Finance

The Finance Committee met to discuss and vote on a proposed law, Bill C-30, which puts into action parts of the government's spring economic update. A big part of the discussion focused on new rules about pesticides. Committee members first approved a small request for money to help study the proposed law. Then, Ryan Turnbull, a Liberal committee member, asked for and received permission for Elizabeth May, a Green Party member, to speak about her concerns. Elizabeth May spoke for a long time about a section of Bill C-30 (called Division 8) that deals with pesticides. She believes this section is very bad because it would allow the government to put economic reasons ahead of human health and environmental safety when deciding if a pesticide is safe to use. She explained that this could lead to dangerous pesticides being used for many years. She also presented several changes she wanted to make to the proposed law to protect health and the environment, and she mentioned that many health and environmental groups shared her worries. Other committee members also participated. Jasraj Hallan, a Conservative member, announced that his party was withdrawing all their proposed changes to Bill C-30. Jean-Denis Garon, from the Bloc Québécois, asked for recorded votes on several parts of the proposed law. After much discussion and voting, most of Elizabeth May's proposed changes were not accepted, but some changes proposed by Liberal members were approved. In the end, the committee voted to approve Bill C-30 with the accepted changes. This means the proposed law will now be sent to the House of Commons for more discussion. The Chair also reminded everyone about a deadline for submitting ideas for the 2026 budget.

This committee meeting was a long discussion about changes to the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) and how information about it should be shared with Canadians. Committee members spent many hours debating a proposed law that would reduce how much people pay into the CPP, and they focused on making sure everyone understands these changes. Philip Lawrence and Tamara Kronis, both Conservative committee members, questioned a government official, Justin Stuart, about the CPP's financial health. Mr. Stuart explained that the CPP is expected to be financially sound for the next 75 years, with inflation already considered in its reports. However, he couldn't give simple, on-the-spot explanations for complex financial calculations, as he wasn't the person who wrote the main reports. The Conservative members argued that the official reports are too complicated and that Canadians need clearer, simpler information. Conservative members proposed several changes, called subamendments, to the proposed law. These changes aimed to make sure future reports on the CPP would include easy-to-understand examples. For instance, one subamendment asked for examples showing how the reduction in CPP payments would affect employees, employers, and self-employed people at different income levels, like those earning $50,000 or $70,000 a year. They argued this would provide real transparency, not just more paperwork, and help Canadians see the actual impact on their wallets. Liberal committee members, including Ryan Turnbull, expressed frustration, saying the Conservatives were deliberately slowing down the meeting. They argued that the government already provides detailed reports on the CPP and that the proposed changes were unnecessary and repetitive. They believed the Conservatives were wasting time and resources, preventing the committee from moving forward with the proposed law. During the meeting, one proposed change (subamendment 7) was voted down. Another proposed change (subamendment 8), which asked for clear examples of how CPP changes affect different incomes, was still being discussed when a Liberal member moved to end the meeting, and it was adjourned.

This Canadian parliamentary committee meeting was about reviewing a proposed law, Bill C-30, which aims to put into action parts of the spring economic update. The committee focused on going through the proposed law section by section, considering changes suggested by committee members. Key speakers included the Chair, Karina Gould, who guided the discussion and explained the rules for making changes. Conservative committee members Jasraj Hallan, Pat Kelly, Philip Lawrence, Eric Lefebvre, Arnold Viersen, Vincent Ho, Grant Jackson, and Andrew Lawton proposed several changes. They mainly wanted more reports and data from the government to show how well new programs were working and to increase transparency. They asked for reports on things like how many tradespeople use a certain tax deduction, the number of business transfers, the use of deductions for co-operative businesses, and the impact of changes to the Home Buyers' Plan and the Canada Pension Plan. They also wanted to know the costs and benefits of extending a fuel tax break. Liberal committee members Ryan Turnbull, Carlos Leitão, Jake Sawatzky, and Danielle Martin generally opposed these changes. They argued that much of the requested information was already available in other government reports, that the timelines for new reports were unrealistic, or that the changes would create unnecessary extra work and costs for government departments like the Canada Revenue Agency. They also pointed out that some proposed changes were outside the scope of the proposed law or would increase government spending, which they felt was inconsistent with the Conservatives' stated goals. No major decisions were made on the proposed changes during this part of the meeting, as most of the Conservative amendments were voted down. However, one technical amendment proposed by the Liberals regarding the fuel excise suspension was agreed to. The committee spent a lot of time debating the need for more transparency and accountability versus avoiding duplication and extra government costs. Several times, the meeting was paused to allow for the translation of proposed changes, which caused delays and frustration among committee members.

The committee held pre-budget consultations for the 2026 budget, hearing from various groups about their needs and recommendations. The discussions covered a wide range of topics, including strengthening the charity sector, improving mental and physical health care, fostering technological innovation, and addressing food insecurity across Canada. Several organizations spoke about the challenges facing the charity sector. John Hallward from GIV3 proposed a new national social sector fund, financed by redirecting a small portion of money that large charitable foundations are already required to give out. Bruce MacDonald from Imagine Canada highlighted that the non-profit sector is key to Canada's economy but is struggling with rising demand and complex government rules. He asked for simpler reporting and longer funding terms. Kevin Muir from YMCA Canada and Aline Nizigama from YWCA Canada focused on the need for more investment in child care, community buildings, and youth employment, and also in housing and safety for women. Later, health organizations presented. Dr. Margot Burnell from the Canadian Medical Association called for better digital health tools, a national plan for primary care, and easier disability tax credit forms. Sarah Kennell and Jonny Morris from the Canadian Mental Health Association asked for continued federal funding for mental health services, noting that many services are not covered by public health care. Kenton Boston from the Canadian Men's Health Foundation emphasized early help for young men's mental health and addressing online harms. Dr. Sarah Giles from the Society of Rural Physicians of Canada highlighted the severe doctor shortage and infrastructure problems in rural and Indigenous communities, asking for more training and a national strategy. In the technology and finance session, Helen Alexandra Hayes suggested investing in public discussions about artificial intelligence (AI) to build trust. Céline Bak explained that Canadian small and medium-sized businesses (SMEs) struggle to get loans, with much Canadian investment going to the U.S. She proposed a plan to help these businesses access more private loans. Daniel Perry from the Council of Canadian Innovators urged the government to use its buying power to support Canadian technology companies and help them grow. Adriana Vega from Fintechs Canada called for faster changes to financial rules to increase competition and make it easier for new financial technology companies to operate. Finally, groups focused on food insecurity. Judith Barry from the Breakfast Club of Canada asked for more funding for the national school food program, noting its positive impact on children and the economy. Melissa Secord from Celiac Canada recommended a simpler, refundable tax credit for people with celiac disease, as gluten-free food is very expensive. Neil Hetherington from the Daily Bread Food Bank reported a huge increase in people needing food, especially working individuals, and suggested a federal tax credit for low-income renters. Jasmine Ramze Rezaee from Right to Food emphasized that food insecurity is mainly an income problem and called for a national goal to cut hunger in half, along with better income support programs. No specific decisions were made during this consultation meeting, as it was for gathering information for the upcoming budget. However, common themes emerged, such as the need for increased and stable funding for essential services, simplified government processes, and targeted support for vulnerable populations. The committee members listened to the recommendations, which will inform their advice for the 2026 budget.

The committee met to gather ideas for the upcoming 2026 federal budget, hearing from various groups about their needs and suggestions for government spending and rule changes. Several industry groups presented their requests. The Aerospace Industries Association of Canada asked for a federal plan for their industry, better government buying processes, and stable funding for Transport Canada to approve new aircraft. The Alberta Cattle Feeders' Association wanted to keep trade with the U.S. open, update farm insurance programs, and make it easier for foreign workers to get permanent residency for year-round farm jobs. They also raised concerns about a proposed trade deal with South American countries. The Canadian Institute of Steel Construction asked the government to double a special tax on imported steel to protect Canadian jobs and apply the "buy Canadian" policy to all government projects. The Helium Developers Association of Canada highlighted helium's importance for high-tech uses and asked for tax changes to encourage investment in Canada's helium supply. Other groups focused on the clean economy and community needs. CVW Sustainable Royalties Inc. proposed changes to tax credits to support technology that cleans up oil sands waste, recovers valuable minerals, and reduces pollution. New Economy Canada and The Transition Accelerator both stressed the need for major investments in Canada's electricity system, asking for clean energy tax credits to be extended and simplified. StormFisher Hydrogen also requested changes to clean hydrogen tax credits to include more products and recognize provinces with very clean electricity grids. The Canadian Craft Brewers Association asked for changes to how beer is taxed, allowing craft breweries to grow larger before facing the highest tax rates. The Conseil québécois du commerce du détail raised concerns about "ultra-fast fashion" companies selling cheap goods online without following Canadian rules, asking for a legal definition and more inspections. Finally, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities asked for more federal money for local infrastructure, especially for housing and ending homelessness. The Union des producteurs agricoles called for more government support for farming, including better risk management programs, more funding for agricultural research, and tax changes to help small farms and farm succession. No decisions were made during this meeting, as it was part of the process for gathering information for the 2026 budget. The committee will consider these recommendations as they prepare the upcoming budget, and committee members were reminded that a proposed law, Bill C-30, will be studied next week.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance met to discuss the federal government's spending power and how it affects provinces. The committee heard from three experts: Daniel Béland, William Robson, and Robert Laplante. They talked about equalization payments, which are given to provinces with less money to help them provide public services. Some provinces, like Alberta, contribute more to these payments than they receive, which has caused some tension. Daniel Béland suggested that the equalization program should be reviewed regularly by a new expert panel. He also said that the formula used to calculate payments is too complicated and should be made more transparent. William Robson agreed, saying that the current system is not working well and that the federal government should better align its spending with the needs of each province. Robert Laplante talked about the imbalance of money between the federal and provincial governments, and how this can lead to confusion about priorities. During the meeting, committee members questioned the witnesses about the fairness and effectiveness of the equalization program. Some members expressed concern that the current system penalizes provinces with lower taxes and rewards provinces with higher taxes. The committee also discussed the possibility of creating an independent commission to oversee the equalization program and make recommendations for improvements. The committee then heard from officials from the Department of Finance, who explained how the federal government's transfer programs work. The committee also passed a motion to study a proposed law related to the spring economic update.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance met to discuss the Bank of Canada's monetary policy report. Tiff Macklem, the Governor of the Bank of Canada, and Carolyn Rogers, the Senior Deputy Governor, presented the report and answered questions from committee members. The main topics included inflation, interest rates, affordability, and economic growth. They discussed how global events, like the war in the Middle East and trade uncertainties with the U.S., are impacting Canada's economy. Governor Macklem explained that while Canada's economy is growing, it faces challenges from global events that are pushing up inflation, especially through higher energy prices. He emphasized that the Bank of Canada is focused on keeping inflation under control and ensuring that higher energy prices don't lead to persistent inflation. Macklem also addressed concerns about affordability, noting that it's a major challenge for Canadians due to higher prices and the need for income growth through increased productivity. Committee members questioned the witnesses on various issues, including the impact of U.S. tariffs, the role of government spending in driving economic growth, and the potential effects of artificial intelligence on employment. They also discussed regional differences in the Canadian economy and the challenges faced by specific sectors, such as manufacturing. The Governor and Senior Deputy Governor highlighted the importance of diversifying trade, reducing interprovincial trade barriers, and investing in productivity-enhancing measures to strengthen Canada's economy. The committee identified key factors influencing the Bank of Canada's decisions on interest rates, including global oil prices, inflation expectations, and the overall strength of the economy. The Governor emphasized that the Bank is committed to keeping inflation close to its 2% target and will adjust monetary policy as needed. The committee members and witnesses agreed that ongoing monitoring and adaptability are crucial in navigating the current economic uncertainties. No specific decisions were made, but the discussion will inform future policy considerations.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance met to discuss federal spending power and its impact on the Canadian economy and the relationship between the federal and provincial governments. Witnesses included academics Jennifer Robson and Tammy Schirle, and representatives from the Montreal Economic Institute, Daniel Dufort and Gabriel Giguère. The discussion covered topics such as the federal government's role in areas of provincial jurisdiction, the effectiveness of federal spending programs, and the balance between federal and provincial fiscal responsibilities. Jennifer Robson emphasized that Canada is a decentralized federation and that federal spending power should be considered in the context of intergovernmental collaboration. She cautioned against excessive conditions on federal funding that could strain the federation. Tammy Schirle discussed when federal spending power is best used, focusing on market failures, reducing frictions across regional markets, and the long-term benefits for Canadians, using early learning and child care as an example. Daniel Dufort argued that the current budgetary challenge is a spending problem and advocated for disciplined program spending and a review of government missions. He expressed concerns about federal programs encroaching on provincial jurisdictions and suggested reforms to promote investment and productivity. Committee members questioned the witnesses on various aspects of federal spending, including the newly announced sovereign wealth fund, the effectiveness of the Canada Infrastructure Bank, and the impact of federal policies on provincial autonomy. Several committee members raised concerns about the federal government's involvement in areas of provincial jurisdiction, such as health care and dental care, and questioned whether federal programs were addressing actual market failures or simply duplicating existing provincial efforts. The discussion highlighted the ongoing tensions between the federal government and the provinces over fiscal responsibilities and the appropriate use of federal spending power. No specific decisions were made during the meeting, but the committee members gathered information and perspectives from the witnesses to inform their ongoing study of federal spending power. The committee will continue to examine the issue and consider potential recommendations for the government.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance met to discuss household debt in Canada. Witnesses shared their expertise on the factors contributing to debt and potential solutions. The committee heard from Philippe d'Astous, a professor at HEC Montréal, who emphasized the importance of financial literacy and understanding the true cost of credit. Brian Dijkema from Cardus discussed the impact of online gambling, particularly sports betting, on household debt, highlighting the potential for addiction and financial harm. Grant Bazian and Sheri Aberback from MNP LLP provided insights into the realities of household debt, noting that many Canadians are struggling with rising costs of living and reliance on high-interest credit. d'Astous suggested presenting the cost of credit in a clear and simple way and improving financial literacy education for young consumers. Dijkema recommended recognizing online gambling as a significant contributor to debt and suggested supporting Senator Marty Deacon's proposed law to address the issue. He argued that online sports betting is structured to be addictive, like a slot machine, and is heavily advertised, leading to increased debt and mental health issues, especially among young men. He suggested banning sports advertising and changing the structure of gambling revenue to encourage savings rather than spending. Bazian and Aberback offered four recommendations: increasing public awareness of debt relief options, strengthening consumer protections around high-interest credit, addressing the connection between housing and debt, and supporting practical financial education. They emphasized that high household debt reflects financial literacy gaps, lending practices that normalize long-term debt, and structural pressures like housing costs and inflation. They noted that many Canadians are close to insolvency and that financial distress is often linked to mental health issues. Committee members questioned the witnesses on various aspects of household debt, including the sustainability of current debt levels, the impact of job losses, and the role of government policies. The committee explored potential solutions, such as improving financial literacy, addressing housing affordability, and regulating online gambling. There were no specific decisions made during the meeting, but the discussion provided valuable insights for future policy considerations. The committee acknowledged the need for earlier intervention, stronger consumer protections, and policies that address the root causes of household debt to help Canadians avoid insolvency.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance met to discuss household debt in Canada, with a focus on understanding the factors contributing to financial distress and potential solutions. The committee heard from various experts, including Ronald Butler, Peter MacKenzie, Vasiliki Bednar, André Bolduc, Wesley Cowan, Maude Pugliese, and Douglas Hoyes, who provided insights into the current state of household debt and its implications. The discussion covered mortgage renewals, the impact of interest rates, the role of government policies, and the challenges faced by young Canadians and low-income individuals. Ronald Butler highlighted the increasing difficulties faced by Canadians in affording homes, especially in major cities like Toronto and Vancouver. He noted that many people are struggling with mortgage renewals due to higher interest rates and stagnant wages. Peter MacKenzie suggested focusing on the debt service ratio as a key indicator of household financial health and recommended policies to promote economic growth in mid-sized cities as an alternative to larger, more expensive urban centers. Vasiliki Bednar raised concerns about the growing use of "buy now, pay later" services and their potential to trap young people in debt. André Bolduc and Wesley Cowan discussed trends in consumer insolvency, including longer-term debt products and the expansion of alternative lending. They emphasized the need for stronger consumer protection and responsible lending practices. Maude Pugliese presented findings from her research on debt in Quebec, highlighting the importance of distinguishing between debt and excessive debt. She suggested enhancing social programs and improving awareness of alternatives to credit during times of financial stress. Douglas Hoyes pointed out that the Canada Revenue Agency is a creditor in many personal insolvencies and suggested improving communication between the CRA and licensed insolvency trustees to facilitate better outcomes for debtors and creditors. Committee members raised questions about the impact of government policies on housing affordability, the role of the social safety net, and the challenges faced by young Canadians in managing debt. The witnesses offered various recommendations, including deregulating housing construction, promoting financial literacy, and providing more support for low-income individuals. The committee agreed that household debt remains a significant issue in Canada and that further action is needed to address the underlying causes and mitigate the risks. The committee did not make any specific decisions during the meeting but gathered valuable information from the witnesses to inform future policy discussions and recommendations. They did agree to extend the deadline for pre-budget consultation portal submissions to May 22.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance met to discuss Canada Pension Plan (CPP) investments in Canada. Michel Leduc, Senior Managing Director of the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board (CPPIB), explained how the CPPIB invests globally to secure retirement income for Canadians. He emphasized that while Canada is a core market, the CPPIB must diversify investments worldwide to maximize growth and manage risk. Leduc stressed the importance of the CPPIB's independence from political pressures to ensure the best returns for Canadians. Committee members questioned Leduc on various aspects of CPPIB's investment strategies, including investments in Canada versus other countries, and the role of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors. Mr. Leduc clarified that the CPPIB is one of the largest investors in Canada, with over $115 billion invested. He addressed concerns about the CPPIB's investments in China, noting that while the fund has reduced its exposure, it maintains an "optionality" in anticipation of China's future economic growth. Members discussed the importance of predictable regulations and efficient approval processes to attract more investment to Canada. Mr. Leduc highlighted that the CPPIB is actively looking at opportunities in Canada, particularly in energy, digital infrastructure, and regulated utilities. Committee members explored the CPPIB's approach to climate change, with Mr. Leduc explaining that the CPPIB sees investments in high-emitting sectors as both a risk and an opportunity to help companies transition to a low-carbon economy. He also emphasized the importance of global standards for sustainability reporting to better measure and manage climate-related risks. Members also discussed the potential for the CPPIB to invest in infrastructure projects, such as airports, and the challenges of navigating complex regulatory processes. During the meeting, a motion was introduced to suspend all federal taxes on gasoline and diesel for the remainder of 2026, but it was defeated. The committee agreed to schedule an informal discussion with the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs of the European Parliament in May to discuss cooperation in the financial sector. The committee members agreed that Canada has a unique opportunity to attract global funds, and that the CPPIB is well-positioned to take advantage of this situation.

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance met to discuss household debt in Canada. Witnesses from the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada (FCAC), the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy (OSB), and Statistics Canada presented data and insights on the current state of household debt and financial vulnerabilities. The committee also heard from experts including a chief economist, a credit counselor, and a licensed insolvency trustee. Committee members questioned the witnesses on various aspects of household debt, including its impact on the economy, the role of financial literacy, and the effectiveness of consumer protection measures. Shereen Benzvy Miller from FCAC highlighted the agency's work in protecting financial consumers and empowering them to make informed decisions. Elisabeth Lang from OSB provided an overview of Canada's insolvency system and key data points related to household debt. Jennifer Withington from Statistics Canada shared insights into Canadian household debt and financial vulnerabilities, emphasizing the importance of distributional statistics to understand the financial position of different socio-economic groups. Charles St-Arnaud, Chief Economist at Servus Credit Union, discussed the structural impacts of high household debt on the Canadian economy, including the crowding out of business investment and the impact on productivity growth. Jeffrey Schwartz, Executive Director of Consolidated Credit Canada, emphasized the critical role of financial literacy and the need for consistent and equitable funding for accredited non-profit credit counseling agencies. Guyllaume Amiot, a Licensed Insolvency Trustee, discussed the changing profile of Canadian debtors facing insolvency and the role of LITs in the financial rehabilitation of consumers. Committee members expressed concerns about the rising levels of household debt, the impact of inflation and interest rates on household finances, and the potential for increased insolvencies. They also discussed the role of government policies in addressing household debt and promoting financial literacy. There was discussion on whether Canadians have too easy access to credit, and whether banks should take more responsibility for fraud. The committee explored the impact of international events on household finances and the potential for targeted measures to provide relief to vulnerable Canadians. The committee did not make any specific decisions during the meeting, but the information gathered will likely inform future policy recommendations related to household debt and financial well-being.