House of Commons Hansard #333 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was election.

Topics

Question No.2638—Questions Passed as Orders for ReturnsGovernment Orders

7:35 p.m.

Conservative

Chris Warkentin Conservative Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, AB

With regard to government dealings with economists Jim Stanford, Andrew Sharpe, Mostafa Askari, Mel Cappe, Marc Lévesque formerly of the Public Sector Pension Investment Board, Don Drummond, Kevin Milligan, Stephen Gordon, Andrew Leach, Paul Beaudry, Pierre Fortin, and Mike Moffat, since November 4, 2015: (a) which of the economists above have received government contracts; (b) what are the details of all contracts with these economists, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) vendor, (iii) amount, (iv) description of the goods or services provided, (v) manner in which it was awarded (sole-sourced versus or competitive bid); (c) what are the details of all grants or contributions issued to these economists, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) recipient, (iii) amount, (iv) purpose of the grant or contribution; and (d) which of these economists have received an Order in Council appointment from the government or have served on any type of government advisory body since November 4, 2015, including, for each, the (i) name of the individual, (ii) body or organization for which they were appointed or served, (iii) position, (iv) start and end dates?

(Return tabled)

Question No.2640—Questions Passed as Orders for ReturnsGovernment Orders

7:35 p.m.

Conservative

Shannon Stubbs Conservative Lakeland, AB

With regard to firearms which were prohibited as a result of the May 1, 2020, Order in Council SOR/2020-96: (a) how many have been (i) turned in, (ii) seized, (iii) confiscated, (iv) otherwise obtained by the government broken down by how it was obtained; (b) what is the breakdown of (a) by those firearms which were previously in the possession of individuals versus businesses; and (c) what is the breakdown of (a) and (b) by make and model?

(Return tabled)

Question No.2642—Questions Passed as Orders for ReturnsGovernment Orders

7:35 p.m.

Conservative

Bob Zimmer Conservative Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC

With regard to Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada's Northern Abandoned Mine Reclamation Program: (a) how much has been spent to date on the Giant Mine, in total and broken down by the (i) purpose, (ii) recipient, of the funding; (b) how much is allotted to each purpose and recipient in (a), in total and broken down by (i) purpose, (ii) recipient; and (c) what are the details of all consultant contracts for the Giant Mine and the Giant Mine Oversight Board, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) vendor, (iii) amount, (iv) description of the goods and services, (v) manner in which the contract was awarded (sole-sourced or competitive bid), (vi) start and end dates, if applicable?

(Return tabled)

Question No.2644—Questions Passed as Orders for ReturnsGovernment Orders

7:35 p.m.

Conservative

Ted Falk Conservative Provencher, MB

With regard to the review by Health Canada (HC), the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), or the National Advisory Committee on Immunization, of a pre-print study posted on October 15, 2023 of which six authors are associated with the US Food and Drug Administration that found "a new signal was detected for seizures-convulsions after BNT162b2 (2-4 years) and mRNA1273 COVID-19 vaccinations (2-5 years),": (a) which federal health agency, organization, committee or department(s) or outsourced contracted firm is responsible for reviewing or identifying studies such as the pre-print titled "Safety of Monovalent BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech), mRNA-1273 (Moderna), and NVX-CoV2373 (Novavax) COVID- 19 Vaccines in US Children Aged six months to 17 years;"; (b) has any federal health agency, organization, committee, department(s) or outsourced contracted firm reviewed or been made aware of the forementioned study or learned about the new safety signal of seizures/convulsions among children following monovalent COVID-19 vaccine; (c) if the answer to (b) is affirmative, has HC or any federal health agency, organization or committee issued any statement to the Canadian public or any communication to the provinces or the medical community to create awareness of this new safety signal; (d) if the answer to (c) is affirmative, what was the statement or communication provided; (e) if the answer to (c) is negative, why not; (f) how many episodes of seizures-convulsions have been reported in children under 17 years in Canadian Adverse Events following Immunization Surveillance System records, from (i) May 1, 2021 to April 30, 2023, (ii) May 1, 2018 to April 30, 2020; (g) what provincial and territory data is the federal government relying upon to monitor risk of seizures and convulsions in this cohort in real time; (h) how far out is the government monitoring this data (e.g. 28 days post-vaccine, up to 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, beyond 12 months post-COVID-19 immunization); (i) what are the Canadian government's threshold values for marking the likelihood of a vaccine serious adverse event as transitioning from an extremely rare, to a rare occurrence, and from a rare to a common occurrence; (j) what is the threshold whereby a safety signal of seizures or convulsions would shut down the mRNA vaccine program in children under the age of 17 years; (k) why are children's seizures-convulsions not listed on HC's webpage denoted to children's side-effects which was last updated on October 27, 2023; (l) with real-time monitoring, what other safety signals has HC, the PHAC or any other federal agency or department discovered post-mRNA vaccine injection for (i) children under age 5 years, (ii) children 6-17 years, (iii) persons 18-25 years, (iv) persons 26-35 years; (m) is HC receiving any data directly from provincial datasets to monitor increased usage of provincial health systems by Canadian children post-vaccination; (n) has any federal health agency or entity such as the Canadian Institute for Health Information or outsourced contractor tracked the number of episodes of myocarditis and pericarditis in young persons under the age of 35, post-vaccination, using billing or ICD-10 data from physicians and hospitals across Canada both before and after the COVID-19 injections had commenced; (o) if the answer to (n) is affirmative, (i) for what period of time post-immunization are they tracked, (ii) is the rate of myocarditis and pericarditis in persons under 35 years following the roll-out of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines greater or less than the baseline rates of myocarditis and pericarditis from 2016-2019; (p) if there were deviations from the baseline found in (o)(ii), by how much did this occur and by which method has the determination of any difference, or lack thereof, been made; (q) if the answer to (n) is negative, why is this data not being tracked; and (r) when examining the risk-of-harm to benefit ratio of the COVID-19 mRNA products and when considering the combination of serious adverse events such as seizures-convulsions, myocarditis and pericarditis in young persons, what is the combined threshold of serious adverse events by which mRNA products would no longer be available to (i) children under the age of 5 years, (ii) children 6-17 years old, (iii) persons 18-25 years old, (iv) persons 26-35 years old, and who determines these thresholds, when, and based on what data?

(Return tabled)

Question No.2645—Questions Passed as Orders for ReturnsGovernment Orders

June 17th, 2024 / 7:35 p.m.

Conservative

Frank Caputo Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC

With regard to Correctional Service Canada, broken down by year since 2008: what is the capacity of federal institutions and the number of those incarcerated (i) in total, (ii) by region, (iii) by correctional institution?

(Return tabled)

Question No.2648—Questions Passed as Orders for ReturnsGovernment Orders

7:35 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Muys Conservative Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON

With regard to Health Canada (HC), the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) and the reporting processes of adverse events following immunization (AEFI) and the implementation of the Brighton Collaboration Case Definitions of AEFIs: (a) in what ways does HC’s Canada Vigilance Program (CVP) differ from the PHAC’s Canadian Adverse Events Following Immunization Surveillance System (CAEFISS) reporting system; (b) what purpose does it serve for Canada to have two reporting systems; (c) how, if at all, is the CVP and CAEFISS data amalgamated; (d) regarding HC’s relationship to the Brighton Collaboration (BC), (i) does one exist, and, if so, when did HC or the PHAC start using the BC criteria as a requirement for AEFI recognition, (ii) what is the BC’s purpose in the vaccine space in Canada; (e) regarding the implementation of the BC criteria, (i) when was it communicated to health care practitioners, (ii) how was it communicated; (f) were there any definitions of AEFIs that were changed after January 1, 2019 by (i) the BC, (ii) HC, (iii) the PHAC, (iv) the National Advisory Committee on Immunization; (g) if the answer to (f) is affirmative, (i) which ones were changed and by which agency, (ii) how were they changed, (iii) why were they changed; (h) is HC aware of the entities, such as the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, which partner with the BC; (i) if the answer to (h) is affirmative, what are those entities and corporations along with their inherent conflicts of interest (COI) in the vaccine space; (j) what or who are the other funding and non-funding entities who partner with the BC; (k) is HC aware of those individuals who constitute the BC’s Board of Directors and those who have been trained at the BC, including the members of the Advisory Committee on Causality Assessment; (l) if the answer to (k) is affirmative, (i) what percentage of those individuals are working, have worked, or have consulted for a pharmaceutical company, (ii) how many work in Canada; (m) of the individuals identified in (l) as Canadians, (i) what are their names, (ii) what are their conflicts of interest, (iii) what positions do they hold in other entities; (n) how much does the Government of Canada, and any entity related to the Government of Canada, provide monetarily to the BC; and (o) is the BC associated, either directly or indirectly, with any vaccine manufacturers or related organizations?

(Return tabled)

Question No.2649—Questions Passed as Orders for ReturnsGovernment Orders

7:35 p.m.

Conservative

Frank Caputo Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC

With regard to the Canada Border Service Agency's (CBSA) releasing detainees, who would otherwise be held in custody pending deportation, due to a lack of detention capacity: (a) how long has the government known about the problem; (b) how many meetings has the government had on this issue; (c) what steps has the government taken to address this issue; and (d) how many detainees does CBSA project will have to be released due to lack of capacity?

(Return tabled)

Question No.2650—Questions Passed as Orders for ReturnsGovernment Orders

7:35 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Muys Conservative Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON

With regard to the government’s approach to the Chinese state owned CRRC Corporation Limited: (a) has the government identified any threats to national security from CRRC, and, if so, what are the details of each; (b) has the government identified any safety or performance issues with the operation of CRRC rolling stock in Canada, and, if so, what are the details of each; (c) since January 1, 2016, and broken down by year, how many projects involving CRRC have been approved by Transport Canada; and (d) since Canada joined the Asian Infrastructure Bank on March 19, 2018, is the government aware of (i) any CRRC projects that received funding from the Asian Infrastructure Bank, (ii) any other funds received by CRRC from the Asian Infrastructure Bank, and, if so, what are the details of each?

(Return tabled)

Questions Passed as Orders for ReturnsGovernment Orders

7:35 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, finally, I would ask that all remaining questions be allowed to stand.

Questions Passed as Orders for ReturnsGovernment Orders

7:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont

Is that agreed?

Questions Passed as Orders for ReturnsGovernment Orders

7:35 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

The House resumed consideration of Bill C-69, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 16, 2024, as reported (with amendments) from the committee, and of the motions in Group No. 1.

Budget Implementation Act, 2024, No. 1Government Orders

7:35 p.m.

Liberal

Parm Bains Liberal Steveston—Richmond East, BC

Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to stand in the House to debate on matters on behalf of the great people of Steveston—Richmond East. Today, it is to continue on the debate on Bill C-69, the budget Implementation act for budget 2024, which is about reinforcing the promise that all Canadians should have a fair chance to build a good life, and about continuing to build a country that works for everyone. We are going to do that by building more affordable homes, by making life cost less and by growing the economy in a way that is shared by all.

Today I would like to talk about one element of Bill C-69 that could improve financial outcomes for Canadians: consumer-driven banking. Every Canadian deserves access to affordable, modern banking services to help them pay their bills, save money, receive their government benefits and build their credit. Budget 2024 includes measures to lower banking fees by capping non-sufficient fund fees, modernizing free and affordable bank account options, expanding financial help services, doing more to crack down on predatory lending and launching new consumer-driven banking tools.

Consumer-driven banking, also known as open banking or consumer-driven finance, provides a way for people and small businesses to securely transfer their financial data to different service providers, including banks, credit unions and accredited financial technology companies, fintechs. This could include apps that use data to provide automated budgeting and savings advice, help keep track of bills, secure a loan, find a better deal on insurance or on a currency exchange rate and track monthly rent payments to build up credit.

Consumer-driven banking provides real-time access to all financial accounts, products and services in one place and access to personalized tools and products to help improve financial health. It can play an important role in the future of the Canadian economy and increase consumers' choice and control over their financial data. It can help make life more affordable and even help young Canadians when it is time to buy a first home.

However, so far, in the absence of a framework, fintechs have been limited in their ability to develop new financial tools, largely due to a reliance on an unsecured process called screen scraping, which pulls data from a bank account by reading the account information. This requires consumers to share their banking credentials with fintech companies. An estimated nine million Canadians currently share their financial data this way, which raises security, liability and privacy risks to consumers and the financial system. I presume there may be hon. members present who have gone through this process and felt uneasy about it, as I have.

As first announced in the 2023 fall economic statement, the government published Canada's consumer-driven banking framework along with budget 2024, in order to drive an innovative consumer-driven banking system in Canada. As announced in budget 2024, the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada, FCAC, is mandated to oversee, administer and enforce Canada's consumer-driven banking framework.

FCAC's existing financial literacy and consumer education mandate make it well placed to help guide consumers who engage in consumer-driven banking. The mandate was informed by an extensive review of international jurisdictions and is in line with international best practices, offers administrative efficiency and allows for the timely delivery of consumer-driven banking in Canada.

At this point, I should also stress that the government would not be privy to any personal information or data.

I will move now to the bill before us. Bill C-69 introduces legislation to implement key components of the framework, including a new act, the consumer-driven banking act, and amendments to the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada Act. These legislative updates would establish the foundational elements of the framework, including governance and scope, as well as criteria and the process for the technical standard.

The amendments to the FCAC Act would create a senior deputy commissioner for consumer-driven banking, who would be responsible for the supervision of the framework. The commissioner of FCAC would retain full administrative control of FCAC and would continue to report to the Minister of Finance and Parliament. As well, the consumer-driven banking act would require FCAC to maintain a public registry of participating entities in the framework.

Once implemented, the framework would regulate access to financial data, providing Canadians and small businesses with safe and secure access to financial services and products that would help them manage and improve their finances.

The framework would also align with those of our largest trading partners, including the United States. In order to facilitate oversight of provincial entities while respecting their jurisdiction, provincial entities would be able to opt in to governance, supervision and participation. In the case of provincial credit unions, provinces would retain the authority to impose their own requirements.

Importantly, the functional scope for participating entities would be limited to “read access”. This means that participating entities would only be able to see, not change, the data held by another participating entity should a consumer request it. The scope would not include payment initiation, or “write access” as it sometimes is called. Furthermore, data could be obtained only if a consumer provides consent to the participating entity.

Access to data would be limited to what is specified in the legislation, which includes chequing accounts and savings accounts, investment products and lending products such as credit cards, lines of credit and mortgages. Regardless of an entity's size or business model, due diligence of its security controls would be conducted before allowing it to participate in the framework. This would help set an equal and high bar for security measures and give confidence to consumers that their data is safe.

Participating entities would be required to comply with existing privacy legislation as well. The framework would also include additional privacy rules that are unique to financial data sharing to address the provision of express consent to access data, consent management, and revoking access to data shared by a consumer. Participants would be required to have a standardized process for consent and revocation that would be done in a clear, simple and not misleading manner.

The proposed legislation represents a culmination of long-term engagement with industry, consumer groups and experts, and would deliver a made-in-Canada solution to the issue of screen scraping. There is alignment among stakeholders for the government's proposed approach, including fintech and the Canadian Bankers Association.

The government would continue to engage with industry, which would lead on the implementation of the framework in key areas, including technical standards, with oversight from the FCAC. This collaborative work would refine more complex elements, such as the accreditation framework and common rules for privacy, security and liability, to be introduced in additional legislation later this year.

Canada's consumer-driven banking framework, with government-led oversight of security requirements, technical standards and consumer protections, would enable consumers to securely and confidently exercise their right to use and move their data. Once the framework is operational, the government would consult with stakeholders to determine how and when to phase out screen scraping. This would include review of other jurisdictions' approaches to screen scraping.

Canada has a strong, well-regulated financial sector that has proven to be stable, resilient and trusted by Canadians. Consumer-driven banking would contribute to the strength of the sector and protect financial consumers, part of the government's plan to grow Canada's economy in a way that works for everyone. I encourage all hon. members to support the bill.

Budget Implementation Act, 2024, No. 1Government Orders

7:45 p.m.

Conservative

Larry Maguire Conservative Brandon—Souris, MB

Mr. Speaker, my colleague did not really reference much in his speech in regard to where the government is at with its spending habits. There is the $61 billion more in spending that virtually every sector, the banking industry and even the government people themselves are saying is leading to continuing inflation.

Can the member tell us what he thinks is wrong with the idea that, as Canadians are telling me, the government raised $54 billion on the GST and it is all going to the interest on the debt this year?

Budget Implementation Act, 2024, No. 1Government Orders

7:45 p.m.

Liberal

Parm Bains Liberal Steveston—Richmond East, BC

Mr. Speaker, I encourage the member opposite to look at the responsible measures taken in the spending review right now. If we look at all of the measures in the budget, we see that they are all about productivity. Whether we are talking about $5 billion in loan guarantee programs or whether we are delivering major economic investment tax credits, it is all to increase productivity.

Budget Implementation Act, 2024, No. 1Government Orders

7:45 p.m.

Bloc

Luc Desilets Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to hear my colleague talk about banking services. That is something that Bill C-69 does not talk much about.

I have two short questions to ask him about banking services.

First, does he recognize the authority of Quebec and the provinces in this sector?

Second, does he realize that Bill C-69 will give all of Canada's big banks a huge advantage over the smaller ones like Caisses Desjardins in Quebec?

Budget Implementation Act, 2024, No. 1Government Orders

7:45 p.m.

Liberal

Parm Bains Liberal Steveston—Richmond East, BC

Mr. Speaker, a tremendous number of initiatives respect what Quebec has to offer. If we look at the budget, there is $3.4 billion to support young researchers in Canada and Quebec, billions to fight homelessness, $780 million in support for creative industries and $1.5 billion to protect and expand affordable housing. There is a lot in this budget that respects how we are working with Quebec.