Industry committee  We haven't had our counsel review it from the constitutional perspective in light of the Spencer decision. We're working on the basis that the government has vetted this bill through its own lawyers—Justice—and that it would actually hold water in that context.

Industry committee  My understanding is that the amount is up to $100,000. Our concern is that if the maximum amount would be imposed on a small credit union, as you said, with say $10 million in assets, that would have very significant consequences, compared to what might happen if a bank faced the

Industry committee  It's a bit of a complicated question, but we can try to provide you some of the data, if any of that's going on. But you have to keep in mind that there is now anti-money-laundering and anti-terrorist financing legislation that, to my understanding, requires that this sort of inf

Industry committee  It's a fairly broad subject. It comes down to there being a training element at the credit unions. We have our own organization, CUSOURCE, which would train individuals to identify fraud and the various features of fraud. Our lenders and our front-line staff will be put through t

Industry committee  What is attractive about the bill is that it would eliminate the need for the crime prevention office. As you can imagine, in the credit union system we have fairly small institutions. There is an administrative burden that goes along with it. We actually like the way the bill

Industry committee  I would just reiterate that the one concern we have in this section is the fact that it's targeted at next of kin rather than, more generally, family members being able to disclose. There's not a definition of next of kin in the legislation, so it's hard for us to interpret tha