Bill C-28 (Historical)

Financial Literacy Leader Act

An Act to amend the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada Act

This enactment amends the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada Act to create the position of Financial Literacy Leader within the Agency. The Leader is to be appointed by the Governor in Council to exercise leadership at the national level to strengthen the financial literacy of Canadians. The amendments also provide for the other powers, duties and functions of the Financial Literacy Leader.

Financial Literacy Leader Act

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting that the question is raised, because we have actually put in place 120 different tax reductions since 2006 when we formed government. We have made sure that Canadians do have more of their hard-earned money. An average family of four now keeps over $3,000 more than it did before. That is important. That is what we can do for Canadians, making sure that they keep more of their own money.

This legislation actually provides the information for them to be able to save more of their own money, to be able to invest it wisely, to be able to have a learned discussion with a financial adviser or someone who is simply providing them with an option for a registered retirement savings plan, perhaps even a tax-free savings account, which is one of the best vehicles that Canadians have had offered to them for saving for their retirement.

It is about the information, and we have actually reduced their costs. Now they can take some of that money and we can help them invest it wisely.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is important not only to talk about what is in the bill and what we have been doing, but also about the dissemination of information, as the minister brought up.

Many Canadians in today's technological age do not realize the information we should be disseminating and the information that we definitely should not be disseminating online. It is important that we raise that.

The awareness factor is something that has to be out there. A lot of my friends who are highly educated and have master's degrees do not realize that they are not very financially literate and do not understand how to calculate mortgage interest or credit card interest fees.

Regarding the awareness aspect of this, as the member for Edmonton—Leduc has acknowledged and done a great job in highlighting, could the minister talk about the impact on Canadians of our raising the awareness of this and having this debate on increasing their financial literacy?

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, this is a great opportunity. There were a number of witnesses at the finance committee, who are very much engaged in this and want to help people. The Financial Consumer Agency of Canada, FCAC, is doing a great job, especially with the addition of a leader who could focus specifically on this.

The FCAC has many other challenges ahead of it, but a financial literacy leader would be able to focus attention specifically on how we insert this into the educational system with our partners, the provinces, which hold the curriculum decisions. We think it is very important that there be a partnership there, that we start educating our children and even our seniors.

There is a lot of new technology. The fact is that one can now pay with a swipe of one's phone, which is pretty new technology for many Canadians. We need to make sure that they understand how that works. It looks like great technology, but we need to understand the challenges that go with it.

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to present the NDP's position on Bill C-28, which would create a financial literacy leader with the aim of improving financial literacy in Canada.

Let me start by saying that, obviously, an understanding of financial literacy is a good thing. Understanding how much the difference between a 5% and 5.5% APR will cost over the lifetime of a loan, how long it will take to pay off a credit card if only minimum payments are made each month, how much needs to be saved each month for school or for a car or to put money away for a down payment on a house, or for retirement, having this knowledge is clearly a benefit.

How do we get to the end point? As I said at committee, it is a little like golf. Some people hook. Others slice, but at the end of the day they are all trying to put the ball into the hole. Therefore, the question we must ask ourselves is: How well does the bill achieve its desired ends?

Unfortunately the bill, while a very small step, is not going to get us to the end point we all desire. For a start, the terms of reference for this position are extremely vague. While the holder of this post will be required to advance financial literacy, there is no definition of what constitutes financial literacy within the bill nor any attempt to define how we could or should advance it.

Moreover, the original recommendation to create this position was very clear on the need for an advisory council that would include labour, voluntary groups, educators and business stakeholders to direct the work of the financial literacy leader. The bill does not include any such measures to create this advisory council and, as such, there is very little in the way of accountability.

Additionally, there is no proviso in the bill that would ensure that this position is filled by someone who is fluently bilingual in both official languages. To me, and to the NDP, it would seem a necessary condition that someone who is expected to teach and encourage Canadians about financial literacy would be able to communicate in both French and English.

We in the NDP tried to address these problems at committee. We introduced six amendments, all of which were dismissed by the Conservative members of the finance committee. Most surprisingly, some of those nay votes seemed to contradict comments made by the Minister of State (Finance) in committee and here today.

When I asked the minister of state about the fact that bilingualism is not a legislative requirement in the bill, the minister replied that the ability to speak both official languages and to disseminate the information in both official languages will be mandatory. Yet just a week later when I tabled a motion to amend the bill to this effect, the Conservative members voted against the amendment on the grounds that they want to ensure that they can choose the right person.

We in the NDP believe that it is impossible to choose the right person if that person is not bilingual, because bilingualism is necessary to ensure that we are helping improve the financial literacy of all Canadians.

We are therefore left with a dilemma. The stakeholders that we have consulted have told us that the NDP approach is far superior to the bill that we are debating today, but unfortunately, and especially with the current government, the choice we are presented with is all or nothing, no compromise, no improvements. This is what is on the table and we can take it or leave it.

That is exactly what was on display at committee, where the Conservatives refused to accept even a single amendment. This approach is not good for the functioning of parliamentary democracy and it is not good for Canadians.

That is why we in the official opposition are not going to play these ideological games. Canadians want good governance and good public administration, and that is exactly what they will get when they elect their first NDP government in 2015.

That is why we in the NDP will be supporting the bill at third reading, not because we believe it is the big fix the Conservatives claim it is but because, for all its faults, passing the bill is better than the current status quo.

Unlike the Conservatives, we listen to stakeholders regardless of their political affiliations and we listen to their concerns when it comes to policy decisions. These groups have told us that the bill would be a small step in assisting their work and enhancing the financial literacy of Canadians.

Our concerns with the bill have certainly not disappeared. However, my colleagues and I will hold the government to account for all of the commitments that we have heard around their position, and when we form government in 2015, we will be in the position to correct all the problems that the party opposite is all too happy to ignore in order to score political points.

When we look at the bill, we should also look to place it within the broader policy changes that the Conservatives have brought forward in the past six years. For example, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada stats tell us that 26% of Canadians struggle with basic numeracy and 20% struggle with basic literacy. Yet the government that is trying to sell Canadians on financial literacy being the answer to their economic problems is the same one that cut $17.7 million from adult literacy programs in 2006. The Conservative government's approach is to give with one hand while taking away with the other.

It is clear that financial literacy is something that we cannot understand in a vacuum. In fact, during the committee process, my colleague from Quebec raised this issue with the minister of state. He said:

You mentioned curriculum. That is very much a key issue. When I was in my third year of high school—which is equivalent to grade 10, I believe—we had what was called an economic education program. It covered things like credit cards and bank accounts, but it also dealt with fundamental issues facing people such as unionization. We looked at everything from a macroeconomic perspective, taking a lot more into account than just financial markets.

Instead of strictly limiting the financial literacy discussion to financial markets, pensions and other really specific issues such as credit cards, don't you think we should widen the scope and talk about economic education in general? Taking that approach, we could work with the provinces to help them develop a curriculum component possibly for primary students, but especially for high school students, to educate all young people about the complexities of economics, beyond just the financial dimension.

The minister's response was simple and to the point. The minister said, “I certainly can't disagree with you: that needs to happen”.

When pushed on it, even the government agrees that we need a more comprehensive strategy than the one we have been presented with. Instead, we get a bill that includes recommendation one of the Task Force on Financial Literacy and ignores the other 29. The minister's response to this is that the financial leader has at his or her discretion the option to put in place many of the other 29 recommendations.

We would agree with recommendation one but not with ignoring all the others. What is the point of independent task force reports if the Conservatives simply pick and choose the parts they like? Recommendation two of the task force calls for the creation of an advisory council made up of financial institution members, educators, unions and other stakeholders to ensure that the financial literacy leader is properly guided.

The Conservatives were happy to say that they were introducing the first and most important recommendation, but what they are doing is equivalent to building a house without putting in a proper foundation. It is not enough to say that it could, will or should have been implemented. It should have been implemented side by side with the financial literacy leader legislation. To do otherwise is to say that it is not important to ensure that all voices are heard.

We in the NDP take a different approach, one that listens to a wide variety of voices and ensures that no Canadian gets left behind. We need to make finance more understandable, not just make people better at understanding it. Even for people who do not struggle with numeracy and literacy, finance is not a particularly comprehensible subject. Barrie McKenna, a business columnist for the Globe and Mail, states:

Looking to financial literacy to fill the void is like asking ordinary Canadians to be their own brain surgeons and airline pilots. The dizzying array of financial products, mixed with chaotic and increasingly irrational financial markets, makes the job of do-it-yourself financial planning almost impossible – no matter how literate you are. The average credit-card agreement is as intuitive as quantum physics.

We also need to ensure that Canadians are aware that sometimes it may not be in their best interest to take out certain financial products. Encouraging people to take out savings and investment funds creates lucrative fees for banks and brokers. In fact, according to Morningstar, an investment research company, Canadian fees for equity funds are some of the highest in the world, being on average around two and a half times higher than fees in the U.S. for example.

We need to ensure that our financial literacy regime will criticize plans where fund managers take a substantial fee regardless of the performance of the fund, that it will highlight funds like the CPP, regularly outperform private funds and it must communicate to people the need to weigh the inherent dangers of investing in the stock market. Unfortunately, without a definition of “financial literacy” and without an advisory council, we cannot be sure that this will be the case.

We as parliamentarians should also be wary about increasing the quantity of financial literacy available without ensuring its quality. We in the NDP understand that this is a possibility and introduced an amendment to improve the reporting requirements of the financial literacy leader. However, as seems par for the course, the Conservatives ignored the concerns and voted it down. This has two dangerous and interlinked consequences.

First, the model presents the possibility of shifting all blame off banks and onto consumers. At the individual level, people can begin to be blamed for their own uninformed choices and, at the national or even international levels, systemic problems are no longer the fault of banks that will lend beyond their means to individuals who borrow too much. Obviously, individuals do have a responsibility to manage their own finances but banks, hedge funds and other financial institutions have the ability to affect the economy in a much more profound way than individual consumers, and we must not forget that.

Second, what do we do for the people who actually end up worse off due to financial investments that fail? We have to understand that some people will lose their savings when businesses go bust or when the stock market drops. This has been the way the stock market has worked since the first recognizable stock exchange opened in Amsterdam in the 17th century.

What about those people who simply do not have the type of disposable income required to invest in their futures, the people who live paycheque to paycheque, the people who have seen their wages stagnate or fall in real terms since the mid-1990s? The government should recognize that for a very large portion of Canadians a lack of savings is a reflection of the disparity between the rise in the cost of living and the rise in wages over the last 15 years or so.

Encouraging savings is fine for people who have disposable income after they have paid for the essentials but, unfortunately, far too many people taking on debt is not a choice. It is the only way to survive.

An OECD report published in December 2011 pointed out that the trend toward a less progressive tax structure and a more unequal society here in Canada began in the mid-1990s under the then Liberal government and has continued since 2006 under the current government.

As famed Canadian economist, Jim Stanford, noted in his submission to the national task force:

Personal savings will never constitute an important source of financial security for the strong majority of Canadians who cannot save, given the paucity of their incomes.

If the government really wanted to give these people an opportunity to build their own savings, then it would regulate bank fees and the level of interest that is charged on credit cards in order to allow people to put a little bit aside each month to ensure that it can help with their savings.

Similarly, if the government wants to ensure that Canadians have adequate savings when they retire, the way forward is not to create a new and inherently risky vehicle for private savings. There are already multiple methods for Canadians to save for their futures, RRSPs and TFSAs spring to mind, if they have the funds available to invest.

These vehicles are already supported and funded by the government. In fact, studies have shown that the highest earning 11% of Canadians contribute more to RRSPs than the bottom 89% of tax filers combined. Because of the tax benefits of these investments in RRSPs, Canadian taxpayers subsidize that contribution by the top 11% of earners to the tune of $7.3 billion in annual net tax expenditures.

The creation of pooled registered pension plans, or PRPPs, therefore, only benefits those who are already able to invest in their retirement. It does nothing for the 30% of Canadian families who lack any form of retirement savings outside of CPP.

Encouraging people to invest in a risky vehicle on the stock market is not real leadership on financial planning. It again simply passes the entire risk and blame for an individual not having adequate retirement savings onto that individual. To make matters worse, the Conservatives have delayed the age at which Canadians are eligible for OAS from 65 to 67. It would make far more sense, if the government is really interested in Canadians' retirement security, in allowing Canadians to properly plan for their retirement, to reverse the changes to the eligibility age for OAS and, just as the NDP leader has done, make a commitment to the NDP plan to expand the guaranteed Canada/Quebec pension plan by phasing in an affordable doubling of benefits.

This plan has been called for by provinces across the country. It would allow Canadians both the ability to plan for their retirement and a guaranteed income to ensure they can retire with dignity. Moreover, the CPP is a much safer investment than market based private funds and consistently outperforms the market. Even business columnists, like the aforementioned Barrie McKenna of The Globe and Mail, pointed out the benefits of such a policy by stating:

And Ottawa could beef up the CPP, mandating Canadians sock away more money for retirement, while benefitting from the CPP's low costs.

However, so far, the government, and the Minister of Finance in particular, have not listened to this appeal for a real and proven way of ensuring Canadians can retire with dignity.

The problem is that the government seems to think that encouraging these skills is a suitable substitute for a proper regime of consumer protection, retirement security and a proper strategy for economic growth. The bill embodies the government's strategy, or lack of strategy, in addressing the issues that really matter to working and middle-class Canadians across the country.

I wonder why the creation of the financial literacy leader could not be included in the Financial System Review Act rather than being a stand-alone act? The Conservatives have no problem lumping together pieces of legislation that have no relationship to one another in omnibus budget bills but, apparently, a bill to amend the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada Act could not be included a system review of banking legislation. It appears to me that the only reason these did not go together was because the government hoped it could get some positive media out of this legislation, but who knows?

The NDP believes in real measures to protect consumers, seniors and low-income Canadians. My colleagues on this side of the House in the official opposition will continue to stand up for policies that really help hard-working Canadians. This is a small start, a very small step, and one which we will be supporting to send to the Senate in order to get the funds, which have already been allocated, out to the organizations that really need them.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague across the way for standing and speaking in favour of financial literacy, in moving forward with this legislation and sending it to the Senate.

It is obvious that there is a need for some financial literacy based on the speech that was just given. We talked about CPP outperforming the marketplace. I would like to know if the member opposite could break down how much the CPP has invested in the actual stock market. Does he know how much is in bonds, treasury bills and in common shares? I wonder if he understands that CPP is invested, actually, in the marketplace and the reason it is outperforming is because it is a pool.

He criticized the registered retirement pooled savings plan that we put together but the CPP actually is a pool of funds. That is why, based on reducing risk and spreading risk, it has been able to perform better. The fact is that the CPP is invested in the marketplace.

I appreciate his support but the NDP could use a little financial literacy.

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

Mr. Speaker, what the member forgot to mention is that the CPP is guaranteed and the PRPP is not. What we are calling for on this side is to ensure that Canadians can retire with dignity. The thing is that the Conservatives always forget the one tiny piece.

That is what I said about financial literacy. We need to ensure that Canadians have financial literacy but the financial literacy leader that the Conservatives are talking about and have brought forward is a very tiny step.

We encourage the Conservatives to bring forward this advisory council to ensure all French and English Canadians can get the education they need to ensure that we stop blaming individuals for the financial crisis. We need to ensure that they have the information they need and put the banks where they should be with the understanding that they have a responsibility with this as well.

[Annick Papillon, NDP, Québec, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the speech given by my hon. colleague from Sudbury, who demonstrated the importance of taking a stand regarding this bill on financial literacy. He also demonstrated what this could mean for Canadians on a day-to-day basis, and I thank him for that.

One point that I really appreciated, especially being the member for Québec, is the importance of having people who are competent as well as bilingual. We cannot overstate the importance of having bilingual government officials and the importance of having a bilingual financial literacy leader who understands people from Option consommateurs and the Union des consommateurs, and from all the provinces. I wish to thank my hon. colleague for that.

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

Mr. Speaker, financial literacy truly is important. As a person who has a French last name and comes from a French family, I am working hard on becoming fluent in French. I have been doing this for a few years now but to be able to say that I could do this quickly and understand the complexities of many situations would not be fair.

We are asking the government, and the Minister of State for Finance has already mentioned it in committee and here today in the House, that it will be mandatory to be bilingual for this position. This is truly important to ensure that all Canadians, French speaking or English speaking, get the financial literacy education they need. Hopefully, the Conservatives will stay true to their word.

[Claude Gravelle, NDP, Nickel Belt, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for Sudbury for educating the member for Burlington on pooled registered savings plans. Maybe he could hold a seminar and educate the rest of the members on the other side of the House.

After listening to his great speech about the work that was done in committee, it sounds to me like his committee works like the rest of the committees in this House of Commons. The Conservatives want us to support their bills so we can bring them to committee to make some change but, once the bill gets to committee, they absolutely refuse to make any changes. In this case, against the advice of the minister, they refused to make changes.

Would my hon. colleague tell me about the good changes that were suggested by the NDP?

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Nickel Belt for the great work that he does with me in the great city of greater Sudbury.

We proposed six amendments and, as I do not have time to talk about all of them, I will talk about three.

The first amendment was to ensure that the financial literacy leader, whomever the Conservatives hire, needs to be bilingual. That amendment was turned down.

We asked that a definition of financial literacy be included in the bill. That was pretty straight forward but it amendment was turned down.

We then asked that an advisory council be brought forward by looking at the recommendations of the task force. The second recommendation of the task force was that the financial literacy leader needed an advisory council. It recommended that the advisory council be made up of financial organizations, members from the industry, labour, education and other community stakeholders. All of these groups would then advise the financial literacy leader and ensure that the great work that is currently being done by all of the not for profits and other organizations that are already doing this work across the country would be able to work together with this financial literacy coordinator. The word “coordinator” was used several times in committee. The witnesses never used the word “leader”, but said that they needed someone to coordinate all of this. We presented this amendment and it also was turned down.

Obviously, the Conservatives had no interest in trying to make this a bill that works for everyone.

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we proposed six amendments to this bill that were all rejected. The one that interests me most is the advisory board. Could the hon. member could tell us a bit about the advantages of having an advisory board added to the legislation?

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to answer this question because that truly is important. If we look at what the advisory council's mandate and role are, it is to do what the title says, “advise the financial literacy leader”. No one person can be the expert on this subject, especially when there are so many great organizations right across the country, like the United Way, which are all doing great work when it comes to financial literacy. This advisory council is to ensure that we hear all perspectives from the education sector.

There are things that were talked about in committee. I quoted the minister and my hon. colleague from Quebec. We talked about ensuring that we could provide some type of financial literacy for the provinces to put into their education system. The financial literacy leader cannot do that, but he has to work with the educators, school boards and the provinces.

Right now, there is absolutely no framework in the bill to allow them to do this. Do we have concerns about that? Of course we do. Hearing from some of the stakeholders, they like having the financial literacy leader, though they also liked using the term “financial literacy coordinator”, which is important as well, as a first step so they can continue doing the great work they do. I hope the government stays true to its word and will ensure that the advisory council will be promoted and pushed for the financial literacy leader to implement as soon as this person is hired.

[The Acting Speaker, Barry Devolin]

It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Drummond, Fisheries and Oceans; the hon. member for Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, Aboriginal Affairs; and the hon. member for Thunder Bay—Superior North, Border Security.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise today to speak to Bill C-28, An Act to amend the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada Act, or more to the point, let us talk about having a financial literacy leader, or as my hon. colleague pointed out, financial literacy coordinator. It is necessary across all regions in the country for the sake of the troubled times that we have entered into. For that reason alone, having a person in charge of financial literacy is one that is necessary.

We are living in a different world than we used to. My father worked in one mill for over 40 years and he had what is called a defined benefit pension plan. Quite simply, when he retired, he had the same amount of money each and every month apportioned to him and the financial risk was taken on by the company. These types of pension plans are not as prevalent as they used to be.

What is happening is a lot of pension plans are becoming what is called the defined contribution plans, so the company contributes like they did before, but so does the individual contribute. The essential risk of a pension plan now falls on the shoulders of the individual worker or the person investing in that plan. There is a fundamental shift. People have to plan, if they take an annuity, how their asset mix is to be placed, which was done before in a defined benefit plan by the person in charge of the plan itself. Now we have entered a new age when there are a lot of people in that position.

The other aspect is there are a lot of people out there now who are in transient work. I say that for my riding in Newfoundland and Labrador because a lot of people there get work in other jurisdictions, especially when it comes to skilled labour.

In the early nineties, we had a collapse of the cod industry, which was the greatest massive layoff in the history of the province of Newfoundland and Labrador. A lot of government programs were put in place to educate people to give them the skills. Over the years that paid off tremendously. Within my riding, a tremendous amount of people are not at the wharf, not at the factory, not at the plant, but at the airport. They are going to places like Alberta, Saskatchewan, Russia, off the coast of Africa, drilling. They are going to eastern Russia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, parts of the North Sea, Norway. They are going to places that were considered to be unimaginable for so many people in my riding.

What does that mean? How does this equate to financial literacy because they are making very good money to sustain their families? The problem is the pension plans we used to rely on are not portable. These people have to be their own investor. They have to take on all the risk themselves, which is the most important aspect of having financial literacy. Because people are now investors and absorbing the risks, I would like to see more defined benefit plans. Why not? If 308 members of Parliament are eligible for a defined benefit plan, why can others not be? That is not the way it is going. The risk is falling on the particular individual and that is why financial literacy is so important.

Let us look at another aspect. Let us look at our youth today. Let us look at some of the numbers. We are indebted right now at $1.60 for every dollar that we bring in as income. This is not a good statistic, especially for the category of age 18 to 24, because they have actually fallen way behind before they have even started. A lot of that is consumer debt, which is the worst kind because there is no asset to show at the end of the day. Student debt is a big thing, but there is a degree to show for it and a education to get a high paying job. Whether they are mortgages, or automobiles to a lesser extent, or investments in RRSPs, pooled or not, these plans have a certain asset at the end of the day.

The problem is with the consumer debt and the high amount of interest on certain things, like credit cards either from a store or chartered bank, what happen is a lot of this debt will not show an asset at the end of the day and therefore it becomes that much more burdensome to all individuals, especially the young.

How do we get into a situation where we improve financial literacy? There has been a lot of talk about it in the House. The member for Edmonton—Leduc brought it up in the House during the past number of years and also had a motion passed in the House some time ago, which lends to the type of legislation we are debating today. I certainly commend him for that.

Because we are the national legislature, the federal institution, when it comes to the term “education”, according to our Constitution, it falls within the jurisdiction of the provinces. However, the federal government has a role to help coordinate some kind of educational program for the young people across the country. It is not just isolated to them, but certainly for high school students this could be an open window into the minds of our young as to how this will cripple their ability to financially support themselves and their families in the future.

Bill C-28 is a small step in that direction. As we talk here in third reading and send it to the Senate, it is a step in that direction.

We talked about the task force. My colleague, the member for Sudbury, talked quite a bit about the task force itself, the financial literacy task force with 30 recommendations, the vast majority of which are bona fide recommendations. Number one of which would be to have that coordinator, the financial literacy leader, which is most important.

If we look at the background of this, over the past little while we have talked about it a lot and now I would like to see more action given to a national financial literacy strategy, if I may be so bold as to call it that. We will make small steps along the way, and this is one of those steps that is necessary.

It is designed to create the position of a financial literacy leader and enforces the consumer provisions applicable to federal financial institutions. It is all coached within the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada. This is the particular agency that provides a lot of this information. I would like to see it be more proactive in its education. Nevertheless, it does have ability and the resources and now because of the bill, it will get more resources to make that possible, certainly under the guise of the financial literacy leader.

The legislative summary is from the Library of Parliament, and I would like to congratulate the library for the wonderful work it does.

The FCAC, the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada, monitors the financial services sector self-regulatory measures designed to protect consumers and small businesses. Again, we are in the situation where those who do not have the benefit of being a large company cannot really provide a lot of resources to looking after a lot of this material. What the government ends up doing is taking on that responsibility to provide a source of information for individuals and smaller businesses unable to afford to get the right advice, or a substantial amount of advice, to make that decision.

It also promotes consumer awareness and understanding of the financial services sector and responds to selected consumer inquiries. One point about that is very important, and that is the financial adviser. There are thousands and thousands of financial advisers across the country. I always like to recommend to people that they see a financial adviser especially those who have a skilled trade and find themselves working for a particular company for a short period of time, then another one and another one.

People are working for a 40-year span of their lives. Nowadays the idea of working for one company for over 40 years is a very rare thing. It happened many years ago for my family in a small town with a big plant, but now these situations do not happen as regularly as they used to. I would suggest people see financial advisers because they are the ones that take on the risk.

They could be pipefitters, electricians or carpenters. They are not necessarily financial experts. Many of them do not want to be. However, there is certainly a level of financial literacy that has to be attained in order for these people to support themselves as they move on from work, or if something happens to them and they have no choice but to leave the workforce because of a long-term disability or something of that nature.

It is certainly incumbent upon us to take the risk, but it is also incumbent upon us to learn about the financial tools out there to help us and to see what is available to us in order to plan over the long term.

The government has a large role, both provincial and federal, to ensure that financial literacy is a key learning tool for many of our young people and certainly for middle-aged people who have not even started to think about retirement.

I mentioned earlier the people who do not have access to a portable pension. The largest portable pension is the CPP, but whether it is the combination of the Canada pension plan and old age security coming together, it does not replace the income we had while we were working. It is a very low percentage. Therefore, for people who invest on their own, that would probably become the majority of their income as they enter into retirement years or if they face something like a long-term disability.

I have talked quite a bit about pensions, which I think is the ultimate example of financial literacy. This is important because we now have a substantial amount of people retiring. I am basically talking about the baby boomer age group, as we affectionately call it.

The 2011 federal budget announced $3 million annually to undertake financial literacy initiatives. This amount was in addition to what was provided to the FCAC, which is a $2 million fund. When we talk about the financial literacy leader, the terms of the provision are clauses 3, 5 and 7 of the bill.

The objective of the leader is to provide national leadership in strengthening financial literacy. Whether we call the person a financial literacy leader or coordinator is a question of semantics, but we get the idea that the person has to take a very large role in the lives of others. They have to coordinate across many sectors, federal and provincial, French and English, as well as first nations.

This is a huge task for this person and one that is worthy. Obviously any task that is asked by Parliament and by government is worthy, but this one also has to be contemplated and well-financed, which is why the $3 million is key here as the additional budgetary amount. In looking at this in depth, the powers, duties and functions of this particular person are also key to ensuring success is there.

I mentioned earlier that this is a small step toward improving financial literacy in this country. There is no doubt about that, but let us take a look at the financial literacy leader in this particular situation. The Commissioner of the FCAC may impose an assessment on any financial institution in order to recover some or all of the expenses associated with initiatives designed to strengthen the financial literacy of Canadians. It is putting some of that burden onto the financial sector, which is a great idea.

As is the case for Her Majesty, the Minister of Finance, and the commissioner, deputy commissioners, officers and employees of the FCAC, no action may be taken against the financial literacy leader for anything he or she does or omits to do in good faith in administering or discharging the powers or duties of the position of financial literacy leader. This is also a very important aspect. It allows this person to function in the way a person should function whose goal is to increase the amount of financial literacy across this country. We would not want to see this person chained into a position where they find themselves being suffocated, for lack of a better word, by rules and regulations and by their own machinery. It allows this person to go above and beyond the call of duty if that person chooses to do so.

The bill says the financial literacy leader will report to Parliament, and there is also a clause about civil proceedings.

The final point from the Library of Parliament is that financial literacy is frequently a topic of interest to parliamentarians, which it has been for quite some time. I mentioned my hon. colleague from Edmonton—Leduc. The issue has been discussed in parliamentary committee reports. We also heard from the member for Sudbury, who talked about six possible amendments. These were not accepted, but nonetheless, the discussion was there and I think some of them are quite noteworthy and noble in their cause.

We talked about the 30 recommendations from the task force. One of the recommendations my colleague from Sudbury brought up was about the advisory council, which I think is a positive step in the right direction as well.

What we see here are many facets of the industry, including those who are workers, such as the people I meet every weekend when I am at the airport and they are on their way to whatever job it is they have in the oil and gas sector. These are people who belong to building trades associations, or unions for that matter. They certainly do have quite a bit of input in how we can improve financial literacy.

Also, the issue has been mentioned in the House of Commons, including in the context of the private member's motion, Motion No. 269, by the member for Edmonton—Leduc, who is also the chair of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance. The conversation we had centred around the importance of financial literacy and how we have moved ahead into what I would deem is a brave new world for all citizens who work in this country.

As I mentioned before, there is the Canada pension plan and old age security. If people do not have the CPP, they are most likely eligible for the guaranteed income supplement. These measures do not displace the income that people earned, and certainly not if people work in the oil and gas sector where wages are so high and all of a sudden they find themselves out of work, through no fault of their own, such with a long-term disability.

Financial planning at the earliest age and financial literacy plays a very important role for many years to come. It someone gets injured on the job at the age of 25 to 30, think about how many years he or she has to recover based on his or her investments in a very short period of time. This is where financial literacy becomes that much more important. We get calls at our office every day about this.

This particular legislation, Bill C-28, required a ways and means motion as it would give the Commissioner of the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada the authority to impose a financial levy against any financial institution, as I mentioned, in order to pay for expenses related to financial literacy initiatives. During the committee study, officials also told finance committee that the government would increase the annual budget for the FCAC from $2 million to $5 million.

A significant contributor to rising household debt, which we talked about some time ago, was mortgages. One of the things I think was necessary was reducing the mortgages with 40-year amortization down to about 25 years. I think it was necessary because zero-down, 40-year mortgages were causing more problems than not. We found ourselves in a situation similar to that in the United States, where they had sub-par loans that caused ripples around the world that have lasted for years. That was not the only thing but certainly that was the genesis of it, the spark. That is one part of it that had to come down.

We are taking measures in addition to this that help financial literacy and certainly help the average consumer cope.

The danger in having zero-down, 40-year amortization mortgages is that, as we have seen, it is way too much risk to take on. We end up elevating ourselves to the statistic I read earlier, which is $1.63 in debt for every dollar that we bring in. Nations in the world are in the same ratio. In Europe right now, nations that we considered financially sound are no longer as sound.

In looking at this, I would say that many of the questions that we had asked prior to third reading were addressed in committee.

The financial literacy leader will not have his or her own office. Instead, he or she will operate out of the office of the FCAC. That was one of the questions we brought up.

There are no plans to use Bill C-28 to levy an assessment on banks to pay for financial literacy. It should be noted the FCAC already had the power to levy assessments against banks under legislation brought forward when the FCAC was created.

There was also, of course, the question about the anticipated cost, the extra $3 million for this particular individual.

Again, I would agree with my colleague that the advisory council should also be a second part to this. I am certainly willing to say yes to this, as a precursor to that step in the future.

I will go back to what I talked about in the beginning. This is a brave new world. It is one that compels our children to be that much more financially literate, to the point where this is a step in the right direction.

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Cooperation]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to hear my colleague speak to the good things that are going on with financial literacy and the things that our government is trying to accomplish. He highlighted a number of reasons why it is necessary. The world has changed, as he said, from a time perhaps long gone when individuals could depend on company policies or pension plans. The world is a different place.

I would like to highlight the great work of my young nephew. As a young person out of high school who did not have a lot of financial literacy, he got involved, educated himself and is now making a very respectable annual income on earnings from his stock.

I think about what my colleague has said about developing new skills and becoming financially aware. I wonder if he could speak to the benefits that this is going to have for his own constituents, who are going to be changing jobs maybe two or three times in their careers. How is this going to impact his own constituents?