—who threw out the word “banks” as an example of where communities are all protected and that there is equality. If anybody thinks that, we're dreaming.
Let me add one more point, and that has to do with your point, Mr. Chairperson, on the Superintendent of Financial Institutions.
I just sat through a committee hearing with the superintendent, and I tried, on a whole set of issues, to ask for some comment, whether we're talking about payday lenders, or income trusts, or banking, on some serious problems in terms of competition, in terms of access, in terms of equality. Each and every time, the superintendent said, “That is not my field; that is not my area. Don't forget the word “prudential”. If I teach you anything it's the word 'prudential'.”
In other words, the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions does not do what you said. That is erroneous; that is not correct. They simply look at it from the point of view of a business decision.
I can't believe that you're going to try to create the impression with this committee, on record, that the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions is going to somehow play a key role in ensuring that all of these mortgage lenders coming onto the scene are not only going to have a good, sound business plan, but they're also going to be worried about all regions and groups in this country, regardless of profitability. I think that's exactly why these amendments are here, and you're not doing a very good service. This government is not playing a responsible role, as it said it would before the election and during the election, around accountability, transparency, and openness. I think it's a big mistake not to do something.
These might not be the perfect amendments, but I'm surprised, Mr. Turner. You opened up this issue—
