The answer is interesting, because we heard from a Fintechs Canada representative, who told us that the problem stems from credit card issuers. He was basically saying that they themselves were simply customer service manufacturers. When we draft the committee's report, I think we'll have to look at the issue of fintechs offering these payment options, particularly for food.
I will now turn to Superintendent Lang, from the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy, since time is short.
When credit cards are used as a financial tool to borrow over the longer term, they strike me as toxic credit tools.
The Office de la protection du consommateur au Québec, or OPC, considers a 35% interest rate to be usurious. As a result, to exceed the 23% or 24% rates on some credit cards, you almost have to do business with organized crime. That means that we really find ourselves at the top of the rate range.
For my part, I note that banks advertise credit cards far more than all the other products that could better suit clients, including personal loans at a preferential rate, plus 1%, lines of credit at lower interest rates, and so on. That's not a scientific observation; it's just an observation.
Here is my question.
For certain toxic substances, such as alcohol, lotteries and cigarettes, there are mandatory education programs to accompany these products.
Shouldn't we have strong warnings about credit card offers? Shouldn't we also, in a way, require banks and issuers to offer other less expensive products to their customers, if these are tools used to borrow over the longer term?