Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. The Competition Bureau welcomes the opportunity to take part in the committee's study of ABM fees and electronic payments. My comments today will focus on the 1996 Competition Tribunal order concerning Interac. However, I would first like to briefly describe the mandate and the role of the Competition Bureau.
The Commissioner of Competition is responsible for the administration and enforcement of the Competition Act. The purpose of the act is to maintain and encourage competition in Canada in order to promote the efficiency and adaptability of the Canadian economy and to provide consumers with competitive prices and product choices.
As you will appreciate, the bureau routinely receives complaints from consumers saying that they believe prices are too high or that competitors charge similar prices or have increased their prices in unison. Other complaints frequently allege profits or price gouging.
It is important to understand that high prices and profits in and of themselves are not contrary to any of the provisions of the Competition Act. However, when high prices are the result of anti-competitive conduct circumscribed by the Competition Act, the bureau will deal with those situations expeditiously.
Agreements among competitors to fix or raise prices are subject to the severe criminal conspiracy provisions of the act, the penalties for which include heavy fines and jail terms.
In addition, the act deals with potentially anti-competitive conduct that has prevented or lessened or is likely to prevent or lessen competition, whether it be anti-competitive mergers or abuses of a dominant position aimed at eliminating or excluding competitors from the market.
One of the major investigations under the abuse provisions in the 1990s involved the Interac Association which operates the network that allows customers to make withdrawals from ABMs not belonging to their own bank. Originally, Interac was dominated by a small number of large deposit-taking institutions. Rules imposed by these few members restricted access to the network, impeded innovation, and limited competition in providing banking service to merchants and consumers.
The bureau's investigation of Interac focused on practices that limited competition in the supply of network services to both businesses and consumers. The practices included the following: limiting membership to deposit-taking institutions; charging prohibitively high initiation fees for new members who weren't among the nine members at the time; having restrictions that impeded the introduction of new services or innovative products; and prohibiting charges for ABM use, which discouraged the placement of ABMs and deprived consumers of the benefits of widespread ABM deployment determined by market forces and not by the association.
In June 1996, the Competition Tribunal issued a consent order against Interac that not only prohibited these anti-competitive acts but also put in place changes necessary to restore competition in the affected markets. The order required Interac to open its network to potential participants; collect fees based solely on a user or transaction basis; broaden the governance of the association; make the network available for additional types of accounts and new services; and remove the prohibition on surcharges, which are now known as convenience fees.
The order did not in any way mandate or regulate the imposition of surcharges. However, allowing surcharges permitted operators of ABMs to determine and charge a competitive price for ABM services based on their costs, consumer demand and other relevant market factors.
Consequently, consumers have benefited from the placement of ABMs in all parts of Canada in accordance with market forces. Following the 1996 order, the number of ABMs increased from 12,800 in 1995 to 55,000 in 2006. In fact, Canada has the highest number of ABMs per capita, and we are among the heaviest users of ABMs.
To reiterate, the order does not regulate the convenience fees that ABM operators charge consumers, nor does it require that they charge any fee at all. Furthermore, the order does not deal with network access fees, so-called Interac fees, or any other account-related fees connected with cash withdrawals or debit transactions.
I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.