Debates of June 1st, 2015

Opposition Motion—Financial Code of Conduct

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

That's a lie. Say it outside. Do you want to promote that lie? Say it outside. Say it outside the door.

[Leon Benoit, Conservative, Vegreville—Wainwright, AB]

Let them holler, Mr. Speaker, but the truth is the truth. They cannot deny it. That is the truth. They were found guilty of that.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary for Multiculturalism]

Mr. Speaker, it is—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

Mr. Speaker, perhaps the member opposite would conserve his comment until I have finished my remarks.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

Order, please. If some members in this place want to have further conversation, I would suggest that they all take it outside the House and speak there.

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary for Multiculturalism has the floor.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure today to discuss how our government continues to lower costs for businesses and consumers, and in the process update this House on all that this government has done on the subject in recent years.

Our government understands that Canadians are tired of hidden fees, and that is why we introduced a code of conduct for the credit and debit card industry in Canada. The code was launched in 2010 to promote fair business practices and ensure that merchants and consumers understand the costs and benefits associated with credit and debit cards.

At the same time, Canadian banks understand that they operate in a highly competitive environment and that they must be prepared to respond to the specific and often changing needs of Canadian consumers. Accordingly, the government believes that a strong consumer protection framework is one in which there is vibrant competition, fees are disclosed, and consumers can exercise choice.

On this front, we have introduced regulations relating to credit agreements, which came into force in 2010. These regulations accomplish a number of pro-consumer goals, including the following: strengthening consumer protection and limiting business practices that are not beneficial to consumers; requiring the provision of clear and timely information to Canadians about credit products, with a particular emphasis on credit cards; mandating a minimum 21-day, interest-free grace period on all new credit card purchases when a customer pays the outstanding balance in full; and requiring express consent for credit limit increases.

We continue to make progress in this regard. Last November, in fact, the government welcomed individual commitments by Visa and MasterCard to reduce their credit card fees for merchants, which should ultimately result in lower prices for consumers.

Specifically, Visa and MasterCard are voluntarily reducing their respective credit card fees for consumers to an average effective rate of 1.5% for a period of five years. These proposals include specific commitments that all merchants receive a reduction in credit card fees, while providing a greater reduction for small and medium-sized enterprises and charities, which have the least amount of bargaining power.

Canadians work hard for their money, and our government believes Canadians deserve to keep more of that money in their pockets. That is why we have taken action to improve low-cost accounts and expand access to no-cost banking services to protect consumers and save even more money for Canadians. In this spirit, in May 2014, the government secured voluntary commitments from Canada's eight largest banks to enhance low-cost bank accounts, and to offer no-cost accounts with the same features as low-cost accounts, to a wider range of eligible consumers. As a result, no-cost accounts are available to youth, students, seniors qualifying for the guaranteed income supplement, and registered disability savings plan beneficiaries.

This action fulfills a 2013 Speech from the Throne commitment to expand no-cost basic banking services, as well as an economic action plan 2014 commitment to enhance access to basic banking services. Moreover, just this past April, the government released an update to the code of conduct for the credit and debit card industry in Canada, delivering on a commitment made in 2014 to help make life more affordable for Canadians and entrepreneurs.

These new changes will make the code even stronger, by addressing unfair business practices and improving transparency for merchants and consumers, including new provisions that apply specifically to mobile payments.

Consumers will also benefit from a new requirement that credit card issuers disclose to consumers who apply for premium credit cards that the use of these cards results in higher merchant fees. This will help to empower consumers in selecting their payment method by disclosing the actual cost to merchants of accepting payments with a premium card.

When it comes to helping businesses with their payment costs, members should not just take my word for it. The Canadian Federation of Independent Business has said that the code of conduct for the credit and debit card industry in Canada, “...has served merchants extremely well... [It] has done an excellent job in ensuring some fair ground rules and maintaining Canada's low-cost debit system”. They have also said that “...the Code played a big role in saving low-cost debit in Canada and it gave merchants some degree of power in dealing with the payments industry”.

Therefore, despite the opposition's call for more support to empower consumers, we can see that our government has already taken considerable action in this regard.

We are supporting consumers and merchants by working collaboratively with financial institutions. We will not change course. I urge my opposition colleagues to support our efforts in this regard by voting in favour of our budget bill, which is a bill that contains many low-tax and pro-consumer measures.

Our initiatives go beyond law-making and regulation. They also include public outreach and education.

In April 2014, we announced the appointment of Jane Rooney as Canada's first-ever Financial Literacy Leader. Her mandate is to collaborate and coordinate activities with stakeholders to contribute to and support initiatives that strengthen the financial literacy of Canadians. This initiative will allow the government to broaden its efforts and help Canadians make more informed choices for themselves and their families.

This is nothing new. Throughout our time in office, our government has been focused on helping Canadian consumers identify and take advantage of the best possible financial products and services for their needs. We are not done yet.

In economic action plan 2015, we proposed to amend the Bank Act to strengthen and modernize Canada's financial consumer protection framework to respond to the diverse needs of Canadians. For example, the financial consumer protection framework will provide improved access to basic banking services by allowing a broader range of personal identification, cooling-off periods for a greater range of products, and a new requirement that advertising be clear and accurate.

Unfortunately, the opposition, the NDP and Liberals, have committed to voting against our budget.

I should note that we have already accepted promises from the banks to end pay-to-pay practices as well. Hopefully, the next time the opposition will do their research before putting forward a motion like the one we are debating today.

As our actions have clearly demonstrated, the Government of Canada understands the importance of these costs that affect all Canadians, but we will continue to allow Canadians to keep more of their own money with lower taxes and increased benefits. The measures I have described today will benefit all Canadians, including the most vulnerable consumers. Moreover, they will help to provide all Canadians with the protections and tools necessary to make informed decisions on their financial futures.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the member told us that we should be doing our research. However, I would suggest that maybe he should do his. The fact is, despite all this bragging about the government's record up to this point, the Conservatives' code of conduct is voluntary. It is based on nothing but a good faith agreement. It is great that the Conservatives have sat down with stakeholders, but what has come out of those meetings is nothing but a good faith agreement to follow a voluntary code of conduct.

What we are asking for with this motion is that we finally put in place some concrete measures and a real code of conduct that would oblige banks to stop fleecing their customers when they try to access their own money or pay their bills with their money.

Despite the fact that the Conservatives say they are going in the right direction, does the member not agree that the code of conduct should be obligatory, not a voluntary one as it is right now? It is not leading to anything.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it appears that the member opposite does not have a lot of experience with financial institutions.

Prior to entering this House, I spent five years in public accounting, and one of my tasks was to audit some of the big banks. The member should know that banks, as profit institutions, are very concerned about how they govern themselves and how they win consumers. One of their tasks in doing that is to ensure they are competitive in this unregulated environment. It is regulated in the sense that we protect consumers, but unregulated in the sense that they do not have to comply with a day-to-day regulatory regime as to exactly how they should manage accounting, their fees, and so forth.

Government is not in a position to run the banking business. That is not our task. Let us leave that to the professionals in financial institutions.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for my colleague who spoke earlier this morning on my private member's bill with respect to getting government advertising under control.

The member alluded to financial literacy a moment ago, which is a very important initiative for Canada, and for Canadians who have difficulty managing their credit, in the most indebted per capita population on the face of the planet today. I would like to know how much the government is spending on actual financial literacy outreach.

We know that the Conservatives spent $12,000 to shrink wrap one train in the GO Transit system with a blue plastic wrap that said “economic action plan”. We know that they spent $30 million on 9,850 billboards around the country saying “economic action plan”, and no other message. We learned today, just several hours ago, that the Prime Minister has ordered every department and agency in this country to put a link on their home page to his 24 Seven vanity video station, with no financial literacy message to my knowledge.

Can the parliamentary secretary explain how much is really being spent on helping Canadians understand?

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

Before I go to the hon. parliamentary secretary, I would remind all hon. members that the conversation seems to have drifted a significant distance from the matter that is before the House. I will go to the parliamentary secretary, if he wishes to respond.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

Mr. Speaker, in response to the question of advertising, it is absolutely the responsibility of the government to communicate with Canadians on important programs and services that are available to them.

From time to time, government changes policy or fiscal strategies to meet the economic needs of the country, to move the country forward in terms of how we address the challenges of the 21st century and the challenges of the world economic system.

On this side of the House, we make no apologies for ensuring that middle-class Canadians are aware of the measures that would put more money back in their pockets, including an enhanced universal child care benefit, the family tax cut, and encouraging more Canadians to join the 11 million Canadians who benefit from tax-free savings accounts. Liberals would take these measures away from middle-class families if they had the choice.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to speak to the motion introduced by my colleague from Davenport, calling on the government to ban all pay-to-pay practices by banks operating in Canada through the enactment of a mandatory code of conduct to protect consumers.

I will be splitting my time with the member for St. John's South—Mount Pearl.

I am an MP from the city of Toronto and Toronto is a place that has very high housing costs. We have a wait list of over 90,000 households trying to get affordable, subsidized housing in the city of Toronto. Barely 50% of workers in the GTA have some kind of job security. They have seen the amount of precarious work jump by 10% since 2011. Just recently, the Toronto Dominion Bank estimated that the wage gap between precarious and permanent employment was as high as $18,000 a year.

Toronto, which is one of the most multicultural cities in the world, is finding that racialized workers have experienced a 30% increase in precarious employment since 2011. Poverty is increasing. Almost 10% of Torontonian seniors live in poverty. That is the most recent data since 2011 because of the undermining of our Statistics Canada data by the government. However, what we do know is that many seniors do not use the Internet. In 2013, in the U.S., about 59% of seniors used the Internet. Internet is significantly down for those who live in subsidized housing.

The reason I give these statistics about the city of Toronto and the people who live there is the fact that bank fees, which are unregulated by the government, are costing Canadians, costing Torontonians up to $180 million a year. This is like a private sector tax that the government is allowing on some of the most vulnerable people in our society. Seniors, newcomers, low-income Canadians are paying up to $180 million in really what is a private sector tax.

What am I talking about here? I am talking about the practice of banks charging customers a fee just to get a paper bill. For over 100 years, people have been receiving bills through the mail, either for utilities, or other accounts and then they go to the bank and pay their bill or they make out a cheque and send it through the mail. However, in 2011, Canadians started noticing charges appearing on their bill for the simple privilege, which I thought was a right, to receive a bill in a paper copy.

For seniors, that is the way a lot of them liked to bank. My mother was absolutely incensed when Bell Canada sent her a bill and charged her a couple of dollars for the privilege. She phoned it and was furious. She had been a customer for 60 years, had never been late with a payment, and suddenly it decided to charge her an extra couple of bucks for the privilege of paying a bill. Someone likened it to someone handing us a bill in a restaurant and then giving us an additional bill for a couple of bucks because he or she was handing us a bill.

If we buy a table in a department store and it charges a couple of dollars to give a receipt for the table, that is absolutely ludicrous. I want to thank my colleague from Davenport. He began campaigning on this and called it his “ending of pay-to-pay fees”; that is having to pay just for the privilege of paying a bill. He has noted quite rightly that it disproportionately affects seniors, low-income Canadians, newcomers to Canada, people who like to get paper copies or people who perhaps do not have access to the Internet, like more than 40% of Torontonians who live in subsidized housing. In Toronto community housing, people do not have access to computers.

Most Canadians agree with the right of people to get bills without additional fees. Forty per cent of Canadians have said that they are just not comfortable banking online, but three-quarters of Canadians disapprove of charging Canadians for getting bills or statements. Most Canadians believe this is just the cost of doing business. Businesses invoice people and send the bills through the mail. That is the cost of doing business and it is accommodated appropriately in business plans.

The New Democrats have been talking to Canadians across the country. They have been signing petitions, emailing, phoning their MPs and going into constituency offices demanding action to get rid of these pay-to-pay fees. After strong pressure from the New Democrats, the government finally decided to take action on utility bills, but, inexplicably, left the banks out. It is very difficult to understand why the banks would be excluded from this. They are doing quite well. In the first quarters of their fiscal years, Canada's big banks have amassed more than $16 billion in profits. RBC, just one of the major banks, has broken records by pulling in about $5 billion in the first half of this year.

The point is that it is not like the banks are on the brink of bankruptcy. The banks are doing extremely well, yet not only have they been charging people to pay their bills but they thought this year it would be a good idea to start charging people to make payments on their lines of credit and mortgages. I am sure they thought that was a very good idea that would add even more profit to their bottom lines, but Canadians were absolutely outraged by it and have forced the banks to backtrack on it. However, Canadians should be comparatively outraged by the $180 million that banks are ripping off from people by nickel and diming them $2 at a time. Even these fees have been increasing.

The Public Interest Advocacy Centre has recommended that the government follow through on its commitment to eliminate the application of additional fees charged to Canadian consumers to receive any paper bill or statement. Certainly, the Canadian Association of Retired Persons has spoken out against this. It knows how angry seniors are by the charge just to get a bill from the bank. It says that it hardly seems fair that customers, through no fault of their own, are being charged $2 for the privilege of paying a bill.

We do not need the wishy-washy voluntary code of conduct that the Conservative government has put forward. We need strong measures. We need a mandatory code of conduct that bans these extra fees that penalize those who can least afford to pay them. That is what the people of Toronto are telling me and what Canadians are saying right across the country.

I thank my New Democrat colleagues for their strong support for banning pay-to-pay fees. I think the rest of the members in the House will probably support this measure. We need the Conservative government to take action, ban pay-to-pay fees, get tough with their friends in the banks, and benefit Canadian consumers and citizens right across the country.

[Christine Moore, NDP, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, how many people living in poverty in Toronto simply cannot afford to pay for daily Internet access? Even if we told them to go on the Internet, they would not be able to pay for the connection. Furthermore, if they do not do what they are told to do, they have to pay fees. Is it common for people to not even be able to afford Internet access?

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is true that almost half the people living in subsidized housing in Toronto do not have an Internet connection at home and cannot afford Internet service. Paying $2 a month to the bank is really like a tax for them, because it is hard for the very poor to pay their monthly bills. The government has no excuse for not moving to eliminate the fees charged by major banks, which make huge profits. It would be very easy for the government to eliminate these fees, just as it eliminated the fees of other companies.

[Christine Moore, NDP, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as my colleague was finance critic before being industry critic, I would like to know if the Conservatives, at the same time as modifying what we have asked for, could improve other measures that could apply to banks in Canada and fees charged to consumers.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there is a great deal the banks could do to appeal to consumers. We have long advocated for a capping of credit card rates. We have pressured for some time to reduce the fees charged to small businesses. That is an important step forward.

However, we really think the counterbalance, the growth of payday lenders across the country that can charge exorbitant interest rates and disproportionately have as customers people who are of low income, is a kind of no-frills credit card capped at a 5% interest rate. That would really be helpful for Canadians.

We have not had any take-up on that from the government, but it really would make a difference. There are times when people just need a little extra money to make ends meet and we allow them no other option than to go to payday lenders where they can be charged absolutely exorbitant rates. We are penalizing them even further. It is like a super tax on the people who can least afford it.

There is a great deal the government could do to make life more affordable for Canadians by working with the banking sector to make their consumer products much more accessible.

[Ryan Cleary, NDP, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I stand in support of the motion:

That, in the opinion of the House, the government should ban all pay-to-pay practices by banks operating in Canada, through the enactment of a mandatory financial code of conduct to protect consumers.

I keep my finger on the pulse of my riding of St. John's South—Mount Pearl, in Newfoundland and Labrador. I am constantly out and about in the community, on the doorsteps, in the coffee shops, on the streets, on the wharves and even in the boats. I ask my constituents for constant feedback about issues ranging from child care, climate change, pensions, poverty and, of course, all federal issues having to do with the great province of Newfoundland and Labrador. If it moves here in Ottawa and it affects my province, I am all over it; I am on my feet in this House.

Most of the feedback I have received to date, as a member of Parliament, has to do with banks; more specifically, bank fees, which people see as generally too high, and credit card interest rates, which people also see as too high, through the roof, actually.

Household debt in Canada is alarming. The total debt owed by all Canadians, at the end of March, was a record $1.8 trillion. We have gone a bit of a borrowing binge, that is how it has been described, living on credit.

However, I would say the banks have gone on a bit of a binge themselves. Household debt in Canada is at a record high, but bank profits are right up there, too. The top five banks in this country are making a killing. Profit is a good word. Profit is to be celebrated. Profit means growth. Profit means success.

However, is there a point when profit crosses the line into unfettered greed?

In the first two quarters of their fiscal years, Canada's top five banks amassed more than $16 billion in profits. RBC, alone, had broken records by pulling in almost $5 billion in only the first half of the year. I would say banking binge is pretty accurate.

I can tell members what drives me. My pet banking peeve is going to an ATM that is not with my bank but still one of Canada's big five and being charged $3.00 to withdraw cash over and above my own bank fees. That is obscene. I will go without before I pay that $3.00. It is the principle. It happens right outside this House, down on Sparks Street. I consider it gouging and I take that personally. I also take my business elsewhere.

One of our New Democratic Party proposals is to cap bank fees at federally regulated ATMs, those machines owned by chartered banks, at 50¢. The banks would still walk away with a healthy profit at 50¢ a transaction, but that is another topic.

Today's motion is about pay-to-pay, paying to pay a bill. Do members find that offensive? I do. Canadians, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, should not have to fork over their hard-earned dollars to receive a bank statement or to pay a bill.

When was the last time members went into a restaurant and had to pay extra for the check, for the honour of being handed the check, or paying the check? That is what is pay-to-pay fees amount to: paying a fee to pay a bill.

Canadians will pay up to $180 million this year alone just to receive bank statements. No one should be punished, charged, for receiving bank statements or paying their bills.

These fees that charge extra for the bill itself unfairly target seniors, about 40% of whom do not use the Internet. These fees unfairly target those without Internet access, which amounts to one in five homes in Canada, according to Statistics Canada. These fees unfairly target families already struggling to pay their bills. Forty-six per cent of households with incomes below $30,000 a year do not have Internet.

In the 2013 Speech from the Throne, the Conservatives promised to end pay-to-pay policies so customers would not be charged extra to receive paper bills.

The Conservative budget 2014, last year, promised that again. However, then when it came to taking action the Conservative budget excluded banks from the stopping of pay-to-pay fees. It excluded them when it had a chance. It was $180 million in 2013 and another $180 million in 2014. That is a total of $360 million that Canadians had to pay because the current Conservative government failed to act.

Last year, the Conservative government blocked telecommunications and cable companies from charging fees for paper bills. Why were the banks not included? I do not have an answer to that question. Mr. Speaker, do you have an answer to that question? I have asked around and I cannot get an answer. There is dead silence from that side of the House.

I was in this House today during question period when the Minister of Finance rose to his feet to say the government will be supporting this motion. Does he expect a pat on the back for that? He supports this motion, but when he had an opportunity to change the law of the land to stop banks from charging pay-to-pay fees, his government failed to act. It stopped short.

Sitting in this House today, watching the government in question period for example, it is obvious that the current government is on its last legs. The minister supports stopping the banks from charging pay-to-pay fees, but he did not outlaw those fees last year when telecommunications companies and cable companies were blocked from charging fees for paper bills. Again, the question is why not? The Conservatives are all over the place.

It reminds me of the finance minister's unexpected announcement last week that he is prepared to hear proposals to expand or enhance the Canada pension plan. The Conservatives had written off that idea, but now in an election year with no mention of it in the recent federal budget, they are possibly open to it. I just shake my head. They are all over the place. However, that is also a good thing, because it will not be long now and we will have a change of government.

I have a final word on banks. I am old enough to remember a day that when we called a branch we actually got someone from the branch on the phone. That is getting harder and harder to do. Banks are almost cold in terms of personal touch, and they are very calculated. It seems now to be all about the numbers. I cannot remember the last time I heard of a bank giving someone a break by writing off interest or forgiving a loan.

Yes, though, I can remember. An interesting news story broke back home in Newfoundland and Labrador over the last week. It was over how three major banks, Scotiabank, CIBC and the Royal Bank, wrote off $371,000 in interest charges to the Liberal Party of Newfoundland and Labrador relating to a loan for the 2003 election campaign. It is a rare occurrence for an individual Newfoundlander or Labradorian or an individual Canadian to get a break from the banks.

We are being charged for paper bills; bank fees are too high; credit card interest rates are shocking; and, bank profit is measured in billions. In the meantime, the only one getting a break that I know of is the Liberal Party of Newfoundland and Labrador. That is not nearly good enough.

I will end on this: It will not be long now.

[James Rajotte, Conservative, Edmonton—Leduc, AB]

Mr. Speaker, as my colleague knows, the government is supportive of the motion presented by the NDP, but we do need to bring some sense of reality.

Canadians should be proud of the fact that for seven years in a row the World Economic Forum has recognized Canada as having the best banking system in the world. We can get basic major banking services for $4 or less a month. We have a 21-day grace period for credit card payments in this country, which is something that was brought into force by this government.

About people saying “bank profits” and “banks exceeding”, we cannot see this as banks over here exceeding. I recall my father, who is a retired schoolteacher, complaining about this one time. I said to him, “Dad, let's go look at the Alberta teachers' retirement investments on the website”. It was bank after bank. I said, “Dad, your defined benefit pension plan is in part directly linked to banks doing well in this country”. We are very much linked in this Canadian society.

If we look at the Canada pension plan investments, something that the opposition members want to increase, we see that the Canada pension plan has loads of investments in our major banks. I would like the member to stand up and add a bit of balance to what he is saying in being so critical of the banking sector in this country.

[Ryan Cleary, NDP, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I am not so much critical of the banks, although I have been, for sure. I am more critical of the Conservative government. It had an opportunity. The government said it would act on the opportunity in 2013 to ban pay to pay, and it did not do it. It said it would ban pay to pay in 2014, and the Conservative government did not do it.

Every year that costs Canadians $180 million in pay-to-pay fees, and times two, it is $360 million. That is how much Canadians, including Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, have had to pay because the Conservative government, which is so supportive of this motion, failed to act.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I must say I am a bit disappointed in the member's comments.

He tries to tie in the relationship of the Liberal Party and the banks. I say shame on the member. Quite frankly, the banks, as an industry, have loaned hundreds of thousands of dollars to the New Democratic Party as well.

I challenge the member to stand in his place and indicate that in no situation did the bank ever give any sort of break to the New Democratic Party.

Would the member not, at the very least, recognize that Canada has a healthy banking industry, second to no other banking industry in the world, and that in good part it is because of the actions taken by Jean Chrétien during the 1990s, which ultimately prevented Canada from going as far as other G7 countries around the world, in terms of their economics and the impact on their economies because of bank closures and foreclosures that have taken place?

I think the member's priorities might be somewhat misplaced.

[Ryan Cleary, NDP, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Mr. Speaker, to the member's first point about the Liberal Party of Newfoundland and Labrador that had $371,000 in interest charges written off recently, by three major banks, I do not know why that was. The leader of the Liberal Party of Newfoundland and Labrador has yet to come out and explain that. It is a little too close for comfort.

In terms of the banks, yes, we do have a healthy banking system in Canada. That is beyond a shadow of a doubt. However, credit card interest rates are too high and they are hurting Canadians, they are hurting Newfoundland and Labrador families, and our bank fees are too high. When there are profits in the billions, with one bank alone making $5 billion in the first half of this year, that says that balance has been lost, the balance between people and profit.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

Mr. Speaker, before I start, I would like you to know that I will be sharing my time with the member for Edmonton Centre.

Our government has a strong record of empowering Canadian consumers. We understand that when Canadians make decisions about how to spend their money, they must be assured their interests come first and that they are given fair treatment. That is why our government is pleased to support this motion. In fact, our government has already addressed the issue raised in the motion at hand. As such, it gives me great pleasure to take a moment to speak about the hard and effective work that our government has done to help middle-class consumers.

We have an actual record to stand on, in contrast to the NDP, which has voted against every consumer protection measure we have introduced.

In November 2014, the Minister of Finance accepted voluntary undertakings from Visa and MasterCard to reduce their average effective interchange fees to 1.5%. In total, the two commitments represent a reduction in credit card fees of approximately 10%. These commitments represent a meaningful, long-term reduction in costs for merchants that should ultimately result in lower prices for consumers.

Furthermore, our government released the enhanced code of conduct for the credit and debit card industry in Canada in April, a move which ensured that merchants and consumers have the information they need to make informed decisions and that they are not gouged by credit and debit card companies. The enhanced code of conduct includes a new measure to ensure that credit card issuers disclose to cardholders that premium credit cards can result in higher fees to merchants.

In economic action plan 2015, we will continue to build on this record by introducing a new and exclusive financial consumer framework for federally regulated banks. This would ensure that banks are more accountable when it comes to consumer protection, such as in advertising and the sale of products. This framework will be good for small businesses and for consumers. Unfortunately, the opposition appears to oppose this measure, along with the rest of the low-tax, pro-job measures that our government has introduced in our most recent budget. Measures such as these would ensure that small businesses benefit from a meaningful reduction in credit card acceptance costs, which would in turn be beneficial for consumers.

As we know, small businesses are the backbone of the Canadian economy. Beyond lowering merchant fees, our government has a record of helping small businesses grow and succeed. Small businesses account for 99% of all businesses in Canada and employ half of the working men and women in the Canadian private sector. Our government believes that small businesses should spend their time growing their businesses and creating jobs. That is why we have cut taxes significantly for small businesses and their owners since 2006. Economic action plan 2015 would go even further.

In the fall of 2014, our government introduced the small business job credit, which will help small businesses save more money. Then, in economic action plan 2015, our government proposed to reduce the small business tax rate to 9% by 2019. This would be the largest tax rate cut for small businesses in more than 25 years. It is estimated that this measure will reduce taxes for small businesses and their owners by $2.7 billion between 2015 and 2020. For example, as a result of this tax cut and other measures since 2006, for a small business with a taxable income of $500,000, the amount of federal tax paid in 2019 will be 46% lower than in 2006. This represents an annual tax reduction of up to $38,600, which can be reinvested in the business to fuel its growth and create jobs for Canadians.

Unfortunately, the opposition parties have chosen to vote against our measures that are designed to help small businesses and consumers. In opposing our current budget bill, the NDP and the Liberals are demonstrating their lack of understanding of the important role that small businesses play in the Canadian economy.

The hon. member prefaces his motion with the notion that the government should take immediate steps to make the cost of living more affordable for the middle class, and we could not agree more. That is why we have cut taxes over 180 times since coming to office. In fact, the overall federal tax burden is currently at its lowest level in 50 years. We believe it is simply the right thing to do. By putting more money in the pockets of Canadians, we are helping them to make ends meet and spend more on what matters to them.

Since 2006, the government has introduced measures to make life more affordable for Canadians. We have cut the GST from 7% to 5%, established tax credits to support working low-income individuals and families, public transit users, first-time home buyers, and families caring for disabled relatives. We have provided additional support for families with children through the children's art and fitness tax credits, and the enhancement of the registered education saving plan and the adoption expense tax credit. We have introduced the new family tax cut, and enhancements to the universal child care benefit and child care expense deduction, measures which will provide support to every single Canadian family with children under the age of 18. Canadians at all income levels are benefiting from the tax relief introduced by the government, with low- and middle-income Canadians receiving proportionately greater relief.

In 2015, a typical two-earner family of four will receive tax relief and increased benefits of up to $6,600 as a result of the measures introduced since 2006. These low-tax measures also build on our pro-consumer record, which includes removing tariffs on baby clothes and certain sporting equipment to help reduce the cost of these goods for Canadian families, banning negative option billing for financial products, requiring all-inclusive airfare advertising to ensure that consumers can clearly see the total price of an airline ticket with no hidden fee, and much, much more.

By keeping taxes low for small businesses and individuals, our Conservative government is demonstrating our commitment to creating jobs and making life more affordable. Moreover, by working with banks and credit card companies, we are ensuring that all Canadian consumers are protected and well educated in order to make informed choices about their financial futures.

Today, Canada stands tall in the world. Over 1.2 million more Canadians are working now than at the end of the recession. The majority of these net new jobs have been full-time positions in high-wage, private-sector industries. Canada has posted one of the strongest job performances in the G7. The International Monetary Fund and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development expect Canada's growth, already ahead of our peers during the recovery, to continue to be solid.

Our government continues to be absolutely committed to job creation and economic growth, objectives that have underpinned our economic action plan since its inception in 2009. By staying the course and sticking to our proven economic action plan, our government will remain committed to helping all Canadian consumers. Let us hope that the NDP will finally start supporting our pro-consumer measures for once.

[Dany Morin, NDP, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Mr. Speaker, today we are talking about the excessive fees charged by Canada's major banks and credit unions to the poor customers who have no choice and who are being squeezed. The middle class is trapped, no mater which financial institution they use, since the practices are similar from one bank to the next.

Could my Conservative colleague comment on the fact that the vast majority of small businesses do not impose fees on their customers when they send out a bill? How does he think these poor, poor big financial institutions and corporations can justify imposing these fees on their customers?

I think his response will show whether the Conservative government is serious, considering it has given the major banks a free pass to impose excessive fees without any consequences.