44th Parl. 1st Sess.
December 01, 2023
- Yea
- Nay
- add
- star_border
- share
The Chair is now ready to rule on the point of order raised on October 24, 2023, by the parliamentary secretary to the government House Leader concerning Bill C-353, an act to provide for the imposition of restrictive measures against foreign hostage takers and those who practice arbitrary detention in state-to-state relations and to make related amendments to the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, standing in the name of the member for Thornhill.
In a statement concerning private members’ business on October 19, 2023, the Chair invited members to make arguments regarding the need for this bill to be accompanied by a royal recommendation.
In his intervention, the parliamentary secretary stated that the bill would grant a monetary award to an individual who provides information that assists the Government of Canada to secure the release of Canadian nationals and eligible protected persons who are held hostage or arbitrarily detained in state-to-state relations outside Canada. He therefore concluded that this would constitute a new and distinct charge to the consolidated revenue fund.
The Chair has examined Bill C‑353 and has noted certain elements concerning the requirement of a royal recommendation.
Page 835 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, states, “[u]nder the Canadian system of government, the Crown alone initiates all public expenditure and Parliament may authorize only spending which has been recommended by the Governor General.”
In addition to the pecuniary reward provided for in clause 21, the bill also seeks, in clause 10, to allow a minister to make withdrawals from the proceeds account in order to provide hostages or detained individuals or, if deceased, their estates or successions with financial compensation.
The proposed plans to offer monetary rewards and to provide monetary compensations entail new and distinct charges against the consolidated revenue fund, which would constitute an infringement of the financial initiative of the Crown. Accordingly, Bill C-353 must be accompanied by a royal recommendation.
Consequently, the Chair will decline to put the question at the third reading stage of the bill in its present form unless a royal recommendation is received.
When this item is next before the House, the debate will continue on the motion for second reading of the bill, and the question will be put to the House at the end of that debate.
I thank all members for their attention.
413 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
I thank the hon. member for his input. I am, of course, looking at that closely.
16 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I rise with respect to what the Speaker said on Thursday, October 19, when he raised two items for Private Members' Business that appeared to infringe on the Crown's financial imperative and asked members to bring forward interventions on these matters.
Without commenting on the subject matter of the two bills in question, I submit that Bill C-353, sponsored by the member for Thornhill, and Bill C-356, sponsored by the member for Carleton, both infringe on the Crown's financial prerogative and that both bills require a royal recommendation.
Subclause 21(1) of Bill C-353 relating to the programs to encourage co-operation provides that:
The Minister may, in cooperation with the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, establish and implement programs designed to encourage individuals to co-operate with the Government of Canada to secure the release of Canadian nationals and eligible protected persons who are held hostage or arbitrarily detained in state-to-state relations outside Canada.
Subclause 21(2) of Bill C-353 further provides that “the Minister may pay a monetary reward to the individual who provides that information in an amount and manner determined by the Minister.”
I submit, respectfully, that there is no authority in statute or in an appropriation to establish such a program set out in subclause 21(1), nor the authority to make payments subject to the provisions set out in subclause 21(2). Therefore, subclause 21(1), in toto, seeks to impose a new and distinct draw on the consolidated revenue fund in a manner that is not currently authorized.
Turning to Bill C-356, I submit that the repurposing of $100 million from the housing accelerator fund and the provision to give effect to a 100% GST rebate on the new residential rental property for which the average rent payable is below market rate both seek to infringe on the Crown's financial prerogative.
First, the housing accelerator fund was established as a program administered by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation and is funded by a voted appropriation by Parliament through the estimates process. The member is seeking to change the terms and conditions and the purposes of the housing accelerator fund in a manner that is inconsistent with the program parameters as established and that therefore deviates from the authority granted by Parliament. The tabling of the main estimates and supplementary estimates is preceded by the recommendation of Her Excellency the Governor General for voted appropriations. That royal recommendation sets the maximum amount, the purpose and the terms and conditions of the voted appropriations contained in the estimates documents and voted upon by Parliament.
Second, the 100% GST rebate on new residential rental property would be a rebate paid out of the consolidated revenue fund for which a builder, landlord or buyer could claim the said rebate. I would point out that Bill C-56, which also proposes a 100% GST rebate for purpose-built rental housing, while different in design, was accompanied by a royal recommendation. Since, when brought into force, it would create a new and distinct draw on the consolidated revenue fund, it stands to reason that the program for which the terms, purposes and conditions of the GST rebate envisioned in Bill C-356 cannot rely on the royal recommendation provided with Bill C-56. Bill C-356 must, similarly, require a new royal recommendation to authorize a new and distinct draw on the consolidated revenue fund.
581 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
The Chair would also like to make a statement on the management of Private Members' Business. The consideration of legislative measures involves certain procedural issues of a constitutional nature that impose constraints that the Speaker and the members must address.
As a consequence, every time the order of precedence is replenished, the Chair reviews the bills added to draw the House's attention to those that appear, at first glance, to infringe the financial prerogative of the Crown. This enables members to rise in a timely manner to present their views on whether these bills require a royal recommendation.
Accordingly, following the addition of 15 new items to the order of precedence on Wednesday, September 20, two items concern the Chair.
First, Bill C-353, an act to provide for the imposition of restrictive measures against foreign hostage takers and those who practice arbitrary detention in state-to-state relations and to make related amendments to the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, standing in the name of the member for Thornhill.
Also: Bill C‑356, an act respecting payments by Canada and requirements in respect of housing and to amend certain other acts, standing in the name of the member for Carleton.
In the Chair's view, these bills may require a royal recommendation. Members who wish to make arguments regarding the need for bills C‑353 and C‑356 to be accompanied by a royal recommendation should do so as early as possible.
I thank all members for their attention.
265 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Chair, my colleague has put forward a bill in this House, Bill C-353, that deals specifically with this issue of hostages. Of course, many of us are seized with concern about the situation of these hostages, including Canadians. I wonder if the member can share a bit about the private member's bill she put forward before this situation happened, what the provisions of that bill are and the impact it would have in Canada's playing a stronger role securing the freedom of hostages.
87 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-353, an act to provide for the imposition of restrictive measures against foreign hostage takers and those who practice arbitrary detention in state-to-state relations and to make related amendments to the Proceeds of Crime (money laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
She said: Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to have this first in the House, and I hope it is among my many. It is an honour to present my first private member's bill, the foreign hostage takers accountability act.
It is high time to protect Canadians who are used in hostile foreign states as pawns in diplomacy. Foreign states' imprisoning our citizens on spurious charges to extract concessions is fundamentally unjust, and it puts Canada's national interest in deep peril.
Our country has a strong tradition of upholding its commitment to protecting its citizens, including those living and travelling overseas, standing up for fundamental human rights, civil liberties and the rule of law. As it becomes more and more dangerous, the realities in modern terrorist networks are becoming more complex, requiring continued vigilance and real action.
To ensure that Canada responds effectively to hostage-taking and hostage diplomacy, I am proud to introduce this bill. It would strengthen Canada's ability to deter, minimize and resolve instances of hostage-taking by increasing governmental power to levy sanctions, by establishing a family liaison office and by providing incentives for foreign co-operation.
The hostage takers accountability act would build on Canada's reputation as a dedicated defender of human dignity, and if passed, it would be a vital tool in our nation's arsenal to continue to protect the lives and rights of Canadians wherever, whenever and however they are at risk under wrongful and unlawful detention.
I am happy to bring this bill to the floor of the House of Commons, and I want to thank the member for Calgary Heritage for seconding it.
333 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
