This amendment does not concern at all the criminal aspect, it deals with something else. The criminal act of identity theft must be dealt with elsewhere. Here, we only deal with responsibility. When there is identity theft, is the consumer responsible for the loss or is it the bank? For example, if someone fraudulently takes out a mortgage on your house, the provision proposed in this amendment says that the bank must take responsibility because it is its mistake. Therefore, it will have to go and recover the money, while at the present time, as we have seen in previous court decisions, it is the victim of the fraud who must pay the mortgage and seek reimbursement from the thief.
As for the fact that this is not within the scope of the bill, I would say that the concept here, the key word that must be considered, is not the identity theft but rather the responsibility for the mortgage. It seems to me this is clearly part of the Banking Act. Since we are amending the Banking Act and the minister said he was open to suggestions, I believe we should at least consider this matter and we will see at the report stage what will happen. We still should find out whether the members of this Committee agree to hold banks responsible in this regard.