Finance Committee on Feb. 27th, 2024

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you, Ms. Jhamb.

I also appreciate that ACORN has shared concerns about the loopholes in draft regulations, specifically loopholes for pawn loans and commercial loans. I think it is a very important time to be sharing those concerns so that those regulations might be amended and improved upon.

I have about a minute or so left. Could you share in this last minute a summary of those concerns around how ACORN would like to see these draft regulations improved so that the experience that Ms. Borden shared earlier...? The intent is that this doesn't happen to folks in my community and others across the country.

Can you briefly share how you'd like to see these regulations improved to get rid of these loopholes?

[Dr. Bhumika Jhamb]

Sure.

We are mostly in agreement with the draft regulations, except for the fact that there was an exemption specifically mentioned with respect to pawn loans, for which the amount is equivalent to $1,500 or $1,000, as I recall, or lower.

We spoke to a lot of ACORN members about this issue, and we know that a lot of people who have pawned their gold or whatever have never been able to get it back because of the predatory interest rate that pawn loans carry. It's the argument that pawn loans should be regulated in the same way. As the government further lowers the predatory interest rate, pawn loans should not be exempt.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, MP Morrice.

You'll have another opportunity.

I'll now go to MP Baker.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thanks very much, Chair.

I expressed earlier my disappointment that the Canadian Lenders Association didn't appear. I want to reiterate some of the reasons I'm disappointed.

I'm disappointed because they were a feature witness for this study. They've been putting significant resources out there to communicate their point of view, which I think is misinformation, in my personal view. They had confirmed attendance as of Friday, and then suddenly they cancelled. One would think they'd want to make themselves available to share with MPs their point of view. This was also an opportunity for us to learn more about the subject and learn about the allegations—the misinformed allegations, in my view—that they're putting out into the public.

I think it's really important that we send a message as a committee that we're disappointed with the fact that they haven't appeared, especially with the fact that it was a last-minute refusal to appear, given that they had initially confirmed. I also think it's important that we get answers to the questions and get the information that I think we would have sought from them—which we have been seeking from our wonderful witnesses who are here today, whose presence we appreciate—and obtain the information that a representative from the Canadian Lenders Association could have provided but who chose not to appear to provide.

I would like to move a motion, Chair, on the subject. I am willing to pause to make sure we distribute copies in both official languages. I can pass them to the clerk so that the interpreters have a moment to look at them as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Let's give everybody a moment to receive those.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

When you're ready, Chair, let me know and I'll read the motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

It's being sent electronically, but there are also hard copies coming around.

Has everyone received a copy?

I think you're good, MP Baker. Go ahead and read it into the record.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

It reads as follows:

Given high-cost installment loans are the second fastest-growing type of debt in Canada; and that these products are disproportionately accessed by low-income Canadians;

Given that high-cost loans tend to aggravate, not alleviate existing financial challenges, where Canadians resorting to these loans have ended up in vicious cycles of debt as they struggle to cover the increased cost of bills;

Given the Canadian Lenders Association’s extensive lobbying since the release of regulations in December 2023 to be excluded from the scope of regulations, while refusing to publicly appear at committee to discuss their position;

That the committee express its disappointment in the Canadian Lenders Association's last-minute refusal to appear as part of the committee’s current study;

That, in the context of its study on predatory lending, and pursuant to Standing Order 108(1)(a), the committee send for any documents from the Canadian Lenders Association and its member organizations related to the following:

i. The total revenues and profits of CLA’s membership, specifically of all publicly traded companies such as Goeasy Ltd;

ii. Goeasy Ltd. and Easy Financial’s total revenues in the province of Quebec in 2022 and 2023; given the rapid increase in high-cost lending services in the province, despite the maximum APR of 35%;

iii. The total number and value of high-cost agreements granted in 2022 and 2023, broken down by province and territory;

iv. The dollar value of the CLA’s advertising campaign regarding changes to the criminal rate of interest, and how much of that cost is borne by borrowers’ repayments;

v. All executive compensation and bonuses, including for the CLA’s entire executive and board;

That the committee receive the information no later than Monday, March 18th, 2024.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, MP Baker.

MP Chambers, do you have a comment on this?

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Thanks very much, Mr. Chair. We're just getting this for the first time, but at least....

It's unfortunate—and I wish the clerk well—that we don't have Mr. Roger here to discuss how we got to this place.

My understanding is that the CLA was refused an appearance if Goeasy was unavailable, so there might be a little bit of broken telephone here on why someone may or may not be available. The accessibility of headsets to somebody, as was raised by Ms. Thompson, was certainly, in my understanding, an issue.

I would also ask—

[Joanne Thompson, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

I would like to speak on a point of order.

To clarify, I didn't mention headsets. I mentioned hybrid as an ease to witness availability, so please, let's not confuse that issue.

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Sure. Ms. Thompson correctly identified that hybrid is an option, but in order to participate in a hybrid meeting, someone needs an approved headset, which I understand was not possible in this circumstance. I don't know how we get headsets to remote locations in the world, but in my understanding that was not possible. When that person was not allowed or could not appear, the CLA was told that because the one individual could not appear it could not appear.

It seems to me that the government really wanted one individual to appear, and that person was unavailable. Instead of being flexible, government members refused to be flexible and said that we had to have the date for the meeting at this time—and here we are.

I don't understand. Number one, there is a thing called Google and reading financial statements. I'll reserve judgment on the rest of the motion, but I think we may be able to solve this in a relatively more reasonable way if we have a bit more information or a bit of flexibility on what happens in timing.

To be honest, I'm not sure I personally want to extend this study. We have a bunch of other things on the docket. We should have swapped something else in for today until we had the witnesses that the government absolutely wanted to have. I don't know why we proceeded in the way we did. I would be willing to give the chair and the clerk much more flexibility in the future to make sure that, if there is a witness we absolutely want to have, they're available.

I don't know why we pushed through today, and now we're using that as an example, knowing that it was not possible. We're using that to kind of create the grocery experience here for the government. That is totally fine. It's the government's prerogative, but we probably could have had a moment in the sun if we had just let them come a different day. I don't quite understand why we're here, but we'll take it under advisement.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, MP Chambers.

I have MP Lawrence next.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

My apologies to the witnesses for having to listen to, as I believe Daniel called it, this business today. You have my apologies, and thank you very much for your testimony.

I would like to move the following amendment. It would commence at the very beginning of the motion.

I apologize, because I'm just doing this orally, so I don't have it in French. I will speak very slowly and we can have it translated quickly.

It reads as follows: “Given that after eight years of this NDP-Liberal government, Canadians are facing the worst economy since the Great Depression”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

On the amendment to the motion, go ahead, MP Baker.

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

From my point of view, I think the intent of the original motion was to get the information that we could have obtained if the Canadian Lenders Association had been present. We could have asked the appropriate questions to get the information we need. The purpose of the original motion was to achieve that goal and to send a message of disappointment about their choosing not to appear.

To me, this addition is basically the Conservatives playing politics. I think we should refocus on why we're here, which is to make sure we get the information we need from folks who are out there dedicating a tremendous number of resources to advocate on this issue and who, in my view, were available and chose not to appear.

I'm opposed to the amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

We have MP Lawrence and then MP Morantz.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

Thank you for that.

This is, I think, appropriate context. Even in the meeting I believe there were actually multiple rounds of questions with respect to the economic context that is motivating or animating individuals to take on loans and to take on additional credit, some of it “fair” and some of it “unfair”.

All that's meant by this is to add the additional context that, in an economy where the GDP per capita has grown by just shy of 5% over the last 10 years and where Canadians have record food bank usage, that is no doubt motivating individuals, or maybe “forcing” is the right word, to take on “unfair” credit. I think leaving that out does not tell the full story.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Go ahead, MP Morantz.

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I wanted to add a little bit more context to this discussion. Last night I received an email from Mr. Schwartz from the Canadian Lenders Association. It was sent to my non—

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Let me interrupt for a second, MP Morantz.

The preamble that's asked for in this amendment is not admissible. It comes in as debate and is not admissible. It is not in keeping with the spirit of the motion, so it is not admissible. I've just conferred with the clerk.

Go ahead, MP Lawrence.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

I would bring another amendment, then. I'll read the first part of the motion and then read the amendment.

The motion says, “Given high-cost installment loans are the second fastest-growing type of debt in Canada; and that these products are disproportionately accessed by low-income Canadians”. The amendment would add, “and given that there are additional low-income Canadians because Canada's per capita growth has been less than 5% over the last 10 years”.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

A point of order, Mr. Chair.

I think you will find that there is unanimous consent from the committee to release the witnesses.

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.