Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to participate in the debate on this important bill. We have been talking about this bill for more than seven years, and we are at least two years late in dealing with legislation on financial institutions.
First of all, I would like to congratulate my colleague, the hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, on his hard work in the finance committee, his exceptional contribution, and the amendments he has moved on the legislation of banks and financial institutions.
World competition is increasingly fierce. The six major banks in Canada are small, compared to their international competitors.
When we compare our big banks to the American or the Asian banks, especially those in Japan, we find that what is needed is a legislative environment conducive to increasing the ability of our financial institutions to hold their own against international competition as well as the competition that will inevitably begin to appear within the markets of Quebec and of Canada.
The Bloc Quebecois supports the spirit of the proposed legislation and several of its provisions. However, if the amendments that we will put forward are rejected by the House, we will vote against Bill C-38 for three reasons.
First, Bill C-38 grants many powers to the Minister of Finance to determine all by himself what the future of the banks in Quebec will be.
Second, Bill C-38 provides no guarantee that the minister will take into consideration the specificity of Quebec's financial system.
Third, there is no concrete measure in Bill C-38 to ensure better access to financial services for the poor.
Under Bill C-38, which was introduced on June 13, 2000, the Minister of Finance will have the power to decide on his own the future of banks in Quebec. It is unacceptable for this discretionary power to be as strong as the act itself, if not stronger.
The Bloc Quebecois is concerned about the fact that a single shareholder could, with the approval of the Minister of Finance, hold a 65% interest in the National Bank, the largest Quebec-based bank.
There is no need for the Minister of Finance to allow this kind of excessive control to give the National Bank the flexibility it needs to continue to prosper.
How can a shareholder holding 65% of the shares of a bank give more flexibility than 65 shareholders each holding 1% of the shares? We need legislative guarantees against any negative impact these new ownership rules might have on employment of professionals, consumer services, small businesses, decision centres and the role of Montreal as an international financial centre.
The stakes are just too high to rely on only one man, the federal minister, especially since there are no legislative guarantees in the bill. Bill C-38 does nothing more than list some elements to consider that are under the sole control of the Minister of Finance.
Worse still, Bill C-38 is full of phrases like “The Minister may deem necessary” or “such and such a section of the Act will cease to apply if the minister so decides”.
In other words, this bill can be made to say whatever Ottawa and the Minister of Finance want, in terms of deciding on their own the future of Quebec's banks. It is not obvious that the finance minister's bill will bring about more healthy competition on the national market. But competition is more important for our future economic development than the creation of big banks to compete on the world market. Nonetheless the Minister of Finance has decided to make a law for big banks, even if that means sacrificing Quebec banks like the National Bank, which is the institution for small businesses in Quebec.
As far as consumer protection is concerned, the Minister of Finance remains vague and the bill is more wishful thinking than real political action. The bill establishes the financial consumer agency, which is intended to protect the consumer, according to the minister.
The Bloc Quebecois is a staunch defender of consumer rights. This is evidenced by the debate that we led regarding the privacy legislation, Bill C-54, which became Bill C-6.
We remind the government that Quebec already has legislation dealing with this issue, including the Consumer Protection Act, the Privacy Act and acts relating to insurance, trusts, credit unions and securities.
The establishment of a new agency is likely to create new regulatory overlap with the measures already taken by Quebec in an area which, after all, is a provincial jurisdiction.
The bill includes a provision called “low-fee retail deposit account” which, according to the minister, seeks to ensure access to financial services for low income people. No one except the minister really knows what this “low-fee retail deposit account” is. No one except the minister knows who will be able to open such an account, and no one except the minister knows whether this account will be accessible everywhere. Why? Because all these issues will be dealt with through regulations. For the time being we must be satisfied with the minister's fine rhetoric, but this is not enough of a guarantee to state that consumers will be better protected by the new legislation.
A notice by the bank is the only thing provided in Bill C-38 in the case of the closure of a bank branch or a reduction of services available to consumers. With such an unrestrictive provision, how can the Minister of Finance claim that there will be increased access to financial services? The minister is the only one convinced of that.
There are a number of problems with this bill and we intend to propose amendments at report stage. It is not an easy task, given the countless pages of the bill itself and of its schedules, all 900 pages of it. We realize that the discretionary power given to the Minister of Finance is much too great for a single individual.
It is like this Liberal government and its leader, the Prime Minister, who appoints all the ministers, senators, the Governor General of Canada, the lieutenant governors in all the provinces, the justices on the supreme court, and government officials, including those abroad.
Until recently, one man, the Prime Minister, had at his disposal the personal files of 34 million individuals, dead or alive, in Canada in the longitudinal file of Human Resources Development Canada. He also has a file on most journalists, concocted by the Canada Information Office, the official propaganda organ. And now we have the Minister of Finance going a step further and wanting to decide on his own, at his discretion, the future of Quebec's major banks. This sort of thing would make certain dictators drool.
Throughout the bill, whenever there are provisions concerning banks, insurance companies, trusts, anything to do with the financial sector, the minister always reserves the right to determine, based on criteria known to him alone, whether or not an operation is acceptable. He alone defines certain concepts such as low-fee retail deposit accounts.
Generally speaking, we would have liked more clarity regarding the decision making process and also more specifics regarding certain concepts, such as the low-fee retail deposit accounts for the poor.
We do not oppose increased consumer protection. However, we do oppose provisions that duplicate and overlap those that are already included in the Quebec consumer protection act. Consumer protection is an exclusive provincial jurisdiction. The Liberal government has a tendency to want to centralize everything. It is systematic, disgusting and often insidious.
As I said, the bill is important. It was also important that it be introduced in the House, but we oppose certain provisions and if our amendments are not approved at report stage, we will vote against this bill.