Adam Chambers, Simcoe North
“I want the House to pass my bill. It creates a public list showing which corporations have large debts forgiven by the government.”
“moved that the bill be read the third time and passed. He said: Mr. Speaker, it is an absolute honour to be here tonight with all of my friends from all sides of the House. It is an important day for taxpayers. It is an important day when one is a member of Parliament and has the honour and the opportunity to bring forward legislation that makes amendments to the statutes of Canada. It is a lottery system. I was lucky enough to be given the opportunity to be chosen early in that lottery. I wanted to pick an idea that I believed would have widespread support in the chamber. I would like to thank all of my colleagues from all sides of the House in getting the bill to this stage, which included sending the bill to committee, a lengthy committee study, some thoughtful amendments from all parties at the committee table and bringing it back to the House. It is my hope and sincere pleasure to see this bill carry forward here this evening. I want to thank individual members, and I will return to this later. To put aside the partisan politics, we tangle in the chamber from time to time on some very controversial issues but, with respect to greater transparency for taxpayers, this is an issue that I think we will see unites all members of the chamber, no matter their political affiliation. Bill C-230 would create a registry for the government to disclose every time it writes off a large debt. For corporations, not individual taxpayers, that have their debts waived, those amounts and the identities of those corporations would be published in a corporate registry. That would enhance the level of transparency that taxpayers receive from our tax-collecting authorities. This bill is here before our chamber because we noticed in the public accounts large amounts, year after year, being written off. Members of Parliament from multiple parties, including the government side, probed the government for additional information. We were met with not great answers, a lack of transparency, and a suggestion that we, as parliamentarians, could not receive this information because of the privacy provisions of the Income Tax Act. Given the opportunity, in drawing that high lottery number to bring forward a private member’s bill, I thought that we should change the law, change the privacy provisions in the Income Tax Act and require the government to disclose this information. After all, I think it is a matter of public interest when large debts that are owed by corporations are written off by the government. In fact, just a few years ago, 10 corporations had a total of $1.1 billion written off. A lot of people work hard every day. They pay their taxes honestly. They fret about filing their taxes on time and they worry that they might have made a mistake. They do so honestly and in good faith, because they know that paying taxes helps pay for this wonderful, beautiful country that we have and all the social services that we all enjoy. They are frustrated because they learn that, while they are working hard to pay their taxes, the government is unable to collect millions and indeed billions of dollars each year that corporations owe the government. That is the real basis for this idea that has come to the floor of the House and was proposed as a private member’s bill. I would say that I learned my lesson in the last Parliament. I believed that I had a wonderful idea to increase the penalties for money-laundering offences, but I did not have as much time to work with all members of the chamber to make sure that it was in a position to receive broad-based support and pass. This time, I wanted to do my homework. I consulted with my own team, my own colleagues, who encouraged me to continue. I consulted with members from other parties who thought it was a good idea, and so here we are. I appreciate the opportunity to address this very important issue. I appreciate the opportunity my colleagues have given me to recommend this bill that made it to committee and, as I said, had some thoughtful amendments along the way. There was an amendment at committee about the threshold. The committee recommended increasing the threshold from $1 million to $2 million. While I do not believe we are at an ideal state, I think that in this environment, we can hold out for the perfect and get nothing, or we can make some compromises so that we can all have some level of say and influence over a bill and actually make progress on behalf of taxpayers. I am happy with where we landed, although I would have preferred to keep a lower threshold. In fact, some members on the committee wanted the threshold to be as low as $100,000. We have landed on an opportunity to start this registry in a way that would give taxpayers more transparency about how their money is being collected and used. I would like to commend the work of Senator Percy Downe in the Senate. He not only has been encouraging me along the way but also has his own bill that would also increase transparency requirements at the CRA. It has passed three times from the Senate and will come to this chamber later next month before we break for the summer. This issue and these two bills go hand in hand. This chamber will have time to opine on Senator Downe’s bill at a later date. I think it is important to consider the process. I mentioned we saw the public accounts. We saw amounts going up. We asked for more information. We then submitted an Order Paper question. That question was not answered in the House and it was not answered at committee, but a friend in the other place, Senator Wells, was kind enough to submit a similar question, a more detailed question. From those answers was the genesis and the basis on which we designed this bill, because it outlined the number of corporations and the amounts that had been written off. That is the way the process worked in order to get this bill. It was hard research, asking questions, collaboration and really an opportunity for us to use all of the tools in this chamber in order to find out more information and then propose a law to fix it for the benefit of taxpayers and indeed the country. It is my great honour that I am standing here tonight with this opportunity to propose a change to the statutes of this country. When elected, as I mentioned before, many people could be here for years, indeed decades, and not have the opportunity because it is a lottery system. I took that opportunity very seriously. I wanted to put something forward I thought would have widespread support from all members in this chamber. I cannot help but recognize that in the new environment we are in, with respect to the government now controlling a majority of the seats in this chamber, I have still felt good co-operation and collaboration from members of the government, including the parliamentary secretary and the House leadership team, in order to advance what I believe is a good piece of legislation that would make a positive contribution to public policy in this country. I believe it is time that taxpayers have more transparency. We need to hold not just the government accountable, which I find to be an important part of my role here as an opposition member, but also the agencies that the government entrusts to carry out fundamental activities. The Canada Revenue Agency’s primary objective is to enforce the Income Tax Act and collect the monies owing to government. This bill would bring a level of transparency and accountability to those activities at the Canada Revenue Agency so that all members of Parliament from all parties, and indeed all Canadians, would have a greater line of sight and transparency into the activities of the Canada Revenue Agency. We have to acknowledge that the agents and the employees of the Canada Revenue Agency, by and large, work very hard day in and day out to complete their duties. I will say, at the same time, that I think they have been unfairly burdened with additional activities and requests from the government that have asked them to do things that are far outside their core mandate. The bill would also help refocus resources at the Canada Revenue Agency so it can get back to fulfilling the objectives of its core mandate. It would be inappropriate for me at this time to not recognize some individuals who helped me along the way. I have to pay special tribute to our legislative drafters, who fielded many late-night questions and phone calls outside business hours because they were helping me get the bill into good shape before it had to be tabled in September: Marie-Claude Hébert and Marie Danik. They did fantastic work. I do not think people understand that while many government ministers and departments have armies of lawyers at their service, members of Parliament also have wonderful resources that are able to support us in our role. Those resources are quite small in number, but they pack a mighty punch and have been very busy supplying members of the chamber with great ideas and legislative work on private members’ bills that members introduce on a daily basis. That is done by a very capable and thoughtful team in the House of Commons. The member for Calgary Midnapore has been fantastic to work with as our shadow critic. The member for Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk has been our shadow critic for CRA. The member for Calgary Rocky Ridge, who originally turned me on to this idea a few years ago, deserves a great round of applause because he has been an advocate for greater transparency at the CRA. I mentioned the parliamentary secretary earlier. Although we have tangled many times on the finance committee, and I was actually moved off that committee, maybe because of those tangles, we did find a way to work well together. I joke, but we do end up working on things in collaboration that we think will enhance this country and do great things for taxpayers. The Minister of Finance, for whom I also have many criticisms, was very gracious to set me up with his staff to work on the bill. We did receive some amendments, as I said, and I worked with them. I also very much appreciated Sean-Matthew O’Neill for his help during this process. Another individual I would like to thank is Jay Gamma, from Edmonton, who has been on this idea as well. He has been talking about it for a couple of years. I would be remiss if I did not pay tribute to the late Jim Flaherty, who was a close mentor of mine. I am wearing green today in his honour. If it were not for him, I would not be standing in this place. I appreciate the opportunity to have the bill voted on. We will see where it goes tonight. I want to thank everyone in the chamber for their support and collaboration in doing something good, which I believe is in the public interest and in the best interests of the citizens of this country.”
-
Speech on a bill
Signal 44 of 100
Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.
See full analysis
moved that the bill be read the third time and passed. He said: Mr. Speaker, it is an absolute honour to be here tonight with all of my friends from all sides of the House. It is an important day for taxpayers. It is an important day when one is a member of Parliament and has the honour and the opportunity to bring forward legislation that makes amendments to the statutes of Canada. It is a lottery system. I was lucky enough to be given the opportunity to be chosen early in that lottery. I wanted to pick an idea that I believed would have widespread support in the chamber. I would like to thank all of my colleagues from all sides of the House in getting the bill to this stage, which included sending the bill to committee, a lengthy committee study, some thoughtful amendments from all parties at the committee table and bringing it back to the House. It is my hope and sincere pleasure to see this bill carry forward here this evening. I want to thank individual members, and I will return to this later. To put aside the partisan politics, we tangle in the chamber from time to time on some very controversial issues but, with respect to greater transparency for taxpayers, this is an issue that I think we will see unites all members of the chamber, no matter their political affiliation. Bill C-230 would create a registry for the government to disclose every time it writes off a large debt. For corporations, not individual taxpayers, that have their debts waived, those amounts and the identities of those corporations would be published in a corporate registry. That would enhance the level of transparency that taxpayers receive from our tax-collecting authorities. This bill is here before our chamber because we noticed in the public accounts large amounts, year after year, being written off. Members of Parliament from multiple parties, including the government side, probed the government for additional information. We were met with not great answers, a lack of transparency, and a suggestion that we, as parliamentarians, could not receive this information because of the privacy provisions of the Income Tax Act. Given the opportunity, in drawing that high lottery number to bring forward a private member’s bill, I thought that we should change the law, change the privacy provisions in the Income Tax Act and require the government to disclose this information. After all, I think it is a matter of public interest when large debts that are owed by corporations are written off by the government. In fact, just a few years ago, 10 corporations had a total of $1.1 billion written off. A lot of people work hard every day. They pay their taxes honestly. They fret about filing their taxes on time and they worry that they might have made a mistake. They do so honestly and in good faith, because they know that paying taxes helps pay for this wonderful, beautiful country that we have and all the social services that we all enjoy. They are frustrated because they learn that, while they are working hard to pay their taxes, the government is unable to collect millions and indeed billions of dollars each year that corporations owe the government. That is the real basis for this idea that has come to the floor of the House and was proposed as a private member’s bill. I would say that I learned my lesson in the last Parliament. I believed that I had a wonderful idea to increase the penalties for money-laundering offences, but I did not have as much time to work with all members of the chamber to make sure that it was in a position to receive broad-based support and pass. This time, I wanted to do my homework. I consulted with my own team, my own colleagues, who encouraged me to continue. I consulted with members from other parties who thought it was a good idea, and so here we are. I appreciate the opportunity to address this very important issue. I appreciate the opportunity my colleagues have given me to recommend this bill that made it to committee and, as I said, had some thoughtful amendments along the way. There was an amendment at committee about the threshold. The committee recommended increasing the threshold from $1 million to $2 million. While I do not believe we are at an ideal state, I think that in this environment, we can hold out for the perfect and get nothing, or we can make some compromises so that we can all have some level of say and influence over a bill and actually make progress on behalf of taxpayers. I am happy with where we landed, although I would have preferred to keep a lower threshold. In fact, some members on the committee wanted the threshold to be as low as $100,000. We have landed on an opportunity to start this registry in a way that would give taxpayers more transparency about how their money is being collected and used. I would like to commend the work of Senator Percy Downe in the Senate. He not only has been encouraging me along the way but also has his own bill that would also increase transparency requirements at the CRA. It has passed three times from the Senate and will come to this chamber later next month before we break for the summer. This issue and these two bills go hand in hand. This chamber will have time to opine on Senator Downe’s bill at a later date. I think it is important to consider the process. I mentioned we saw the public accounts. We saw amounts going up. We asked for more information. We then submitted an Order Paper question. That question was not answered in the House and it was not answered at committee, but a friend in the other place, Senator Wells, was kind enough to submit a similar question, a more detailed question. From those answers was the genesis and the basis on which we designed this bill, because it outlined the number of corporations and the amounts that had been written off. That is the way the process worked in order to get this bill. It was hard research, asking questions, collaboration and really an opportunity for us to use all of the tools in this chamber in order to find out more information and then propose a law to fix it for the benefit of taxpayers and indeed the country. It is my great honour that I am standing here tonight with this opportunity to propose a change to the statutes of this country. When elected, as I mentioned before, many people could be here for years, indeed decades, and not have the opportunity because it is a lottery system. I took that opportunity very seriously. I wanted to put something forward I thought would have widespread support from all members in this chamber. I cannot help but recognize that in the new environment we are in, with respect to the government now controlling a majority of the seats in this chamber, I have still felt good co-operation and collaboration from members of the government, including the parliamentary secretary and the House leadership team, in order to advance what I believe is a good piece of legislation that would make a positive contribution to public policy in this country. I believe it is time that taxpayers have more transparency. We need to hold not just the government accountable, which I find to be an important part of my role here as an opposition member, but also the agencies that the government entrusts to carry out fundamental activities. The Canada Revenue Agency’s primary objective is to enforce the Income Tax Act and collect the monies owing to government. This bill would bring a level of transparency and accountability to those activities at the Canada Revenue Agency so that all members of Parliament from all parties, and indeed all Canadians, would have a greater line of sight and transparency into the activities of the Canada Revenue Agency. We have to acknowledge that the agents and the employees of the Canada Revenue Agency, by and large, work very hard day in and day out to complete their duties. I will say, at the same time, that I think they have been unfairly burdened with additional activities and requests from the government that have asked them to do things that are far outside their core mandate. The bill would also help refocus resources at the Canada Revenue Agency so it can get back to fulfilling the objectives of its core mandate. It would be inappropriate for me at this time to not recognize some individuals who helped me along the way. I have to pay special tribute to our legislative drafters, who fielded many late-night questions and phone calls outside business hours because they were helping me get the bill into good shape before it had to be tabled in September: Marie-Claude Hébert and Marie Danik. They did fantastic work. I do not think people understand that while many government ministers and departments have armies of lawyers at their service, members of Parliament also have wonderful resources that are able to support us in our role. Those resources are quite small in number, but they pack a mighty punch and have been very busy supplying members of the chamber with great ideas and legislative work on private members’ bills that members introduce on a daily basis. That is done by a very capable and thoughtful team in the House of Commons. The member for Calgary Midnapore has been fantastic to work with as our shadow critic. The member for Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk has been our shadow critic for CRA. The member for Calgary Rocky Ridge, who originally turned me on to this idea a few years ago, deserves a great round of applause because he has been an advocate for greater transparency at the CRA. I mentioned the parliamentary secretary earlier. Although we have tangled many times on the finance committee, and I was actually moved off that committee, maybe because of those tangles, we did find a way to work well together. I joke, but we do end up working on things in collaboration that we think will enhance this country and do great things for taxpayers. The Minister of Finance, for whom I also have many criticisms, was very gracious to set me up with his staff to work on the bill. We did receive some amendments, as I said, and I worked with them. I also very much appreciated Sean-Matthew O’Neill for his help during this process. Another individual I would like to thank is Jay Gamma, from Edmonton, who has been on this idea as well. He has been talking about it for a couple of years. I would be remiss if I did not pay tribute to the late Jim Flaherty, who was a close mentor of mine. I am wearing green today in his honour. If it were not for him, I would not be standing in this place. I appreciate the opportunity to have the bill voted on. We will see where it goes tonight. I want to thank everyone in the chamber for their support and collaboration in doing something good, which I believe is in the public interest and in the best interests of the citizens of this country.
