Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm a little troubled by what I'm hearing, Mr. Chair. What I've heard the NDP say is that they want to see us adopt this and study it in the fall, which is completely unrealistic if you look at the calendar.
According to the calendar we'll have Mr. Hoback's study in the fall. I'm quite troubled by what Ms. Nash said, and I find it quite negative toward Mr. Hoback's motion. I would strongly implore the NDP to actually look at Industry Canada's report.
Just so we're very clear, Industry Canada's report focused on e-commerce, focused on expanding broadband, focused on reducing red tape, focused on fighting wireless spam, focused on the shortage of labour in IT, focused on a directory for R and D programs within the government, focused on a code of conduct for consumers and retailers—which is addressed, by the way, in economic action plan 2013; there is a plan underfoot to have a new consumer code. And the report also focused on government being a model for e-commerce, and it focused on literacy.
It did not deal, not one iota, with the problem that is being addressed right now in our offices. I'm getting calls, and I know Mr. Hoback is getting calls, because people don't know what their rights are with regard to tap-and-go payments. They don't know how the banks are going to treat the competition that exists between one and another, and other providers of electronic wallets.
This government needs to make recommendations at some point on how we regulate these things. Without a study, it is very difficult for a government to get the best practices and get the input. That is the responsibility of this committee, to help government develop policies that actually protect Canadians, and particularly protect consumers.
That is what is of interest to this side of the committee. If we don't address how the fees will occur, if we don't address whether debit will be allowed on the same electronic wallet as two different credit cards that compete with one another, if we don't address whether advertising will be allowed and those kinds of things, we are going to have some very confused Canadians, as they already are as tap-and-gos begin to make their way into our society.
This is pressing. It will further complicate the ability of consumers to do their finances in a prudent and knowledgeable way. It addresses the fact that we want them to be literate in financial areas, and it is a hugely pressing study. For the NDP to suggest that it is not, and suggest that we can just set that study aside is disrespectful to Mr. Hoback. It's also, frankly, unfair of Ms. Nash because we had a conversation about it being the government's intention to look at this, and then the motion was put forward to pre-empt the motion from Mr. Hoback. If we're going to work collaboratively, those things cannot happen and we have to be honest about what is before us.
The industry committee did a good report but it had nothing to do with banks and regulation, which is clearly a finance committee responsibility. I take my responsibilities very seriously, Mr. Chair. I intend to see that Mr. Hoback's study takes place and in another time and another place this might have been a motion that would have fit in the calendar but it is just not possible at this point.