[English]
[Translation]
He said: Mr. Speaker, this bill is to ensure that the federal government complies with the Official Languages Act. As you know, sections 41 and 42, set out in Part VII of the act-a crucial part in terms of enforcement-are being flouted by the federal government. They act in this matter as if there were no legislation.
The bill will require the federal government to enforce its own legislation.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed.)
[English]
Mr. Frazer: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. When the member for Scarborough Centre was asked by the Speaker to withdraw his remarks, he qualified his withdrawal by saying that he had not intended it to be in the singular but rather in the plural-
The Deputy Speaker: The hon. member will have to accept the fact that the Speaker ruled that the matter was finished.
Mr. Frazer: Mr. Speaker, this is a new point of order.
The Deputy Speaker: If it is on a different matter, the hon. member may continue.
Mr. Frazer: Mr. Speaker, the member withdrew his statement, but what he said was that he intended it to be in the plural, which means that he was calling me and every one of my colleagues in the House a racist. That is not acceptable and I think it should be withdrawn.
The Deputy Speaker: I understand the hon. member's point very well. The hon. member is aware, as all of us are, that what happened yesterday has hurt all of us. I hope the hon. member-and everyone heard his remark-will realize that the faster we get this thing behind us, the better it is going to be for all of us and probably for all elected people across the country.
I note what the hon. member has said, but I hope that the matter is now a bit behind us.
The petitioners call upon Parliament to urge the federal government to join with the provincial governments to make the highway system upgrading possible, beginning in 1997.
(1545 )
The undersigned request that Parliament review and change the relevant provisions of the Criminal Code to ensure that men take responsibility for their violent behaviour toward women.
The petitioners point out that Parliament is negotiating with all provinces to assume the administration of all social housing. The government of the province of Ontario has not respected its legal operating agreements and it has said publicly that it wants to sell off public housing. The co-operative housing sector is unique and separate from all other social housing.
Therefore, these petitioners call on Parliament to recognize the co-operative housing sector as a unique and separate entity from all other social housing and that Parliament seriously consider the transfer of the administration of co-operative housing to a non-government organization as proposed by the Co-operative Housing Federation of Canada.
I endorse that petition myself.
Since it cannot be demonstrated sufficiently that sexual offenders such as pedophiles can be cured or rehabilitated, these petitioners pray that Parliament will enact legislation to establish a pedophile registry.
These people are concerned about the injustice in the way those who are convicted of driving while intoxicated are sentenced. They believe there are profound inadequacies in the sentencing practices concerning individuals convicted on impaired driving charges.
Therefore they pray and request that Parliament proceed immediately with amendments to the Criminal Code which will ensure that the sentence given to anyone convicted of driving while impaired or causing injury or death while impaired reflects both the severity of the crime and zero tolerance by Canada toward this crime.
[Translation]
This is such an important petition that I must read you the preamble. ``We ask that the other House, whose members are not elected nor held accountable for their actions and whose operating budget totals $43 million, the other House that will not account to this House for the use of its appropriations, fails to fulfil its regional representation mandate and duplicates the work done by the members of this House, be abolished''.
This petition is signed by 260 people in my riding.
[English]
The petitioners call on Parliament to urge the federal government to join with the provincial governments to make a national highway system upgrading possible.
The petitioners pray and request that Parliament introduce mid-term disability benefits legislation which allows working Canadians who suffer from a debilitating illness or injury to receive continuous sickness benefits in the following form: (a) 15 weeks UIC; (b) mid-term disability; and (c) Canadian disability pension plan.
(1550 )
The first petition calls on Parliament to have our present laws on obscenity strictly upheld, demonstrating a will to protect the men, women and children of Canada from pornography's impact, thereby also fostering recognition and treatment for sexual addictions which most often have been fueled by the use and impact of pornography.
[Text]
Question no. 87-Mr. Rocheleau:
With respect to family trusts: (a) exactly how many family trusts have been recognized by Revenue Canada since 1972; (b) how many family trusts have accumulated assets in the following amounts: (i) $100,000 and less, (ii) $100,000 to $500,000, (iii) $500,000 to $1 million, (iv) $1 million to $5 million, (v) $5 million to $25 million, (vi) $25 million to $100 million, (vii) $100 million to $500 million, (viii) $500 million to $1 billion, (ix) the number of family trusts worth $1 billion or more, with an individual description of each and (c) specify what percentage of all the trusts in each category is held in each province?Hon. Jane Stewart (Minister of National Revenue, Lib.): In response to (a), the term ``family trust'' is not a defined term in the Income Tax Act. The term ``personnal trust'' is, however, a defined term in the act and includes: (i) testamentary trusts, established upon the death of the individual; and (ii) inter vivos trusts, established while the settlor of the trust is alive, for which generally no amount is paid by the beneficiary for the interest in the trust.
The terms ``family trust'' and ``personal trust'' are often used interchangeably. Based on 1994 statistics, there were 117,642 returns filed for personal trusts. Revenue Canada did not begin collecting trust data by computer until 1992. However, of the personal trusts that existed in 1994, 15,832 were created prior to 1972.
In response to (b), just as individuals are not required to file a balance sheet which indicates assets owned with their personal income tax returns, neither are trusts. This is so because individuals and trusts are subject to tax on annual income generated by assets and not on the basis of assets themselves. Therefore, Revenue Canada does not have information with respect ot the dollar amount of assets held by trusts.
In response to (c), as explained in the answer to (b) above, Revenue Canada does not have information with respect to the dollar amount of assets held by trusts.
The number of returns filed by personal trusts in 1994 was 117,642. The breakdown by province is as follows:
NF 400
PE 329
NS 2,823
NB 1,141
QC 16,705
ONT 56,339
MN 6,294
SK 4,035
AB 10,517
BC 18,635
NT 294
YK 130
177,642
Question No. 88-Mr. Rocheleau:
What is the impact on the Canadian tax system of the shortfall since 1972, per year, from the establishment of family trusts?Hon. Jane Stewart (Minister of National Revenue, Lib.): Trusts are subject to tax on their annual income except to the extent the income is allocated to beneficiaries, in which case the income is subject to tax in the hands of the beneficiaries. Therefore, all income is subject to tax.
Questions concerning the shortfall of tax revenues arising from the establishment of family trusts were raised in 1994 by the Standing Committee of Finance during the committee's study on the taxation of family trusts undertaken pursuant to Standing Order 108(2).
At that time, the committee attempted to ascertain the applicable tax revenues that might have been assessed on deemed taxable capital gains had the extension to the 21-year rule not been enacted by the previous government. Such a determination required knowledge of both the cost base and the current value of assets held by those trusts. However, as trusts are not required to file annual balance sheets, information regarding the assets held by trusts was impossible to obtain.
Hence, attempts to speculate on the value of assets held in trusts and the anticipated shortfall in tax revenues as a result of the extension of the 21-year rule were not successful.
Question no. 89-Mr. Rocheleau:
With respect to family trusts: (a) to date, how many family trusts have taken advantage of the ruling Revenue Canada issued on December 23, 1991 enabling them to transfer their assets abroad tax free and (b) what is the value of the assets and the province of origin of each of the family trusts that have been transferred abroad?Hon. Jane Stewart (Minister of National Revenue, Lib.): In response to (a), no trust has requested a ruling similar to the December 23, 1991 ruling and to date Revenue Canada has no knowledge that any trust has proceeded with a similar transaction.
In response to (b), as explained in the response to (a), Revenue Canada has no knowledge that any trust transferred assets abroad in circumstances similar to the 1991 ruling.
[English]
Mr. Zed: I ask, Mr. Speaker, that the remaining questions be allowed to stand.
The Deputy Speaker: Is that agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Deputy Speaker: Is that agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
Unless my memory serves me incorrectly, the custom of this House has been on the occasion of a tribute for the first tribute to any particular former member of this House, or a member of this House that has died, is to come usually from the representative of the party for which the member sat, or in some instances the sitting member for the riding for which the former member sat.
I noticed today that in the case of the former member for Nickel Belt it was a sitting member that was recognized. I fully expected that the next member recognized would be a member from the New Democratic Party and that was not the case.
I would like to register my objection to this departure from what I consider to be the tradition in this House, a tradition of which the Chair should be well aware, having sat in this House as long as I have.
The Deputy Speaker: I thank the hon. member for his point. The Chair fully agrees with it. I regret that I did not go to the hon. member after or before the member who sits for the seat at the moment. I thank the hon. member for drawing that to the attention of the Chair.