Dennis Mills

[Pearson International Airport Agreements Act, June 14th, 1994]

The Auditor General is the third party.

[Environment, June 10th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I take your remarks under advisement.

The question has to do with national standards in the area of the environment. There have been times in the last week during the unity debate, et cetera, where we as members of Parliament were getting mixed signals from the Reform Party as to its commitment for national standards.

Quite simply, would the member tell this House if he shares the view of this side of the House? We believe in the area of the environment that we should commit to national standards and this House of Commons, the Government of Canada, is the best place to make sure those national standards are maintained.

[Environment, June 10th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the member a specific question about national standards. There are times when I get confused about the Reform Party's position on national standards.

[Credit Card Interest Calculation Act, June 7th, 1994]

I will pass, Madam Speaker.

[Credit Card Interest Calculation Act, June 7th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I did not realize that the opposition party was not going to speak on this bill.

I wish to congratulate the member for Simcoe North for his efforts in trying to ensure fair prices for his consumers. This is a very important issue because it is not only central to the care and concern that we must have for consumers, it is right in line with our government's policy to make sure that we look at ways access to capital for small and medium size business is also dealt with. This is very much in that same sort of philosophical direction.

We are trying very hard to make sure that consumers begin getting a fair shake from the financial institutions in this country. I believe that the member for Simcoe North has identified an issue of concern to each and every Canadian.

A great deal of parliamentary attention has been paid to this issue over the last seven years. Three parliamentary committee inquiries were held on this subject between 1987 and 1992. In the course of those inquiries a good deal of the evidence brought to light did not support the concept of regulating interest rates at that time.

First, there was evidence suggesting that if rates had been capped between 1973 and 1991 the real savings for the average card holder would have been small. For example, a consumer carrying a balance of $1,000 would have saved only about 50 cents per month. Also, it appeared likely that the caps would cause lenders to restrict access to credit for groups of people deemed to be higher credit risks. This could include people with low incomes and those with below average levels of education together with young adults and recent immigrants. Thus it is possible that the very people the bills were designed to help could be adversely affected by this bill.

Moreover, it was suggested that if interest rate ceilings were legislated they would likely in practice become floor prices. To maintain their revenue levels lenders could simply vary other cost factors such as annual fees and grace periods.

While sections of this bill dealing with service charge limits and interest calculations would address this last consideration I am concerned that the comprehensive controls proposed by the hon. member could act to diminish competition at a time when credit card markets offer more consumer choice than they have ever had in the past.

I would once again like to congratulate the member for this initiative. I would like to ask for unanimous consent to move the following motion:

That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word "that" and substituting the following:

That Bill C-233, an act to provide for the limitation of interest rates, of the application of interest rates and of fees in relation to credit card accounts, be not now read a second time but that the order be discharged, the bill withdrawn and the subject matter thereof referred to the Standing Committee on Industry.

[Supply, June 7th, 1994]

Not clichés.

[Supply, June 7th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I compliment the member on his very fine speech. The hon. member spoke not only to the issue of saving the planet, but he also talked about this whole notion of creating national standards. I believe that is how national will is created and from that national will we develop a sense of patriotism and a feeling for our country.

The hon. member talked about national standards on the environment and I support that totally. Can the member not see it is also important in other areas? For example, is it not better to have a national standard and a national program on multiculturalism rather than 10 different provincial ones? This whole notion of creating national programs and national standards should not just be on the environment but on other issues as well. Then those in the disadvantaged regions could come up to the advantaged regions, for example in health care, education and training. Would the hon. member not agree that would be a much better way to go to build a nation?

[Supply, June 7th, 1994]

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is a very emotional debate today. Would the leader of the Reform Party support a multiculturalism policy that would link multiculturalism to trade policy?

[Supply, June 7th, 1994]

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question to the leader of the Reform Party has to do with global trading which the member touched upon in his speech.

American business experts have complained that one of the handicaps of the United States in international trade is the lack of Americans with foreign language skills. For the last 25 years we as Liberals have promoted a policy of multiculturalism where we have encouraged people to preserve and promote their language and culture of origin.

We believe the policy Pierre Trudeau enunciated in 1971 today represents one of the greatest advantages that we have as a trading nation because we have people in our country who can go home and trade on behalf of Canada because they preserve that language of origin.

In your new vision of Canada, through you, Mr. Speaker, to the leader of the Reform Party, that you are proposing would you continue to support-

[Supply, June 7th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I say to the leader of the Reform Party that we welcome this debate today so that the Liberal Party, the Government of Canada, can reaffirm its commitment to Canada's integrity and to the vision we have for the country.

I begin with a question related to that portion of your speech that has to do with global trading.