Saturday 19 March 2022

YO Jake Stewart and Pierre Poilievre Why don't you dudes answer your emails or return your phone calls like the clerks sometimes do???

 

 

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WdVnRLAvRQ&ab_channel=PierrePoilievre

 

 
 

Did your family get $40,000 in COVID relief?

684,222 views
Sep 24, 2020
20KDislikeShare
212K subscribers
Did your family get $40,000 in COVID relief? Because that’s what it cost you.
Why don't you answer your emails or return your phone calls like the clerks do???
 
This man called me back on the 15th aka the Ides of March
 
 Alexandre Roger works as Committee Clerk for House of Commons.
Alexandre can be reached at 613-947-8926
First name
Alexandre
Last name
Roger
Title
Committee Clerk
Telephone Number
613-947-8926
Alternate Number

Fax Number

Email
alexandre.roger@parl.gc.ca
Street Address
131 Queen Street (view on map)
Country
Canada
Province
Ontario
City
Ottawa
Postal Code
K1A 0A6
Department
HOC-CDC

House of Commons
 
https://www.ourcommons.ca/DocumentViewer/en/44-1/FINA/meeting-21/evidence
 
 
House of Commons Emblem
 
 
The Chair:
    Thank you.
    That is the time, MP Blaikie.
    We are moving to the Conservatives for five minutes.
     MP Stewart, you have the floor.
[Expand]
Mr. Jake Stewart (Miramichi—Grand Lake, CPC):
    Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    What we're seeing here is a complete suspension of civil liberties, number one. The Prime Minister often talks about which things are acceptable to him and which things are unacceptable. Obviously every other protest that blocked off a road or a trade route was acceptable, because he didn't follow the money on any of those, whether they were climate crisis protests or any of those ones that he obviously supported. But he's willing to suspend civil liberties, freeze Canadians' lives and put their bank accounts on hold right now because single mothers, little old ladies and lots of people in Canada supported this, rightly or wrongly.
     Now, I want to know something. I thought I heard that it was not retroactive. Are these bank seizures retroactive?
[Expand]
Ms. Isabelle Jacques:
    Could you be more precise in terms of what you mean by that?
     No, the order is not retroactive. They could not use the fact that a person gave $50 five weeks ago to freeze the account.
[Expand]
Mr. Jake Stewart:
    What was the date that somebody first donated to this cause?
[Expand]
Ms. Isabelle Jacques:
    Pardon me? What was the date on which a person first donated? I would not have that information.
     All I can tell you—
[Expand]
Mr. Jake Stewart:
    That's interesting. The CRA, the Department of Justice and the Department of Finance were suspending civil liberties, and you don't have the information.
[Expand]
Ms. Isabelle Jacques:
    No, what I mean is the date on which the order took effect was February 15. Financial institutions could not have used information obtained previously to freeze accounts.
    I will turn to my colleague—

  (1535)  

[Expand]
Mr. Jake Stewart:
    No, I have another question. There was one individual in my province who donated quite a sum of money, I believe. It was $75,000, or something like that. If that individual donated that money, let's say, three weeks ago, what will happen to that money? Where does it go?
[Expand]
Ms. Isabelle Jacques:
    I do not know where he donated the money. I don't know which entity he gave the money to. Let's say that it ended up in the financial system and that a bank could freeze the account of the person, if it's a person, or a company that received the funding. Then it would have been frozen if captured. Now that the activities have stopped, it would be unfrozen and remain in the account. It wouldn't go anywhere else. It stays in the account.
[Expand]
Mr. Jake Stewart:
     My question was, if somebody donated money before February 15, what happens to it?
[Expand]
Ms. Isabelle Jacques:
    It should be where the person gave it. It shouldn't have been captured.
[Expand]
Mr. Jake Stewart:
    Where does it go? Does it go back to the person—
[Expand]
Ms. Isabelle Jacques:
    It's where that person gave the money. Whom did they give it to?
[Expand]
Mr. Jake Stewart:
    I have no idea. I just see it in the newspaper. Let's say it was GoFundMe. Let's say somebody made a GoFundMe donation. You can make a donation to GoFundMe from anywhere in the world as long as you have a Visa or Mastercard or something. That's my understanding.
    Let's say somebody made a donation February 7. Where does that money go?
[Expand]
Ms. Isabelle Jacques:
    If that person, for example, gave it to GoFundMe, it went to the GoFundMe fund. As you may know, from the news that I read, they returned the money back to the donors on their own. The actions GoFundMe took were, I believe, their own, as they may not have been comfortable with the ongoing activities. I'm not the expert, and I don't have first-hand information.
    I see that colleagues have their hands up.
[Expand]
Mr. Jake Stewart:
    I have another question though.
[Expand]
Ms. Annie Koutrakis:
    I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.
[Expand]
Ms. Lena Metlege Diab (Halifax West, Lib.):
    Yes, I was going to do that.
[Expand]
The Chair:
    On a point of order.
[Expand]
Ms. Annie Koutrakis:
    Sorry to interrupt my honourable colleague.
    I'm wondering—
[Expand]
Mr. Jake Stewart:
    There's no point of order. You're not—
[Expand]
The Chair:
    On a point of order.
    Go ahead.
[Expand]
Ms. Annie Koutrakis:
    I would like to ask the clerk to ask the interpreters if the interpretation is coming through because it's not coming through very clearly on my end.
[Expand]
Mr. Jake Stewart:
    This is a stalling tactic. This is a stalling tactic because they don't like the question.
[Expand]
The Chair:
    Mr. Stewart.
    Clerk, could we ask the interpreters about that.
[Expand]
Mr. Jake Stewart:
    Oldest trick in the book, isn't it?
[Expand]
The Clerk:
    Is Mr. Stewart coming through? Do you need more audio from Mr. Stewart? Is that what I'm getting from the interpreters?
    Yes. We need more audio for Mr. Stewart for the interpreters.
[Expand]
The Chair:
    If we could slow down the pace, MP Stewart, when asking the questions—
[Expand]
Mr. Jake Stewart:
    How much time do I have, Mr. Chair?
[Expand]
The Chair:
    —it would maybe reduce the cross-talk to help the interpreters.
     You have right now 22 seconds. I did stop the time.
[Expand]
Mr. Jake Stewart:
    Thank you.
    I wanted to say that the Canadian government gave a settlement of $10.5 million to Omar Khadr, who shot and killed our U.S. allies. Trudeau said that we can't water down Canadian citizenship because a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian. But now we're picking—
[Expand]
Mr. Peter Fragiskatos (London North Centre, Lib.):
    I have a point of order, Chair.
[Expand]
Ms. Julie Dzerowicz:
    There's a point of order.
[Expand]
Mr. Peter Fragiskatos:
    Mr. Chair, I have a point of order about relevance. There are many instances where one could have called a point of order. Our colleague was interrupting the witnesses from answering. I held off because it seemed to have been corrected.
    On this point especially, how it's relevant to the topic at hand, really is beyond me.
[Expand]
The Chair:
    We will stick to the emergency measures.

[Translation]

[Expand]
Mr. Gabriel Ste-Marie:
    I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.
[Expand]
The Chair:
    Go ahead, Mr. Ste‑Marie.
[Expand]
Mr. Gabriel Ste-Marie:
    I want to throw in my two cents. For a while now, certain members have raised points of order in the course of our meetings because they felt the comments of the member who was speaking were off topic. Both in the House and in committees, the member who is speaking is usually given a good bit of leeway. If a member isn't allowed to say two sentences that segue into the topic in hand, how can we debate anything?
    I would ask this of you, Mr. Chair. When someone raises a point of order because they don't think the member's comments are germane to the subject before the committee, the member should be allowed to speak and given more leeway. It's ridiculous to interrupt the debate every single time someone feels a member has gone off topic.

  (1540)  

[Expand]
The Chair:
    Thank you, Mr. Ste‑Marie.

[English]

    I do allow for some leeway. We were well over the time with Mr. Stewart. I take your point.
    We are moving now the the Liberals and MP Chatel for five minutes.
 
 

The mandate of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance, which is established under Standing Order 108 of the Standing Orders of the House of Commons, is to examine and enquire into all matters referred to it by the House of Commons, to report from time to time and, except when the House otherwise orders, to send for persons, papers and records, as it operates in accordance with its mandate.

Certain standing committees, including the Standing Committee on Finance, are empowered to study and report on all matters relating to the mandate, management and operation of the department or departments of government that are assigned to them from time to time by the House. For the Standing Committee on Finance, these departments include the Department of Finance and the Canada Revenue Agency.

Finally, the Standing Committee on Finance also has the responsibility to consider budgetary policy, as outlined in Standing Order 83.1. In particular, commencing on the first sitting day in September of each year, the Committee is authorized to consider and report on proposals regarding the budgetary policy of the government. The Committee normally presents its pre-budget report no later than the third sitting day before the last normal sitting day in December, as outlined in Standing Order 28(2).

In each parliamentary session, the Committee’s work may include:

  • pre-budget consultations;
  • briefing sessions by departmental officials on federal programs;
  • examination of planned expenditures of the Department of Finance and the Canada Revenue Agency;
  • a review of Order in Council appointments;
  • a review of Monetary Policy Reports of the Governor of the Bank of Canada;
  • a review of the Minister of Finance’s economic and fiscal updates;
  • consideration of proposed legislation;
  • special studies on topics within the Committee’s mandate; and
  • consideration of reports of subcommittees.

 

In the execution of its functions, each committee is normally assisted by a committee clerk, one or more analysts and a committee assistant. Occasional assistance is also provided by legislative clerks and lawyers from the Office of the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel. These individuals are non-partisan and serve all members of the committee and representatives of all parties equally.

Committee Clerk

The clerk performs their duties and responsibilities under the direction of the committee and its Chair. As an expert in the rules of the House of Commons, the clerk may be requested to give advice to the Chair and members of the committee should a question of procedure arise. The clerk is the coordinator, organizer and liaison officer for the committee, and as such, will be in frequent contact with members’ staff. They are also responsible for inviting witnesses and dealing with all the details regarding their appearance before the committee.

Committee Assistant

The committee assistant provides a wide range of specialized administrative services for the organization of committee meetings and the publishing of documents on the committee’s Website. The committee assistant works with the clerk to meet the needs of the committee .

Committee Analyst

The Library of Parliament’s analysts, who are subject-matter experts, provide authoritative, substantive, and timely research, analysis and information to all members of the committee. They are part of the committee’s institutional memory and are a unique resource for parliamentarians. Supported by research librarians, the analysts work individually or in multidisciplinary teams.

Analysts can prepare: briefing notes on the subjects being examined; detailed study plans; lists of proposed witnesses; analyses of an issue with a list of suggested questions; background papers; draft reports; news releases; and/or formal correspondence. Analysts with legal training can assist the committee regarding any substantive issues that may arise during the consideration of bills.

OTHER RESOURCES AVAILABLE AS REQUIRED

Parliamentary Counsel

Within the Office of the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, parliamentary counsel (Legislation) are available to assist members who are not in Cabinet with the preparation of private members’ bills or of amendments to government bills or others.

At various stages of the legislative process, members may propose amendments to bills. Amendments may first be proposed at the committee stage, during a committee’s clause-by-clause review of a bill. Amendments may also be proposed at the report stage, once a bill returns to the House.

Once a bill is sent to committee, the clerk of the committee provides the name of the parliamentary counsel (Legislation) responsible for the drafting of the amendments for a particular bill to the members.

Legislative Clerk

The legislative clerk serves all members of the committee as a specialist of the process by which a bill becomes law. They are available to give, upon request from members and their staff, advice on the admissibility of amendments when bills are referred to committee. The legislative clerk organizes the amendments into packages for committee stage, reviews all the committee amendments for procedural admissibility and prepares draft rulings for the Chair. During clause-by-clause consideration of bills in committee, a legislative clerk is in attendance to assist the committee with any procedural issues that may arise. The legislative clerk can also provide members with advice regarding the procedural admissibility of report stage amendments. When a bill is sent to committee, the clerk of the committee provides to the members the name of the legislative clerk assigned to the bill.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO)

The Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO) is an officer of Parliament created by the Parliament of Canada Act who supports Parliament by providing analysis, including analysis of macroeconomic and fiscal policy, for the purposes of raising the quality of parliamentary debate and promoting greater budget transparency and accountability.

The Parliament of Canada Act also provides the PBO with a mandate to, if requested by a committee, estimate the financial cost of any proposal over which Parliament has jurisdiction. Certain committees can also request research and analyses of the nation’s finances or economy, or of the estimates.

Further information on the PBO may be found at: http://www.pbo-dpb.gc.ca/en/

 

 https://www.pbo-dpb.gc.ca/en/about-the-pbo--a-propos-du-dpb

 

The Parliamentary Budget Officer

Yves GirouxYves Giroux was appointed Parliamentary Budget Officer on September 4, 2018.

Mr. Giroux entered the federal public service in 1995. Over the course of his 24-year career, he assumed progressively senior level positions and increased responsibilities, joining the executive ranks in 2003.

Mr. Giroux has in-depth tax, fiscal and financial, and social policy knowledge and expertise, and considerable experience with stakeholder relations, and the management of large teams and multi-million dollar budgets. For more than 20 years, he has been closely involved in the federal Budget process in various capacities and is highly regarded as an expert on federal budget making and the Government’s expenditure system.

Since 2015, Mr. Giroux has been serving as Assistant Commissioner and Chief Data Officer, Strategy and Integration Branch, with the Canada Revenue Agency.  Prior to this, he was Director, Operations, Liaison Secretariat for Macroeconomic Policy at the Privy Council Office, for four years. From 2005 to 2011, he served as Director and Senior Chief, Social Policy Division, Finance Canada.

Mr. Giroux is a graduate of the Université de Montreal, where he earned a Master’s and a Bachelor degree, both in Economics.  He is married with two children: an adult daughter and a teenage son.

 

Parliament’s financial and economic analyst.

The PBO’s mandate is to provide independent analysis to Parliament on the budget, the estimates and other documents, as well as matters of particular significance relating to the nation’s finances or economy listed in the PBO’s annual work plan; and at the request of a committee or a parliamentarian, to estimate the financial cost of any proposal that relates to matters over which Parliament has jurisdiction. Certain committees can also request analyses of the nation’s finances or economy or the estimates.

In the months before a general election, the PBO has an additional mandate of responding to requests from political parties or independent members of the House of Commons to estimate the financial cost of any election campaign proposal that the party or member is considering making.

By providing independent and non-partisan financial and economic analysis, we support Parliament with the goal of raising the quality of parliamentary debate on questions of public money and promoting greater budget transparency and accountability.

Many countries have established similar offices to provide economic and fiscal analysis to the legislature. The International Monetary Fund refers to such organizations as “fiscal councils”. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) – under which a network of PBOs has been established – refers to them as “parliamentary budget officials” and “independent fiscal institutions”. In Canada, there is one other office with a mandate similar to that of the PBO: Ontario’s Financial Accountability Office.

Analysis of the state of the nation’s finances

We provide analysis to Parliament on the state of the nation’s finances, which depends on the expenditures, revenues, assets and liabilities of the federal government. We focus on producing analysis that will be of practical use to parliamentarians in decision-making. Consequently, we are usually looking into the future to assess how the state of the nation’s finances will be affected by government decisions and economic trends.

Under this branch of our mandate, we publish semi-annual assessments of the government’s current and projected fiscal position and testify at the House of Commons Finance Committee. To provide a perspective of the sustainability of government finances over the long term, we prepare an annual report that assesses the fiscal sustainability of the federal, provincial and territorial governments, as well as the public pension plans.

These reports focus on how the nation’s fiscal position will be affected by policy measures, economic developments and demographic trends in the medium and long term.

We also publish analyses of other ongoing and future government expenses. For example, we have published reports on Federal Transfers to Provinces and Territories and the Fiscal Sustainability of Canada’s National Defence Program.

We also provide analysis of certain issues that are likely to impact the nation’s finances. For example, at the request of a parliamentarian, we provided an assessment of the Fiscal Impacts of Lower Oil Prices.

Analysis of the government’s spending plans

Each year, the government submits its spending plans and an annual economic policy statement (called the Budget) to the House of Commons. The government’s annual expenditure plans (called the Main Estimates) are submitted to the House of Commons for approval on or before March 1. Parliament will be asked to approve additional estimates (called Supplementary Estimates A, B, and C) during the course of the fiscal year to approve spending above and beyond that in the Main Estimates.

We provide Parliament with analysis of the Budget and Main and Supplementary Estimates to help parliamentarians understand what they are approving. Our quarterly Expenditure Monitor analyzes government spending to help parliamentarians understand how those estimates are being implemented.

We analyze whether enough funding has been dedicated to achieve the goals of certain projects. For example, we estimated the cost of the government’s proposed procurement of Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ships to show that Canada was unlikely to be able to obtain the planned number of ships with the funding it had allocated.

We also analyze general patterns in how the government allocates money. For example, we found that there was no significant relationship between a program’s performance and its funding through a review of Performance Budgeting.

The government can rarely achieve all its cuts through efficiencies. We provide analysis to help Parliament understand what cuts have been implemented and what impact those cuts are having. This information is primarily provided through quarterly reviews of federal program spending.

Analysis of trends in the Canadian economy

The government’s finances are linked to the performance of the Canadian economy. To help Parliament make informed financial decisions, we provide independent analysis of trends and developments in the Canadian economy. This information is provided primarily through our semi-annual economic and fiscal outlook and testimony at the House of Commons Finance Committee, as well as occasional updates. We also provide Parliament with information on trends in the labour market through our annual labour market assessment.

Estimation of the financial cost of proposals within Parliament’s jurisdiction

We also estimate the cost of any proposal within Parliament’s jurisdiction upon request from a parliamentarian. Many of our reports respond to requests for an estimate of the financial cost of a government proposal, such as to estimate the financial cost of extending Canada’s mission in Iraq.

Some costing questions are really directed toward estimating the magnitude of a liability. For example, we were asked to estimate the cost of remediating Canada’s contaminated sites, which represents a major liability for government. Other questions seek estimates of the magnitude of a missed opportunity or problem. For example, we have also been asked to estimate the revenue lost as a result of failing to address international tax evasion.

 

Email: pbo-dpb@parl.gc.ca
Phone: 613-992-8026

99 Bank Street, Suite 900
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A9

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)