, Pierre Mercille, Amanda Riddell, Mark Schaan and Martin Simard answered questions.
Jean-Denis Garon gave notice of the following motion:
That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the Committee undertake a study on the carousel tax fraud scheme that international criminal networks are using to collect tax refunds for GST/QST and steal hundreds of millions of dollars from Canadian government coffers;
That this study focus in particular on the following points:
- the reasons why Canada appears to be an easy target for this type of fraud;
- identifying and understanding the gaps in Canada’s tax system that make this type of fraud possible and easy to commit; and
- measures that should be taken by the government and the CRA to put an end to these scams and to reclaim taxpayers’ money;
That the Committee invite the following witnesses to appear:
- Appearing together for a period of two hours, former CRA Minister Diane Lebouthillier and current CRA Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau, accompanied by senior CRA officials;
- For one hour, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, Chrystia Freeland;
- For two hours each, Marius-Cristian Frunza, an expert in carousel fraud, and Bo Elkjær, a Danish journalist who has been investigating this type of fraud in Europe since 2009;
- For one hour, Samer Bishay, the CEO of Ontario telecommunications company Iristel; and
- Any other witnesses the Committee deems necessary;
That the Committee allocate a minimum of four meetings to this study; and
That the Committee report its findings and recommendations to the House.
Questioning of the witnesses resumed.
At 7:01 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 7:32 p.m., the sitting resumed.
Ian Lee, Keldon Bester, Marie-Josée Houle, Matthew Boswell, Timothy Ross, Sara Eve Levac and Carlos Castiblanco made statements and, with Anthony Durocher, answered questions.
At 9:28 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 4:35 p.m., on Wednesday, November 29, 2023, the sitting resumed.
It was agreed, — That the proposed budget in the amount of $27,550, for the study of pre-budget consultations in advance of the 2024 Budget, be adopted.
It was agreed, — That the proposed budget in the amount of $2,000, for the study of Bill C-56, An Act to amend the Excise Tax Act and the Competition Act, be adopted.
The witnesses answered questions.
The committee commenced its clause-by-clause study of the Bill.
Pursuant to Standing Order 75(1), consideration of Clause 1 (short title) is postponed.
The Chair calls Clause 2.
On Clause 2,
Gabriel Ste-Marie moved, — That Bill C-56, in Clause 2, be amended by adding after line 25 on page 2 the following:“(3.11) For greater certainty, in the case of a mixed-use complex, the construction of the housing portion, or the last substantial renovation of that portion or the addition, as the case may be, must have begun after September 13, 2023.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Gabriel Ste-Marie and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Adam Chambers, Jasraj Singh Hallan, Philip Lawrence, Marty Morantz, Gabriel Ste-Marie — 5;
NAYS: Yvan Baker, Rachel Bendayan, Daniel Blaikie, Julie Dzerowicz, Joanne Thompson, Patrick Weiler — 6.
Clause 2 carried.
On Clause 3,
Daniel Blaikie moved, — That Bill C-56, in Clause 3, be amended by replacing line 26 on page 3 to line 2 on page 4 with the following:“10.1 (1) The Commissioner may, after consulting the Minister, conduct an inquiry into the state of competition in a market or industry if the Commissioner is of the opinion that it is in the public interest to do so.
(2) The Minister may direct the Commissioner to conduct an inquiry into the state of competition in a market or industry if the Minister is of the opinion that it is in the public interest that such an inquiry be conducted. Before making the direction, the Minister must consult the Commissioner to determine whether the inquiry would be feasible, including with regard to its cost.
(3) If, after the consultation referred to in subsection (1) or (2), it is decided to proceed with the inquiry, the Commissioner”
By unanimous consent, after debate, the question was put on the amendment of Daniel Blaikie and it was agreed to.
“10.2 (1) The Commissioner may, on the Commissioner's own initiative, conduct an inquiry into the state of competition in a market or industry if the Commissioner is of the opinion that it is in the public interest to do so.
(2) The Commissioner must prepare proposed terms of reference for the inquiry and publish them on a publicly available website and invite the public to provide comments during a period of not less than 15 days.
(3) After having taken into account any comments received from the public, the Commissioner must publish the final terms of reference on a publicly available website.
(4) The inquiry commences on the day on which the final terms of reference are published and the Commissioner must complete the inquiry and publish a report of the Commissioner’s findings on a publicly available website within 18 months.
(5) The Commissioner may extend the period referred to in subsection (4) for periods of up to three months.
(6) Subsection 10.1 (7) applies in respect of an inquiry conducted under this section.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Gabriel Ste-Marie and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Gabriel Ste-Marie — 1;
NAYS: Yvan Baker, Rachel Bendayan, Daniel Blaikie, Adam Chambers, Julie Dzerowicz, Jasraj Singh Hallan, Philip Lawrence, Marty Morantz, Joanne Thompson, Patrick Weiler — 10.
Clause 3 carried on division.
By unanimous consent, Clauses 4 to 7 inclusive carried severally.
On new Clause 7.1,
Gabriel Ste-Marie moved, — That Bill C-56 be amended by adding after line 16 on page 5 the following new clause:“7.1 Subsection 78(1) of the Act is amended by striking out “and” at the end of paragraph (i), by adding “and” at the end of paragraph (j) and by adding the following after paragraph (j):
(k) directly or indirectly imposing excessive and unfair selling prices.”
The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it sought to amend sections of the parent Act not amended by the Bill, as provided on page 771 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Third Edition.
Whereupon, Gabriel Ste-Marie appealed the decision of the Chair.
The question: "Shall the decision of the Chair be sustained?" was put and the decision was overturned on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Yvan Baker, Rachel Bendayan, Julie Dzerowicz, Joanne Thompson, Patrick Weiler — 5;
NAYS: Daniel Blaikie, Adam Chambers, Jasraj Singh Hallan, Philip Lawrence, Marty Morantz, Gabriel Ste-Marie — 6.
The question was put on the amendment of Gabriel Ste-Marie and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Yvan Baker, Rachel Bendayan, Daniel Blaikie, Adam Chambers, Julie Dzerowicz, Jasraj Singh Hallan, Philip Lawrence, Gabriel Ste-Marie, Joanne Thompson, Arnold Viersen, Patrick Weiler — 11;
NAYS: — 0.
“7.1 (1) Subsections 79(1) and (2) of the Act are replaced by the following:
79 (1) On application by the Commissioner or a person granted leave under section 103.1, if the Tribunal finds that one or more persons substantially or completely control a class or species of business throughout Canada or any area of Canada, it may make an order prohibiting the person or persons from engaging in a practice or conduct if it finds that the person or persons have engaged in or are engaging in
(a) a practice of anti-competitive acts; or
(b) conduct
(i) that had, is having or is likely to have the effect of preventing or lessening competition substantially in a market in which the person or persons have a plausible competitive interest, and
(ii) the effect is not a result of superior competitive performance.
(2) If, on an application under subsection (1), the Tribunal finds that a practice of anti-competitive acts amounts to conduct that has had or is having the effect of preventing or lessening competition substantially in a market in which the person or persons have a plausible competitive interest and that an order under subsection (1) is not likely to restore competition in that market, the Tribunal may, in addition to or in lieu of making an order under subsection (1), make an order directing any or all persons against whom an order is sought to take actions, including the divestiture of assets or shares, that are reasonable and necessary to overcome the effects of the practice in that market.
(2) The portion of subsection 79(3.1) of the Act before paragraph (b) is replaced by the following:
(3.1) If the Tribunal finds that a person has engaged in or is engaging in a practice of anti-competitive acts that amounts to conduct that has had or is having the effect of preventing or lessening competition substantially in a market in which the person has a plausible competitive interest and it makes an order against the person under subsection (1) or (2), it may also order them to pay, in any manner that it specifies, an administrative monetary penalty in an amount not exceeding the greater of
(a) $25,000,000 and, for each subsequent order under either of those subsections, an amount not exceeding $35,000,000, and
(3) Subsection 79(4) of the Act is replaced by the following:
(4) In determining, for the purposes of subsections (1) and (2), whether conduct has had, is having or is likely to have the effect of preventing or lessening competition substantially in a market, the Tribunal may consider
(a) the effect of the conduct on barriers to entry in the market, including network effects;
(b) the effect of the conduct on price or non-price competition, including quality, choice or consumer privacy;
(c) the nature and extent of change and innovation in a relevant market; and
(d) any other factor that is relevant to competition in the market that is or would be affected by the conduct.
(4) Subsection 79(6) of the Act is replaced by the following:
(6) No application may be made under this section in respect of a practice of anti-competitive acts or conduct more than three years after the practice or conduct has ceased.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Daniel Blaikie and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Yvan Baker, Rachel Bendayan, Daniel Blaikie, Adam Chambers, Julie Dzerowicz, Jasraj Singh Hallan, Philip Lawrence, Gabriel Ste-Marie, Joanne Thompson, Arnold Viersen, Patrick Weiler — 11;
NAYS: — 0.
On Clause 8,
Philip Lawrence moved, — That Bill C-56, in Clause 8, be amended by adding after line 23 on page 5 the following:“(1.1) Subsections 90.1(4) to (6) of the Act are repealed.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Philip Lawrence and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Yvan Baker, Rachel Bendayan, Daniel Blaikie, Adam Chambers, Julie Dzerowicz, Jasraj Singh Hallan, Philip Lawrence, Gabriel Ste-Marie, Joanne Thompson, Arnold Viersen, Patrick Weiler — 11;
NAYS: — 0.
Clause 8, as amended, carried.
By unanimous consent, Clauses 9 to 13 inclusive carried severally.
Clause 1, Short Title, carried on division.
The Title carried.
The Bill, as amended, was adopted.
ORDERED, — That the Chair report the Bill, as amended, to the House.
ORDERED, — That Bill C-56, as amended, be reprinted for the use of the House of Commons at report stage.
At 5:18, the sitting was suspended.
At 4:14 p.m., on Monday, December 4, 2023, the sitting resumed.
The committee resumed consideration of the motion of Rachel Bendayan moved on Monday, November 6, 2023, which read as follows:
That the Chair of the committee immediately report to the House, that the committee:
- Celebrates the Canada Pension Plan as the foundation of a secure and dignified retirement for tens of millions of Canadians and a pillar of Canada’s economy;
- Recognizes the important contribution of the Quebec Pension Plan which was established independently at the same time as the Canada Pension Plan; and,
- Stands with the majority of Albertans who are opposed to Premier Danielle Smith’s dangerous plan to withdraw from the Canada Pension Plan that threaten the pensions of millions of seniors and hardworking Canadians from coast to coast.
and of the amendment of Philip Lawrence moved on Monday, November 20, 2023, which read as follows:
That the motion be amended by replacing the paragraph 3 with the following "This Liberal government’s policies, such as the carbon tax and C-69, are leading to greater division in our country.".
The question was put on the amendment of Philip Lawrence and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Adam Chambers, Jasraj Singh Hallan, Philip Lawrence, Marty Morantz — 4;
NAYS: Yvan Baker, Rachel Bendayan, Daniel Blaikie, Brenda Shanahan, Gabriel Ste-Marie, Joanne Thompson, Patrick Weiler — 7.
Philip Lawrence moved, — That the motion be amended by replacing the paragraph 3 with the following "Stands with Canadians who wish to protect the CPP and encourages Albertans to remain in the CPP so that it can be secured for all Albertans and Canadians.".
At 4:24 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 4:28 p.m., the sitting resumed.
The question was put on the amendment of Philip Lawrence and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Adam Chambers, Jasraj Singh Hallan, Philip Lawrence, Arnold Viersen — 4;
NAYS: Yvan Baker, Rachel Bendayan, Daniel Blaikie, Brenda Shanahan, Gabriel Ste-Marie, Joanne Thompson, Patrick Weiler — 7.
The debate on the motion continued.
The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Yvan Baker, Rachel Bendayan, Daniel Blaikie, Adam Chambers, Jasraj Singh Hallan, Philip Lawrence, Marty Morantz, Brenda Shanahan, Joanne Thompson, Patrick Weiler — 10;
NAYS: Gabriel Ste-Marie — 1.
At 4:35 p.m., the committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.