Anthony Rota

[Credit Cards, April 23rd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, are there more important issues than small business and Canadians? That is what I call important. Studies are being done by the Senate finance and industry committees because the Minister of Finance did not do what was expected of him when it was time. He sat back and let the market take care of it.

What does the minister have to say to the 200,000 members of the StopStickingItToUs Coalition, including the Retail Council of Canada, the Canadian Booksellers Association, the Canadian Convenience Stores Association, the Canadian grocers—

[Credit Cards, April 23rd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, merchants across Canada try to offer customers the best value possible. Fees charged by credit card companies and the banks are increasing dramatically. The costs trickle down to consumers while they are forced to pay higher interest rates on credit cards.

Unlike the Conservative government, consumers and retailers are responsible. They cannot spend their way out of their financial woes by passing on their problems to future generations. Why will the Minister of Finance not protect retailers and consumers in Canada?

[Business of Supply, April 23rd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, one of the main areas we are looking at as far as helping where the economy is concerned is small merchants who really do not know what interchange fees they are going to pay from day to day or from card to card. We need to make sure that the merchants are healthy. Merchants employ people. When people have jobs, they can purchase goods, feed their families, earn a living. That is what we want in Canada. We want people to be able to pay their bills and do it independently.

On the other hand, the member talked about the most vulnerable. One of the areas I think is most important is not to allow credit card companies to prey on vulnerable people by sending them cards they do not qualify for, sending them items they have not asked for or raising limits without having alerted them or asked their permission to raise them. People will often get letters from credit card companies congratulating them because their limit has been raised by $1,000 or whatever. If people have not asked for it, should it actually be extended? That is the type of question we should be asking.

[Business of Supply, April 23rd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, that is a very good question that deserved to be asked.

Within the next six months is a perfect time and it does work out. What I do not like is using a cookie cutter approach, taking something from the United States and implementing it in Canada. I want to make sure that was clear. Obviously, this would not be doing that. It would be taking the consultation that is being done in the finance and industry committees, as well as in the Senate, and making sure we conduct a thorough study. By knowing what is going on, we can better put together legislation that would protect Canadians while understanding what is true to us.

All too often what happens is we as Canadians get information or stuff thrown at us that was developed in different countries and we try to modify it. The fear I had and one of the things I wanted to make clear is that we not bring something forward that was developed elsewhere and put it in place here. It is something we have to develop as Canadians. We can use the foreign one as a model and ensure that we study and understand it and know what is working and what is not working.

One point I wanted to make is that down in the United States this is not a proven model. To say we will implement it is not the right thing to do. The hon. member was correct. What we need to do is take a solid look at what we have in Canada, put it together and make sure it reflects the reality of Canadians.

[Business of Supply, April 23rd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to participate in this debate.

The NDP motion which we are discussing today calls on the Canadian government to establish comprehensive legislation similar to the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009 which was recently introduced by the Obama administration in the United States, although the parliamentary secretary claimed differently. He claimed that it was the Bush administration that introduced it. Only a Conservative would stand up and defend Mr. Bush, but that is his prerogative to do that. I just find that very interesting.

While I agree wholeheartedly with the need to protect Canadian consumers, particularly those who are most vulnerable in tough economic times, we must assess whether or not Canadians face the same threat that Americans do before determining whether or not to apply an American solution here in Canada. In other words, we cannot assume that what works south of the border will work here. While it would be foolish to object to protecting Canadian consumers from sudden interest rate increases and account changes, abusive fees and penalties and aggressive solicitation, it is yet unclear as to whether or not Canadians actually encounter exactly the same problems to the extent that American citizens do.

This is why we as Liberals have taken leadership on the issue by initiating three separate studies in order to make that determination. A study by the Senate committee on banking, trade and commerce is currently under way, and separate reviews by the finance and industry committees are set to begin in May. Each of these is designed to examine different elements of the credit card and debit card industries to determine what measures may be necessary in order to further protect Canadian consumers and merchants.

By taking a more broad-based approach, one that includes protecting merchants as well as consumers, the idea is that we as Canadian lawmakers would be much better suited to address the issues that currently face Canadians rather than simply applying a cookie cutter approach that worked in the United States. I might add that this legislation, although it looks very good, is unproven in the United States.

Here in Canada, for instance, consumer interest rates, late payment penalties and repayment terms are determined by banks and not the credit card companies themselves. As such, if we focus exclusively on the credit card companies and neglect the study of the banking institutions that actually establish the terms of the credit card account, then we would be doing a huge disservice to the Canadian public.

It is also worth noting that the proposals in the NDP motion which we are currently debating may not adequately address other concerns. For example, a recent poll commissioned by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business revealed that over the past 12 months, no fewer than 22% of Canadian credit cardholders have received additional cards from companies such as Visa and MasterCard with features such as travel points and extra insurance.

Getting all this and not really asking for it really is a problem. People are being given stuff which they sometimes take. They think it is a great idea and they run with it. They think that because they got it, they deserved it. It really does impose a burden on people who would not otherwise have applied for it, or have done their homework and thought that they really could not afford it but they took it anyway. That is really where one of the issues lies. It is one of the problems.

There is also mounting evidence that the so-called premium credit cards are now being directed toward low-income, elderly and otherwise vulnerable Canadians. For many consumers, they often do not know that they are being charged higher rates until they actually receive their bills.

The concerns in the United States may not be the same as the ones here. When we talk about our banking system, we do have a nice solid banking system that works. We were not plagued by the subprime problem, as was mentioned earlier. Those are issues that all have to be taken into consideration when we are looking at the legislation.

The legislation is appropriate and it may work, but it may have to be modified in order to adapt to Canadian realities. I mention this because while the motion we are currently debating stipulates consumers should be informed of the terms of their accounts, there is nothing in it that would prevent credit card companies from offering cards and upgrades to those people without being asked. I mentioned this earlier.

While there may be some people who feel that regulation in the electronic payment industry could be harmful to Canadians, and that is always something that is out there, I believe the only way to determine this for sure is to take a comprehensive approach to the issue, rather than trying to implement a one-size-fits-all solution.

The NDP motion proposes that the U.S. legislation be applied in Canada. Canada's financial system is much stronger, as I mentioned earlier, than the United States' financial system. It is important to recognize that the problems consumers face with credit cards in the U.S. do not necessarily apply to all Canadians.

One of the problems I also see here is that, before the Prime Minister was in politics, he was opposed to what we had done with the banks. He wanted them to be able to do as they pleased. Now he boasts that we have a banking system here that is far better than anywhere else in the world. This leads me to wonder whether one can have confidence in a prime minister who changes his mind according to his circumstances, especially when something so fundamental is at stake. Before he entered politics, he wanted to take away all regulation of the banking system, and now he is congratulating himself on this system.

So what are we to think of this Prime Minister? Is he serious? Does he say things just to get votes? These are questions Canadians need to ask themselves. Who will protect us from the credit companies or banks? Who will protect them as well? If they had gone in a certain direction, there would have been problems. We have to think of what this Prime Minister believes, and what the Minister of Finance believes.

My Liberal colleagues and I believe there are significant issues that need to be examined with respect to credit cards, such as interest rates, disclosure of information and fees for consumers and retailers.

While the Conservative Party's 2008 election platform pledged to protect consumers with stronger competition laws, it contained no mention of credit cards or their fees.

In the 2009 budget, the government pledged, without giving details, that it would move to limit “business practices that are not beneficial to consumers”, noting that one measure would be to require minimum grace interest-free periods on new purchases.

More recently, the finance minister announced the creation of an advisory committee on finance to “ensure the availability of financing to Canadian businesses and consumers to support the economy and encourage growth”. While the finance minister points to this work as an advisory board in response to questions about credit card rates and fees, it is unclear how the committee's mandate relates to specific issues like interest rates and interest rate increases, payment fees, account transparency and other issues listed in today's motion by the NDP.

My Liberal colleagues and I will continue to pursue the tough questions regarding credit card companies and financial institutions to ensure that Canadian consumers are well-informed and are being treated fairly.

I want to touch on one area that is very important, and that is the interchange fees that are charged to merchants. Fees can vary from one card to another. I think of a small merchant sitting there waiting for business. When there is a sales transaction and a card is used, he does not have the right to turn it down, yet those interchange fees are going to be charged to him. If one card charges 2% and another charges 6% or even more, it is very difficult for that small merchant to plan what his profits are going to be. I am not talking about just protecting the merchant here. That merchant provides jobs. Jobs are what we need in this economy. If we are not protecting that merchant from charges that he is not aware of, then we are killing jobs. This is something the government has to understand.

In order to ensure that consumers are protected, I strongly believe that more information is needed. Once these studies are completed, I think we can take a look at it and ensure that we have everything we need to help the average Canadian.

In the meantime, we will be supporting the NDP motion put forward by the hon. member for Sudbury, because we believe in protecting Canadians as much as possible. Each Canadian deserves to be protected when it comes to finance, safety or any other issue that we have rights to.

[Financial Institutions, April 22nd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, Canadian merchants are struggling to survive in the most painful downturn in generations. Employers are forced to lay off workers just to stay afloat. Credit is limited, but there seems to be no limit to the fees that merchants are charged for credit card service.

The Retail Council of Canada, representing more than 200,000 businesses, states that Canadian merchants pay some of the highest rates in the world. Many governments have taken action to limit interchange fees, while the Conservative government ignores our merchants.

When is the government going to stand up for merchants and business, and stop sticking it to them?

[Employment Insurance, April 20th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the last 300 workers from the Domtar plant in Dryden are getting laid off. Union president, Nick Chasowy, is trying to help his members get through the Conservative government's bureaucracy, with no response from Service Canada. The Conservative MP from the area agreed to meet with union members, but did not bother to show up.

Workers feel jilted and abandoned. When will the HRSD Minister stand up for the men and women of northern Ontario?

[Business of Supply, March 31st, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt in my mind that, ultimately, this government wants to privatize everything it can. The Conservatives do not believe that they have a responsibility to protect small communities. Given their frame of mind, their wild west mentality, they hold the view that if one cannot succeed, if one experiences problems, then one should move to a large city.

In small communities, it is important to have a communication network, and CBC/Radio-Canada is the network that is serving them now and that will continue to serve them in the future—

[Business of Supply, March 31st, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Honoré-Mercier. That is a very good point. We often see the Conservative government act in this fashion. It is doing what it could not do before, by resorting to private members' bills. The Conservatives are doing things through the back door. What they are doing now with CBC/Radio-Canada is a prime example. The government is using the economic situation not to make direct cuts, but to choke the corporation. It is making sure that the money does not get where it should. Personally, I call that an act of cowardice.

It is an act of cowardice where, when one cannot do it directly, one switches over and does it through the back door. We see that often with many of the government's actions and that is not what Canadians want in Parliament. They want a government that is straight with people and faces up to them.

[Business of Supply, March 31st, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Nickel Belt certainly understands what it is like to be in northern Ontario. He has communities, like I do, that really have CBC as their only source of information. We do not have the luxury that parts of southern Ontario or large metropolitan areas have where they have a multitude of stations to choose from. To cut service to somewhere like Sudbury so that northern Ontario gets a smaller service, it really hurts every Canadian and every northern Ontarian.

The thing is that there are only 16 people covering a massive area. Northern Ontario is a large piece of geography. It is not like a concentrated city where there are hundreds of people, if not thousands of people, covering events within a couple of hundred square kilometres. We have tens of hundreds of thousands of space and we are cutting the staff in half. We are cutting 16 people down to 8, which is just not enough to run a proper radio station.

Cutting this out of northern Ontario and out of Sudbury is a black eye to the people of northern Ontario.