If that were true, Mr. Speaker, the National Assembly and the consumer protection bureau would not be asking Ottawa to back down. The bill creates legal uncertainty. The way the bill is worded, bank customers that have been ripped off would have to take their case all the way to the Supreme Court just to get their money back.
If the government truly does not want to undermine consumers, then why does it seem like its legislation favours the bank?
Why is the government refusing to include in its bill that Quebec's legislation still applies?