Finance Committee on April 23rd, 2026

[Sandra Cobena, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

What impact does this increased indebtedness, especially amongst young Canadians, have on things like family formation, for instance?

[Grant Bazian]

I take it you mean just having families. Obviously you'd probably have to ask them directly. When people come to see us, we don't ask if their debt is stopping them from having a family, but I think that younger Canadians are having fewer children so that may be part of it. They may be fearful of starting a family if they can't afford living on their own with their current debt obligations.

[Sandra Cobena, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

In your recent consumer debt index report, it said that one-third of Canadians—roughly 32%—could not absorb an interest rate hike. Of course, given the statistics that we're talking about, that's intuitive.

With many Canadians increasingly relying on debt to cover basic expenses like food, could you describe what even a slight increase in interest rates would do to those who are struggling the most?

[Grant Bazian]

Yes, it pushes them closer to a tipping point. Every time there's an interest rate increase or some sort of inflationary measure that causes consumer goods to increase, it pushes people closer to coming to see us and maybe doing a formal insolvency filing like a bankruptcy or proposal. The tipping point would vary per individual, but it does inch them closer towards having to come and see a trustee.

[Sandra Cobena, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Of course, we're doing the study because we want to understand what is driving this trend of increasing indebtedness, and why Canadians are having to rely on credit card debt for basic needs. It's also to get your recommendations in terms of how we can break this trend. We are seeing this trend. It's been consistent, even post-COVID.

Some of the solutions are one-time handouts here and there, but what would be your recommendations in terms of a longer term, sustainable solution that Canadians who find themselves in that situation would need?

[Grant Bazian]

That goes back to some of our original comments. The financial gap has to be closed. Not all Canadians but many people who come to see us do not understand how interest works. They don't understand the financial burden that they're putting themselves in, and that just by making a minimum payment, how long that debt becomes normalized. I think that's a fundamental part of it. That's a root cause. It's education.

A lot of people know how to do a budget, and a lot of people understand how interest works, but they still come to see us, because they simply can't afford to live the way they have been. Sometimes they make bad decisions. They try to keep up with the Joneses. They're overspending for that purpose. A lot of people are having a hard time just making ends meet. Their income is insufficient to pay their rent and their interest obligations. It's a combination of all of those.

Fundamentally, to answer your question, I would say education is a big component of it. Somehow it's changing the psyche, the culture—that long-term indebtedness is normal. I think that's a big problem that we're seeing.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Thank you very much, Ms. Cobena. That concludes your time.

We'll finish this hour with Mr. Turnbull for five minutes.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Thanks, Chair.

Thanks to all the witnesses for being here today.

I just wanted to state on the record that statistics show that wages have outpaced inflation for over three years. The latest results actually show that wages are growing at over twice the rate of inflation, so that's just to ground us in facts and statistics. I know Conservatives particularly don't like hearing that stat, but it is the truth.

We've heard about a K-shaped economy, with the idea that the people who are in the lowest, most vulnerable positions are the ones who are being most impacted.

We did an analysis in my office recently about all the supports we've wrapped around all the different cost of living pressures that are on families. For roughly an average family of four, we totalled the income tax cut, the CCB—the child care benefit—dental care, the groceries and essentials benefit and the national school food program. All of these things add up to about $30,000 per year. That's significant support.

Can you speak to how much those things have helped alleviate a problem that would be much worse today if those weren't in place?

[Grant Bazian]

We haven't done a study to come up with that answer. All I can say is that people coming into our offices simply can't make ends meet, despite any subsidies that are out there.

All of those are helpful. I think they're interim solutions, and whether or not they are long-term solutions is questionable. That's what we're facing. People are coming in. They're spending more than they're earning, and they're having a hard time making ends meet with the income they have.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Thanks very much.

I'm going to hand it to my colleague, Karim Bardeesy, for some questions now.

[Karim Bardeesy, Liberal, Taiaiako'n—Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Turnbull.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I have a few questions for Mr. Dijkema.

Thank you for sharing some of the facts and figures around the impacts of online sports betting in Canada. I will throw a few more on the table. For Ontario Internet gaming, the cash wagers increased 31% year over year from September 2024 to 2025, and it now has $8.6 billion in receipts. As well, 89% of sports gambling-related accounts are opened by boys and men aged 15 to 44, and people who self-report problems with online gambling, self-report at a rate 45 times greater than those who are primarily lottery users. We have some big issues here.

I want to get into some of the issues. I'll ask you a series of short questions.

Who's making money in the sector? Who are the beneficiaries? We've heard about the costs. Who's benefiting?

[Brian Dijkema]

The primary beneficiary is actually the state, and that's something we've argued for a long time. Many people are concerned about the fact that there is.... They're worried about the people, and I think that's exactly right.

What we have argued at Cardus and what the data shows is that gambling revenues effectively function as a tax, and particularly it's a tax on the vulnerable. We've done studies on who is betting, and those with the lowest incomes bet the highest proportion of their income on it. It's regressive in nature. We have the state as the primary beneficiary, and then you have large companies, like BetMGM and others, that have created that and who are getting the most.

[Karim Bardeesy, Liberal, Taiaiako'n—Parkdale—High Park, ON]

What are the responsibilities of teams, leagues and broadcasters in this industry?

[Brian Dijkema]

Unfortunately, the leagues are also addicted. They had a number of people moving away from their sports so they turned to sports betting to drive revenues. In 1990, the NFL commissioner said, “Nothing has done more to despoil the games [that we] play and watch than widespread gambling on them.” Many players themselves don't like it. They say they're not animals to be bet on. Unfortunately, they're hooked to the revenue, and it's a huge challenge for them.

[Karim Bardeesy, Liberal, Taiaiako'n—Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Is this kind of economic activity worth the cost?

[Brian Dijkema]

It is not. There's nothing wrong with betting. I would be happy to play poker with you and give you my money because I'd probably lose, but the reality is that what we have is an architectural structure, a choice structure, that is actually taking money out of people's pockets and putting it into the pocket of the state without the accountability that we normally have.

[Karim Bardeesy, Liberal, Taiaiako'n—Parkdale—High Park, ON]

You've shared some of the addictive features of online gaming and how a positive, pleasurable sports experience can become tainted. You've described a bit about what your think tank does, and it's also animated by Christian values. I just want to understand a bit of what “better” looks like. We have Bill C-211 to help regulate the online sports betting and advertising sector. What else does “better” look like?

[Brian Dijkema]

One would be to actually stop the advertising. We know that advertising works. That's why people spend money on it, so stopping that would actually prevent people from putting more and more of their money into it. It's also important to change the architecture. They're actually preying on your imagination. Rather than the work of buying a house, doing all the work or starting a business, it's just “imagine the freedom”, and that's a huge challenge. Getting rid of that is one.

The other is to look at how we actually take that money. We suggest moving it out of the consolidated revenue fund. One of the things we suggest is to create prize-linked savings accounts, which allow people to bet but those monies stay in savings accounts that can actually be used as a savings regime.

We know that people who have less than $250 in their accounts are more than five times more likely to use things like payday loans. We're suggesting that the state should get it out of its consolidated revenue fund, stop it being a tax and increase it being a savings vehicle for people, like they've done in France and England.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Great. Thank you very much, Mr. Dijkema.

That concludes the time we have allocated for today's meeting. On behalf of the committee, I would really like to thank the witnesses for their time and their efforts today.

If it is the will of the committee, we shall adjourn.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Great. Have a great weekend, everyone. Thank you.