In order to comply with these restrictions, Canadian companies have had to risk violating provincial and federal anti-discrimination laws, as well as exposure to human rights complaints, when denying employees access to projects involving US-controlled defence items because of their nationality or country of birth. There may now be some light at the end of the tunnel for companies subject to these conflicts between Canadian and US law. Today, the US State Department released its proposal to amend the ITARs to address the conflicts with human rights policies in Canada and other countries and the administrative burden associated with compliance with these restrictions — see Amendment to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations:
LinkedIn In the dry tone reserved for routine business, Senator Larry Campbell made a note for the parliamentary record: This increases the odds of losing, which discourages gambling, which is why the industry wants a change. Which is also why Mr. Liberal sits on the board of Great Canadian Gaming Corp.
Paul Massicotte, a senator with professional connections to the horse-racing industry in Quebec, similarly declared himself to be in conflict. Like all such declarations, they were noted in the official transcripts.
The senators recused themselves and none of their colleagues appeared to have anything more to say.
While ministers in the House of Commons must put their business assets in a blind trust, senators, who can stall, alter or even quash proposed laws, are under no such obligation.
The scrupulous ones try to segregate their personal business from their political power.
But in many cases, drawing a hard line between the two spheres of interest is not as simple as recusing oneself from a Senate discussion, committee or vote. This raises the question: That a politician that makes laws can sit on the board of a company that is affected by laws.
I think this has fallen through the cracks.
How much power Ottawa has to change the senate without a constitutional amendment, including imposing term limits, electing senators, or even the power to abolish it.
There may be more: Campbell is not the only senator who has had to recuse himself recently. While the direct conflicts of interest are apparent, there are more subtle conflicts that are just as relevant: How can senators manage the duties of their public service job, while running private businesses or serving as business directors?
While some senators continue to work in the jobs they had before their appointment — mostly lawyers, consultants, public speakers and landlords, and one Christmas tree farmer — at least 34 of the current 96 Senators the Senate count includes the suspended Senators also sit on the boards of public and private companies.
The companies operate in a wide range of industries, including some highly regulated sectors, from real estate, financial services, mining and energy, to gaming and lotteries and hygiene. While most senators are affiliated with privately held companies, at least 12 have paying positions with firms whose shares trade on major exchanges in Canada and the U.
Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto. Although the federal government introduced tougher disclosure rules for senators governing outside business interests, recent expense and housing-claims scandals have raised questions about whether this is enough without more transparency and accountability.
Hugh Segal, a Conservative senator and one of the more active outside the chamber, agrees the issue merits further inquiry. Long-time Liberal Senator David Smith goes even further.
Among the top earners: Most did not respond to interview requests or declined to comment when contacted by the Post. James Cowan, leader of the Senate caucus identifying as Liberal, withdrew from his law practice in Nova Scotia and stepped down as chancellor of Dalhousie University, Halifax, two years after he was appointed a senator in Segal, who sits on the boards of Just Energy Group Inc.
However, experts say sitting on corporate boards has become increasingly onerous in the past 13 years.
Their responsibilities and personal liabilities have also increased.OTTAWA: Prime Minister Justin Trudeau vowed a ‘firm’ and unwavering defense of Canadian interests in the face of US trade attacks, he said Friday. “We’re going to continue to work very.
Canada–United States relations refers to the bilateral relations between Canada and the United States of America. Relations between Canada and the United States of fought alongside the United States in most major conflicts since World War II, including Canada's chief diplomatic mission to the United States is the Canadian Embassy.
The Canadian military, like forces of other NATO countries, fought alongside the United States in most major conflicts since World War II, including the Korean War, the Gulf War, the Kosovo War, and most recently the war in Afghanistan. MONTREAL _ A Montreal borough is bringing in new rules aimed at limiting the number of short-term rentals in the city’s downtown core in the hopes of preventing conflicts between News Freeland calls tariffs ‘absurd’ after meeting U.S.
Senate committee. The Office I head up is focussed on preventing and resolving social conflicts between Canadian mining companies overseas and project-affected communities. There may now be some light at the end of the tunnel for companies subject to these conflicts between Canadian and US law.
Cross-border costs: If you're considering doing business in Canada, pay attention to taxes by STUART LYONS Tax principal and international practice leader at . The Canadian Revenue Agency issued Policy Statement PR2 to help nonresident companies determine if they are, in fact, carrying on business in Canada, which can be found on their website at torosgazete.com This statement includes 21 different scenarios, which are in-depth and explain why each is, or is not considered to be . Doing Business in the U.S. By Steve Sherman, LL.B, CPA The Treaty regularly overrides certain domestic U.S. and Canadian tax law and provides rules to resolve certain conflicts between each countries respective domestic law. The primary reason most Canadian companies incorporate in the US is to increase their US presence and .
will be required for the transfer of defence articles within a foreign business entity that is an approved end-user or consignee for those items, “including the transfer to dual nationals or third-country nationals.