SoVote

Ms. Heather McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona, NDP)

Feb/1/24 5:49:56 p.m.
Watch

After Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine, millions of Ukrainians sought safety and comfort with their neighbours. I was in Poland, in March both last year and the previous year, and saw immediately after the invasion how Polish people opened their arms and welcomed Ukrainians into their community. We saw welcome centres where displaced Ukrainian women, mothers and children, and the elderly, were welcomed into those communities. We saw the support that was given by the community, how difficult it was for people in Poland to do that, and how they did it anyway. Canada will always stand with Poland. Poland is our NATO partner. We will continue to fight to make sure that there is an end to Putin's illegal and unjustified war because we know that this is happening on Poland's doorstep. The Canadian government must do everything possible within its means to continue to press for there to be a withdrawal of all Russian forces. I am also heartened to see the Polish people continue to embrace democracy. It is another reason that May 3 should be designated as Polish constitution day here in Canada. Recently, the Polish people voted in elections to restore political centrism to Poland after years of right-leaning rule and to vote in a government that will work to restore and strengthen Poland's democratic institutions. New Democrats strongly support the recognition of Polish heritage month every May. We welcome Motion No. 75 and hope to be able to celebrate Polish constitution day and Polish heritage month this year in our ridings. We are calling on all parties to quickly pass this to ensure that this year, Canada will have its first Polish heritage month. We are calling on the Liberal government to ensure tangible, stable and predictable resources and opportunities for the Polish community across Canada so they are able to share their rich, vibrant and delicious culture with all of us. I congratulate the member.

327 words

Mr. James Maloney (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.)

Feb/1/24 5:50:06 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am thrilled to stand in support of my colleague today in seconding Motion No. 75, recognizing the great contribution that Polish Canadians have made in building this country, naming May 3 as Polish constitution day and the month of May every year as Polish heritage month. First, I want to congratulate and thank my colleague from Mississauga East—Cooksville for this initiative. It has been a long time coming and I am proud to be part of this and I want to applaud him for that. As evidenced by my faux pas at the outset, I am proud of my Irish heritage. I am not Polish but I am hoping that by the time I sit down, people here today will understand why I am proud to have a strong connection to the Polish community not only in Etobicoke—Lakeshore but throughout my entire life. The ties between our two countries are strong and they run deep. The profound impact of our Polish Canadian community on Canada's social, cultural, political and economic landscape cannot be overstated. Polish immigration to Canada reaches back to as early as 1752, over 100 years before Confederation, when the first documented Polish immigrants set foot on Canadian soil in Montreal. While it would be naive to think that there were not struggles during the early decades after their arrival, like many immigrant communities who came after them, the Polish people endured and pushed forward to become an important part of the foundation of Canadian society. Our friendship and companionship have grown over the years. Polish soldiers trained in southern Ontario for the First World War. We fought together at Dieppe. Canada was the first country to approve Poland joining NATO in 1998 and our military co-operation continues as we work together to secure eastern Europe against Russian aggression. Our soldiers train together in Latvia, and we both share a vision for a democratic, unified and independent Ukraine. We are both adherents of human rights, democracy and the rule of law. Together we fight and continue to work against tyranny. Economically, we are strong partners. In 2022, there was over $4 billion worth of trade between our two countries, up from $2.85 billion in 2018. The partnership is growing. The Polish people's dedication and perseverance have left an enduring mark on our nation and continue to do so. Our history books are filled with the names of many people of Polish descent in every occupation. Since the beginning of our Parliament, Polish Canadians have been in this House. I think of Alexandre-Édouard Kierzkowski, an MP from 1867 to 1870. I think of the Hon. Don Mazankowski, who served with distinction and honour as our deputy prime minister. There was the Hon. Steven Paproski and my friend Jesse Flis, who also served in this chamber. We have him to thank, in large part, for flag day, which we will be celebrating on February 15. I think, too, of Ted Opitz, who served in this House. Today, we have a number of Polish MPs or descendants of Polish families in our chamber, including four of my colleagues, one of whom sits just over there, from Windsor—Tecumseh and also the member for Calgary Shepard across the way. Provincially, I think of Bonnie Crombie who is an effective voice for the Polish community. She, too, served in this chamber. Of course, in my own riding, there is Chris Korwin-Kuczynski, who served municipally in the city of Toronto and proudly calls Etobicoke—Lakeshore home and has worked forward in getting us here today. Culturally, Polish Canadians have enriched the social and cultural fabric of our country. I think of pianist Janina Fialkowska, whose fingers have danced on piano keys for decades, entertaining people everywhere. Who did not grow up listening to Peter Gzowski on CBC? However, he was not the only famous Canadian Gzowski. His paternal great-grandfather was Sir Casimir Gzowski, of Polish nobility, who was a prominent engineer in Canada and who worked on the Grand Trunk Railway and the Welland Canal. Sir Casimir Gzowski was knighted by Queen Victoria. Canadian legend Geddy Lee, and I did not know this until recently, of Rush has been one of the biggest Canadian music influences in history, certainly in my lifetime, and has very strong Polish roots. His parents were Polish Holocaust survivors who emigrated to Canada. Actress and activist Lisa Ray, who grew up in Etobicoke, has a Polish mother. Media mogul Moses Znaimer's mother, too, was from Poland. Olympian Penny Oleksiak, hockey legend Wayne Gretzky and current captain of the Toronto Maple Leafs John Tavares all have Polish roots. Today, Canada's Polish population is estimated at over 1.1 million people, 2.71% of the population and is concentrated mostly in Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia. I would like to thank the Canadian Polish Congress for all it does to promote awareness of and respect for Poland's history and heritage. As my friend across the way indicated, I am pretty sure if I look around, I could see them in Ottawa today. I know the president is here in Ottawa today, and I want to thank him for all he is doing, along with all his colleagues. I am proud to say the Polish presence and influence in my riding of Etobicoke—Lakeshore is incredibly strong. Etobicoke—Lakeshore is home to the Consul General of the Republic of Poland. I would like to thank Magdalena Pszczółkowska, the Consul General of the Republic of Poland for all she does in Canada and in Etobicoke—Lakeshore. The faith of Polish Canadians is strong and is an inspiration. I think of St. Mark's Parish, St. Theresa's Parish and the Polish Full Gospel Church, all located in Etobicoke-Lakeshore. There are many other organizations: the Polish Association of Toronto, the Polish Teachers Association in Canada and the Polish Cultural Centre. There is a Seniors Polish Group that meets at the Stonegate Community Health Centre. We also have the Polish National Union of Canada, Branch 1 in Etobicoke—Lakeshore. I feel so incredibly fortunate to have such a vibrant Polish community at home. It did not start there. I was born and raised in Thunder Bay, which has a proud Polish community. I spent my youth going to mass at St. Mary Our Lady Queen of Poland Church with my mother, father and my two brothers. I vividly remember going to seven o'clock mass on Sunday nights. I have fond memories of going and buying perogies, and eating that fine Polish food at the Polish hall in Thunder Bay. I sent my brother a text earlier, just before I got up, asking if the Polish hall had a name, and he said that it was just called the Polish hall. I remember it well. Every year, I look forward to Polish celebrations, including in the neighbouring riding of Parkdale—High Park and the Roncesvalles Polish Festival, which marks its 17th anniversary this year. That is something to be very proud of. My point is that Polish Canadians continue to, as they always have, make Canada a better place. Motion No. 75 goes far beyond acknowledging the historical bonds connecting Canada and Poland. It celebrates the importance of those contributions. When we look at people in the Polish community, we see how proud they are to be Polish and how proud they are to be Canadians. That cannot be overlooked. That is why this motion is so important. To designate May 3 as Polish constitution day and dedicate the entire month of May to Polish heritage goes beyond symbolism. It recognizes and captures that importance. I want to thank every Polish Canadian for the contributions they have made to this great country. I look forward to supporting this motion. I know I do not have to ask, but I am going to do it anyway. I want every member in this House to join us in doing just that.

1353 words

Mr. Yves Perron (Berthier—Maskinongé, BQ)

Feb/1/24 5:58:45 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-40

Madam Speaker, it is a great pleasure for me to speak to Motion No. 75. It is also a great pleasure to see you back in the chair and to see your smiling face again. It is only right for us to adopt this motion. There is just one question we should be asking ourselves. Given how long the Polish people and Polish culture have been contributing strength and vitality to our societies, and given that they originated many of the institutions that exist in our society, why has this not been done before? It is never too late to do the right thing, so let us get to it. We will vote in favour of the motion to recognize the outstanding contributions the Polish nation has made to the Canadian and Quebec nations. As members know, a lot of people in Poland speak French, which creates a special bond between Quebeckers and the Polish people. It draws us closer together. A total of 79,000 people in Quebec, 55,000 of whom were born there, claim Polish ancestry. That is a lot of people, and we share a history, because they have been here for a long time. I know that sometimes my colleagues in the House get tired of hearing us talk about the history of Quebec and the important milestones, but we talk about it all the time because we know that, deep down, our colleagues really like hearing it. When we talk about the milestones associated with the Quiet Revolution, the Charter of the French Language, and so on, it should be noted that people of Polish descent were there with us. They have been living in Quebec since 1752. At that time, in 1752, this land was still New France, not Canada. Dominique Debartzch, a fur trader, arrived in 1752. Charles Blaskowitz followed soon after in 1757. These people began contributing to our collective wealth in the New France era. That is amazing. My colleague also mentioned one of the most remarkable individuals who founded the Polish Institute of Arts and Sciences in Canada, an important institution in Quebec, in 1943. I am talking about Wanda Stachiewicz. Before arriving in Quebec, she was a member of the resistance. I would also point out that she was a mother of three. I would like the members present, and anyone else who is tuning in, especially anyone who is a parent, to take a few seconds to imagine what that might be like. Even those who are not parents can still imagine what it must have been like to be a member of the resistance during the Second World War, while at the same time having three children to care for. These people left their homeland to come here, not always by choice. We are pleased that they stayed, obviously, but it is important to understand the sacrifice, the burden, and to recognize this value. I do not think I am wrong to say today that the Polish people probably understand the value of independence better than any other people, because they have lost it several times, because it was threatened with violence, with occupation. It takes a lot of resilience to withstand that. I commend them for their strength, their courage and their tenacity. I tip my hat to them and thank them for participating in building a better society here and now. The people of Poland are such a big part of Quebec culture that they are also part of our literature. I want to mention a famous novel by Arlette Cousture, Ces enfants d'ailleurs, which tells the story of a family who flee their homeland to come live here, near a wide river, in the colourful and inviting city of Montreal. Some of that colour is supplied by the Polish community. At the end of the day, it makes for a beautiful mosaic. I am very happy to contribute to making May 3 “Polish Constitution Day” and the month of May every year “Polish Heritage Month”. I willingly promise to participate in the celebrations, and I invite everyone to join in. Obviously, they will commemorate May 3, 1791, the date on which the Polish constitution was adopted, some 20 years after the disgraceful partition of the Polish territory by Russia and Germany. The Polish constitution was inspired by the French Revolution and the Enlightenment, which is based on the values of reason, freedom and the rule of law. I mentioned it earlier, but I want to reiterate that these people really know the meaning of independence. Of course, at the same time, in Quebec, we were following a very different path. Far be it from me to compare Quebeckers' experience with that of the Polish people. What we experienced was not as intense, but we share a common pursuit of growing, thriving and becoming independent as a nation. I am sure that when that day comes, we will get there with the help of Quebec's Polish community, which will continue to enrich our history and our lives. We are going to vote in favour of the motion, but there is one small concern. It is about the wording, which I think has a Canadian slant. It refers to the idea of multiculturalism, as if we are drowning in it. Quebec's vision is not in opposition to that, it is just different. Our vision is interculturalism. We know that the people of Poland have contributed plenty of richness to Quebec, and there are aspects that we need to integrate into our values. They are generous and hard-working. We are happy to live alongside them, and I am very grateful to them. Our respective societies, as Canadians and Quebeckers, who share this Parliament for the time being, are more than happy to celebrate the Polish nation. The Bloc Québécois will be enthusiastically voting in favour of this motion and celebrating the richness of this culture. It is important to recognize other peoples. Certain members may have been offended by my talk of Quebec's political independence this evening. It bothers some people, but others are used to it. Those of us hoping things might be different someday might have to talk to each other. Just today, in fact, a federal commission was struck pursuant to Bill C‑40, and there is no requirement for its judges to be bilingual. I do not think that should happen in a country with two official languages, French and English, yet it does. I saw it on my news feed, and I could not help but talk about the words of my colleague from Rivière‑du‑Nord, who represents the Bloc Québécois at the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and who spoke out against that. Anyway, we think celebrating people of Polish origin is absolutely fantastic. We are happy to live with them and grow with them because, now that we live together, we have shared lives, shared experiences. That is how we build a just and equitable society. I also want to comment on their recognition of the principle of independence, which we believe in, too, of course, and we hope for that same experience in a sovereign Quebec. With the bit of time I have left, I am going to take a risk. I hope, if people can hear me, that they will excuse my accent. Dobry wieczor pozdrawiam i dziekuje. I will translate what I just said to make sure it was understood. I just said, “Good evening, best regards and thank you”.

1288 words

Mr. Brian Masse (Windsor West, NDP)

Feb/1/24 6:08:48 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is an honour to rise here to speak to Motion No. 75, Polish heritage month. I am going to read the motion, so that we have it in the record. This is important not only for the Polish community, but also for the country of Canada and the multiculturalism that we have. We also have a country that is being built by people coming here and contributing in many different ways, not only in terms of a heritage aspect but also in terms of the economy and civil society. That has been the experience of the Polish community in Windsor, which has done so much for so many years. This also reflects one of the reasons that we have heritage months and the recognition of different weeks. In Ontario, there is already a Polish Heritage Month. The motion moves that: (a) the House recognize the significant contributions Polish Canadians have made to Canadian society, economy, politics and culture, and the importance of educating Canadians of all ages about the core values that Polish Canadians have imparted to the strength and diversity of Canada; and (b) in the opinion of the House, the government should reflect upon Polish heritage for future generations and designate May 3 of every year as Polish Constitution Day, and the month of May, every year, as Polish Heritage Month. That is important not only for the Polish community but also for other communities. It means that we embrace multiculturalism and the participation of citizens who come to build a new life here, who bring some of their culture and experiences with them and get a chance to shape our democracy, our communities and our society. This is the experience I had with the Polish community before politics, when I worked at the Multicultural Council of Windsor and Essex County, which also has a Polish carrousel as part of the Carrousel of the Nations, as well as when I became a city councillor. I want to recognize just one person of many. He is Jerzy Barycki of our Polish community and the Canadian Business and Professional Association of Windsor. It is very important to recognize the contributions one can make. Jerzy has been recognized with the Cross of Merit in Poland, the Order of Merit of the Republic of Poland, the Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal and many other different things. I got to know him as just a citizen sitting on our panel at the race and ethnic relations committee of Windsor and Essex County, when I was chair of that committee. He brought forth the idea to have the city of Windsor twin with Lublin, Poland, and have our city expand its horizons. I saw a situation evolving that took from the streets of Windsor and Essex County and continued to grow that relationship with Lublin, making sure that we had civic engagement by all. We looked at the settlements of Polish citizens from the 1800s to the forefront of businesses, contributing and being part of our Armed Forces, our citizens who do work at home, our auto industry, manufacturing and a number of different avenues from very professional to blue collar. Delegations went over on several trips, and this convinced me that there is no doubt we can achieve just about anything. When I came here as a member of Parliament in 2002, I was fortunate to meet Joe Comartin, the former member of Parliament for Windsor—Tecumseh. Back in 2007, we started to press for a waiving of the visitor visa for Polish citizens. We knew that was a big issue with regard to getting some justice on that file, but we had a government at that time that we were not sure was going to do the right thing. Eventually, it did. I want to give credit to then minister Jason Kenney, who actually worked hard on this and deserves a note in this chamber for the hard work of making sure a change took place. That was one that was adopted by all the corners of the House, and it shows that, when we put ourselves to the test, at different times, we can find more in common than not. It does not always seem that this place is conducive to that, but the reality is that we can get some good work done. One thing I want to note with regard to this heritage month is that we have other ones that are emerging as well. With respect to the Polish heritage month, I hope the government allocates some resources to making sure that we actually have information and supports for programs and services. It may not be official in this motion, because that cannot be appropriate at this point in time. However, it should set a standard for places such as the Dom Polski in Windsor, where we have events and heritage months for Ontario. Now, hopefully, for this and other types of cultural engagement, there would be adequate supports and programs. That has happened at different points and different times over the years. Windsor and Essex county have seen this heritage play itself out with a lot of pride. I mentioned some World War II veterans who were in our contingent of support for the Canadian Armed Forces. Some of them came to my community. They were some of the hardest workers, who contributed to developing not only the Polish community but also the sectors we have in our country. Polish Canadians started immigrating to Canada in 1858, which is when recording began. I am sure others came before then. It is important that this chamber, not just Ontario, recognizes a heritage month because it is from coast to coast to coast. We reflect individually, which happens quite a bit, as we have heard other members, including me, talk about the experiences they have had in local communities. As we travel in this job across Canada and to other places, including the United States, where I have been many times, I have noticed that, in the many different communities in Canada, there is a special flavour and element that comes with the pride of having cultural celebrations that include other communities. Across the river from Windsor, two miles to the north, there is Detroit and the United States, and they do things differently than we do. It is not that they do not have those cultural connections, but there is a special element to Canada that is rather unique. With the opportunities I have, I find these motions are very important, but, at the same time, I hope they are going to continue to encourage the government to make sure that heritage and other types of budgetary expenses, which may be seen as soft to some members in this chamber who might see budgetary expenditures as a loss in supporting cultural celebrations, will create engagement with other countries, groups and organizations. In my community, Lublin, with the city of Windsor, citizens stepped up to help out. They create opportunities for economic development and diversity. I was one of the individuals put on the initial list of people who were banned in Russia. I did not mind. When I got the notification, my response was that I had hoped I could put myself higher on the list. It is because of some of the work I have done on this issue, among other things, and the importance we have as a country right now to support so many of the brothers and sisters in the Polish community within overlapping societies. The motion is symbolic in many respects. It is not legislation, but it would create an opportunity and a path forward. At the same time, I know it reflects the important grounding that is necessary. When we celebrate Polish Heritage Month in the province Ontario, it is a very special event, where there are professional discussions, celebrations, food and many different things. We have seen displays and other things that Jerzy and the rest of the group put together that have educated new people about Polish contributions, whether they are in arts, culture, the economy, or many different things. Those things lead to economic development. The delegations over the years have strengthened the relationship and economic opportunity. To wrap up, I am grateful I have had the opportunity to speak. This is very important for the Polish community, but it is also reflective of a country that accepts and wants the civic engagement of other cultures in the very fabric of how we do things on a daily basis. It is most important to recognize them through special relationships. Polish heritage month is well timed. It is due, and I thank the mover of the motion.

1462 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Feb/1/24 6:17:51 p.m.
Watch

The hon. member for Mississauga East—Cooksville for his right of reply.

13 words

Mr. Peter Fonseca (Mississauga East—Cooksville, Lib.)

Feb/1/24 6:17:57 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, witam i dziękuję. I am delighted to wrap up this beautiful discussion that we have had here on my private member's motion, Motion No. 75. The diverse voices of my colleagues, spanning various political affiliations and regions of our country, have resonated with unwavering support, declaring May as Polish heritage month and designating May 3 as Polish constitution day in Canada. The unanimous backing from members across the spectrum is a testament to the profound contributions of our Polish-Canadian communities. I want to thank my colleagues, the members of Parliament who have spoken today, the members for Yellowhead, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, Edmonton Strathcona, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, Berthier—Maskinongé and Windsor West, the member we just heard from. I want to thank all those who participated as well in the first hour of debate for their thoughtful expression. I express my heartfelt gratitude to the Polonia in Canada, whose roots trace back to the arrival of the first Polish immigrant in 1752. Over 272 years, this community has evolved into its present-day Polish diaspora of 1.1 million. Nicolaus Copernicus, the eminent Polish mathematician, doctor of medicine, theologian and astronomer, once said, “To know that we know what we know, and to know that we do not know what we do not know, that is true knowledge.” What we do know is true is the profound impact of the Polish-Canadian community on Canada's social, economic and political landscape. Its contribution in arts, music, entrepreneurship and academia have enriched our society immeasurably. This motion owes its existence to the dedicated leaders within the Polish community who have tirelessly supported me and fellow members here in sharing their stories of Canadians of Polish descent. I extend my appreciation to those watching. We know some are with us here in the chamber today, whether in person or through our parliamentary channel. While I cannot name everyone, I want to express a big thanks to His Excellency, Ambassador Witold Dzielski and his officials; to the Canadian Polish Congress and its president, John Tomczak, and vice-president, Dominik Roszak; as well as to the entire executive team of the Canadian Polish Congress. I would also like to acknowledge the efforts of the various Polish Congress branch presidents and their boards, our Canada-Poland parliamentary friendship group and our chair, who was born in Poland and represents his community of Windsor—Tecumseh in the House. I know he will be working hard for our first flag raising here, when we get to commemorate May as Polish heritage month. I had the privilege of joining my Polish community friends this past weekend at the Polish combatants' hall for the annual new year oplatek, or wafer reception. It was a moment to break bread, reflect on the past year and celebrate the achievements of the Polonia in Canada. This year marks the 90th anniversary of the Canadian Polish Congress, and we took the opportunity to express our gratitude to Canadian-Polish veterans who bravely fought for the peace, freedoms and democracy that we enjoy today. I feel like I have been adopted by the Polish community. Like the Speaker, we come from Portuguese descent. That is maybe like John Tavares, with Portuguese and Polish coming together, but it has been a true honour. At that function, I received the Ignacy Jan Paderewski Polish medal of recognition. It is with pride that I wear it here today. I am very thankful for this recognition. I extend my heartfelt thanks to Polish Canadians for Poland's steadfast support for Ukraine during these challenging times, my wife being of Ukrainian descent. The Polish spirit, determination and tireless efforts exemplify their commitment to enriching Canada with Polish culture, a strong work ethic, deep faith and unparalleled resilience. When we think about what we are recognizing today, we are celebrating Polish heritage month and May 3 constitution day, from coast to coast to coast. I look forward to raising that Polish flag here on this Hill in Parliament, along with the Canadian flag. Dziękuję bardzo. Niech żyje Polska. Niech żyje Kanada.

703 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Feb/1/24 6:23:21 p.m.
Watch

It being 6:23 p.m., the time provided for debate has expired. Accordingly, the question is on the motion. If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

65 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Feb/1/24 6:25:11 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-365

It being 6:24 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 30(7), the House will now proceed to the consideration of Bill C-365, an act respecting the implementation of a consumer-led banking system for Canadians, under Private Members' Business.

42 words

Mr. Peter Fonseca

Feb/1/24 6:25:11 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will ask for a recorded vote.

9 words

Recorded

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Feb/1/24 6:25:11 p.m.
Watch

Pursuant to Standing Order 93, the division stands deferred until Wednesday, February 7, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

23 words

Mr. Ryan Williams (Bay of Quinte, CPC)

Feb/1/24 6:25:47 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-365

moved that Bill C-365, an act respecting the implementation of a consumer-led banking system for Canadians, be read the second time and referred to a committee. He said: Madam Speaker, when I was a young boy, growing up, like many Canadians, I fondly remember playing the game Monopoly. I loved owning all the utilities, collecting Park Place and Boardwalk, then putting hotels on them and bankrupting all my brothers, sisters and family members. It was really great. The game, of course, was developed in the early 1900s by Lizzie Magie. She wanted it to be an educational tool. It was meant to show the negative aspect of property held in the hands of a very few. One hundred years later, Canadians see that Canada has a monopoly problem. Canadians pay the highest cellphone bills on the whole planet. When it comes to groceries, we only have three Canadian grocery chains and two American chains that are driving prices up. When it comes to a lot of industries, like the Internet, we have a monopoly in the sky overhead. We have satellite, which is the only accessible Internet a lot of our six million rural Canadians can get from Elon Musk's Starlink. Then we look at the main one, which is banking. We only have five Canadian banks that control 87% of all the mortgages. Excuse me, but it was five. Two weeks ago, the finance minister approved the merger of HSBC and RBC. The number one bank bought the number seven bank, which means that five banks now control 90% of all the mortgages in Canada. Talking about how bad it is with monopolies, we can go back to 1776. Adam Smith talked about monopolies in The Wealth of Nations. He talked about the invisible hand and the many buyers and sellers who negotiate and dictate prices. If we remove that invisible hand, and if we take away sellers and keep it to a very few, then prices go up and wages go down. We are seeing that across Canada. Canada is the country that has the most monopolies per industry sector. Oligopoly was a word created in 1930, and it means “few sellers”. It actually comes from the word “oligarch”. When we talk about an oligopoly, that is what we are talking about in the banking sector. When we have few sellers, prices go up, services go down, wages go down, start-ups go down and innovation goes down. We only have a month to look back at what happened, with RBC announcing it was going to buy HSBC, and to see exactly what happened from that. Before the announcement, HSBC had interest rates of 6.4% versus RBC at 7.15%. After the announcement, those rates went up 6.55%. That meant if someone had a mortgage of $500,000 in Vancouver, they just paid $750 more a year. Monopolies benefit only the very few. The shareholders and the owners are the only ones who benefit, while Canadians lose. We certainly have that problem. When it comes to the banking sector, we do have major problems because of this oligopoly. One-third of Canadians are upset with their financial institutions. Canadians pay some of the highest banking fees in the world. Because of economic conditions, J.D. Power stated that 50% of banking customers are “financially vulnerable or stressed”. That is an increase of 6% from only a year ago. The banks will not share people's financial information. If people want the freedom to deal with another bank or institution, the banks feel that they own that information and will not share it with whom people want it shared. Canadians are nickel-and-dimed by the big banks for basic financial services, which Brits, Australians and Americans get for free. The answer to our monopoly and oligopoly problem is right in front of us. A robust, open banking framework or consumer-led banking would allow the industry to overhaul its outdated systems and to modernize payment infrastructure, and would allow a platform for fintechs to fill the gaps left by Canada's oligopoly with one simple method. The banks would have to share one's financial data with one's consent. Consumer-led banking makes the banks have to use an API, application program interface, so that companies could bank with people, and Canadians would get financial freedom. It is just common sense. It is freedom to decide who to bank with, which apps people want to use, how long their data is going to be used for and for what purposes. It would mean that hundreds of financial institution applications and even new banks would be able to ply for Canadians' business, and Canadians would have the freedom of choice to decide who gets their banking business. However, consumer-led banking, open banking, has already been delayed by this Liberal government for six years. My bill, Bill C-365, would end this six-year delay, and there is not a moment to lose. Other countries get it. South Korea implemented this in 2019, India in 2011, Australia in 2020, Japan in 2017, New Zealand in 2018 and the U.K. in 2018. Through consumer-led banking, we have seen countries other than Canada empower their consumers by allowing them, through security access, to share their own financial data. Other countries have reaped the rewards that Canada has lost out on. In the U.K., with consumer-led banking implemented, with only 14% market share, consumers pay zero dollars for monthly transactional fees or for overdraft fees. Consumers in the U.K. pay zero dollars to their bank in general. The savings per year for the people in the U.K. is 12 billion pounds, and for small businesses, it is eight billion pounds. There have been over 250 companies created and over 4,000 jobs. The reality, much like the industrial policy that Canada has lost out on, is that the most competitive and forward-looking leaders are based in other countries. Canada has some really great financial tech companies ready to lead the world, but if this is not implemented, they are going to leave Canada. This government has stalled, and the industry is losing patience, but let us walk through what has happened with this. The government announced in 2018 that consumer-led and open banking would be in place by 2023. It is way past 2023. The government hired an expert panel. Does that sound familiar? It hired an expert panel to weigh in back in the summer of 2021, which had a comprehensive recommendation of how to set up the system, including an 18-month implementation schedule. The government hired a new expert to then come up with the framework in 2021. The expert reported back to the government in early 2023, but the report was never made public. In fact, it sits on the finance minister's desk. The minister sat on this report for six months and stalled this legislation, and now promises that it will be implemented. Strangely enough, after my private member's bill, Bill C-365, to get the government to implement consumer-led banking, it was tabled. However, this patient fintech industry is losing its patience, and we risk losing these companies, potentially worth hundreds of billions of dollars to this economy, at time when we need it the most. For Canadians out there who are asking what “fintech” is, it stands for financial technology companies, and more Canadians have used a fintech app than they might even know. If a person cannot qualify for a loan because they do not have a Canadian credit history, they can share their monthly rent payments information with Borrowell's Rent Advantage to build their credit store. QuickBooks uses a person's transaction data to automate their bookkeeping, and there are one million small businesses using this app. Wealthica tracks a person's investment accounts at different banks while Wealthsimple is a Canadian online investment management service. Shakepay allows people to pay friends, buy Bitcoin and send money. KOHO is a no-fee spending and savings account with the perks of a credit card. Wise allows people to send cross-border currency quickly and efficiently. The fintech industry in Canada is worth $9.4 billion with 169 investments in 2021 worth $1.75 billion, but it is despite this government, not because of it. Companies exist, but is almost in a black market. Nine million Canadians have been simply giving away their online banking usernames and passwords, or what we call “screen scraping”, because the banks will not pass that information on. Screen scraping is illegal in most countries. Can members imagine having to share their safe word with another company because the banks just will not share their information? It is incredibly dangerous. As part of the U.K.'s open-banking reforms, the U.K. scrapped it, banned it and made it so that it could not happen. However, for nine million Canadians, it is happening each and every day. Consumers need laws that force the banks to allow them to, on request, transfer their data from a bank to a financial tech organization, or to move it from bank to bank in order to give them financial freedom. It defines how the consent should be obtained, as well as the cybersecurity requirements that banks and apps must meet. Perhaps most importantly, open banking also helps customers hold their banks or fintechs liable if and when they are unreliable with their data. Canada's reluctance to embrace open banking has recklessly allowed Canadians' private data to be at risk or compromised. Competition would help fix fraud. It makes companies sharper and makes them invest in better technologies. Currently, with fraud increasing, there has been a decrease in satisfaction with how banks handle fraud-related problem resolution. With competition, we would solve that. The financial institutions that rank the highest in J.D. Power are those that effectively communicate about fees, fraud and savings; provide tools and information about budgeting and debt reduction; and address security and fraud problems in a timely manner. members can imagine that competition would also fix fraud. It is the lack of competition that is making Canadians have to put their data at risk, and this is compromising Canadians and Canadian businesses. Let us be clear. Canadians want this. It is not just the cost savings, but the service. When we look at what Canadians want out of their banks, they want to be able to have the tools they want, when they want them. They want a bank that looks after their needs, and one that gets back to them. A lot of these fintechs are open during the weekends. We have seen other industries explode when they have competition. We see the service go up. We see wages go up. We make sure that we create good jobs that stay in Canada at a time when we need them. Here are some comments we received when I put this bill forward. We have had a lot of good, positive feedback from fintechs that are desperately trying to get this legislation through. They have been asking for it for six years. We have Sherri-Lee Mathers, an automation-obsessed accounting technologist, which are her words, in craft brewing technology. She writes, “Open Banking will bring improved Data-driven insights, and cashflow planning so desperately needed by Canadian Small Businesses. Especially, as they weather the challenges in the financial climate especially those industries that are still trying to recover from the pandemic!!...I SAY YES to OPEN BANKING! Tanya Hilts is a CPB whose business name is Rev Up Your Business with Tanya: The Cloud-Savvy Bookkeeper & Efficiency Evangelist! These are great names. They are obviously entrepreneurs. Tanya writes, “Thank you...for your support....This is a game-changer for Canadian businesses, offering unparalleled transparency and control over financial data.” Almost everyone I have met with supports this initiative and wants to make sure we get this right, get it through and get it going. The other part right now is that start-ups in Canada are at a 20-year low. We have 100,000 fewer start-ups from entrepreneurs in Canada than we did 20 years ago, and this is at a time when we are seeing massive layoffs in the Canadian economy. We had announcements even in the last couple of weeks of thousands of jobs that are coming to an end and workers being laid off. We need this industry to grow. We need it to prosper. We certainly need it to excel with the right framework from the government, but we need that to happen right now. The solution to Canada's monopoly problem is a Canadian consumer-led banking initiative and legislation that we want before the House within six months of this bill passing. In the United Kingdom, consumer-led banking has saved individuals 12 billion pounds per year and businesses over 6 billion pounds per year, with improved access to financial services, lower fees and greater control of their financial data. Canadians know what a monopoly is, but they hardly know what a free market is. I talked about the board game Monopoly, and there is another board game called Anti-Monopoly, which is supposed to talk about the free-market system. It was supposed to teach our kids and families about a free market and what it is. After 100 years of monopolies in Canada, it is time we open the free market. Today, Bill C-365 is calling for the government to reaffirm a promise to enact consumer-led banking and introduce legislation within six months so Canadians can have a free market in the banking sector and, with it, financial freedom and better prices, because Canadians and the Canadian fintech industry deserve more. As the Conservative Party, we want to bring home savings and freedom to consumers. Let us bring home open banking to Canadians and the Canadian public.

2364 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Feb/1/24 6:40:26 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, as I am sure the member is aware, in the fall economic statement, which is the debate that was going on, but Conservatives do not want to pass the legislation and are filibustering it, it talks about setting and establishing the framework for a lot of the things, and I would suggest possibly more, that he is talking about now. It talks about how the budget 2024 legislation will incorporate it. I wonder if the member would make a commitment to not only support it, but also encourage his colleagues across the way to try to get it passed relatively quickly.

103 words

Mr. Ryan Williams

Feb/1/24 6:41:10 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, this is so simple, and I think I speak on behalf of all Canadians. I have five words: We do not believe them. They have had six years since they promised to implement this legislation. They said it would be done by 2023; it is 2024. All these companies have been promised one thing, but they did not get the answers. A report for this exact open-banking legislation is sitting on the desk of the finance minister. It was after the fact that this private member's bill hit the floor that the government even mentioned in the fall economic statement. It is time to get this implemented. Let us get it done.

116 words

Mr. Jean-Denis Garon (Mirabel, BQ)

Feb/1/24 6:41:52 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-365

Madam Speaker, first of all, I thank my colleague for Bill C‑365, which is very interesting. I look forward to talking about it in my speech. Many of these fintech companies are provincially regulated tech start-ups. In fact, the largest financial institution in Quebec, Desjardins, is a co‑operative operating under the provincial jurisdiction of the Government of Quebec and is not subject to federal legislation. I would like to know whether my colleague has considered the need to align with Quebec's wish to consult and legislate in this area, and whether he is open to the idea of amending Bill C‑365 to prevent a situation where some banks are regulated under an open banking system and Desjardins, in Quebec, remains unregulated or not yet regulated. I wonder whether my colleague has thought about that aspect.

144 words

Mr. Ryan Williams

Feb/1/24 6:42:46 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-27

Madam Speaker, the member is a new addition to our industry committee; I look forward to working with him. We see this across a lot of different spectra right now. This bill is asking for legislation. The legislation has to come forward. It is much the same as we are seeing with Bill C-27, and we have a much better privacy bill in Quebec, so I will agree with that. It is much the same as we saw today when we were talking about the problems with Manulife and Loblaw, and the fact that some of the legislation is provincial that is allowing Manulife to sole-source pharmaceuticals. Yes, I agree with the member. We always need to look at the provinces, and we are looking at that with some of that legislation. However, let us get the legislation forward and passed, so we can all talk about it in the House of Commons and then get it passed for Quebec and all Canadians.

165 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Feb/1/24 6:43:42 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, can the member give a clear indication of how much consultation he did within the industry before tabling the legislation?

22 words

Mr. Ryan Williams

Feb/1/24 6:43:58 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I probably did a lot more than the government, because we have not seen a report; it is sitting on a desk. We do not even know what it has done for consultation. I am just going to reiterate what the government has done, how long it has taken and why we are trying to get this through. The government announced, in 2018, that this would be in place by 2023. It hired an expert panel to weigh in, which reported back in the summer of 2021. The government then hired a new expert to come up with a framework in 2021, and the expert reported back. He was still being paid by the government, on the payroll, in early 2023. The report is sitting on a desk, and nothing has happened. I have probably talked to just as many people in six months as the government did during its consultation, but I can say that all of them, every one of them, wants this legislation. Let us get this legislation in front of Parliament, and let us get it through.

183 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Feb/1/24 6:44:49 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I think, in terms of a secure and stable financial sector, that is what Canadians want to see. It was not that long ago when Stephen Harper was the prime minister and we had a banking industry that came out of the 90s that was fairly healthy because of decisions that Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin put into place to protect our banking industry. I say that because it is important for us to recognize that, as a party, we have gone the extra mile, whether it is consultations or ensuring that the best interests of Canadians were put first in protecting a vital industry that has to be there, healthy and strong and pushing for consumer protections and choice first and foremost. Remember the first few years of Stephen Harper? We had banks that were going bankrupt around the world. The world was looking at Canada, asking how it is that Canada was doing so well in terms of not having banks going bankrupt. It was being attributed to the work that Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin did during the 90s. In order to be able to do the things that we did back then, it required a great deal of effort and work. That is what we have seen since we were elected back in 2015. We have very much seen a proactive government taking a look at how to build and continue to strengthen Canada's middle class. That means we have to take into consideration what is happening in our financial industry. The banks play a critical role. That is why we have seen budgetary measures dealing with the banking industry. Canadians should not be surprised. The member himself makes reference to the fact that we have been talking about it from 2016. That does not surprise me. Of course we are going to be talking about many different aspects of the banking industry because we understand the importance of it, even when the pandemic hit Canada. It was a worldwide pandemic. We took a look at how we could pressure the banking industry, the financial industry, to ensure that small businesses and Canadians' interests were going to be best served. We used tax dollars and government policy to ensure that small businesses and families were going to be protected during that pandemic, ultimately, I would suggest, saving many businesses from going bankrupt and ensuring that families had the disposable income when it came time to pay mortgages or even put food on the table. What has the government done with respect to this specific issue that the member has raised? It was not that long ago that we had the fall economic statement. Because of the efforts of the Department of Finance and other departments, we were able to deal with the many different stakeholders. The member made reference to one area in particular but what about the consumer? What about the average Canadian? What about small businesses? What about the larger corporations or the family farms? I think we had a responsibility to do a thorough consultation. The idea is great, but it takes a lot of work to put it together. It was coming together quite well. I was glad that many Canadians, our banking industry and consumer groups were very pleased with the fall economic statement. That is the statement they are voting against, I will remind the member. Some of my colleagues are a little more optimistic than I am but I suspect that they are going to vote against it. However, within that statement is that commitment, based on the discussions, the consultations and the work with the many different stakeholders, including consumers. It is coming together, because at the end of the day we recognize that we need to modernize. That is not an option. It is one thing to have the idea today. We have had that idea for years, and we have been working on it. When I opened up my first bank account, it would have been in the late seventies, and at that time one just walked into a bank. Mine was the Bank of Nova Scotia on Albert Street. It did not take too much to be able to open up a chequing account back then. People would be quite surprised to see how easy it was back then. Today, when we try to open up a bank account, there are many challenges. Many challenges that my constituents have are because of issues like ID and so forth. One has to have a bank account. E-transfers are something that is relatively new. We have to look at ways of ensuring that privacy issues are dealt with. These databanks and the amount of information that our financial institutions have on the average Canadian are extreme. If we put in an application for a loan or even if we put in an application for a bank account, we can imagine the type of information that is gathered from banks or credit unions, and we will find that they likely know a lot more about us than we might think they do. As a government, we have to ensure that the right to protect that information is also in place. We have to ensure that those financial transactions are not leading to financial exploitation of consumers. We are very much concerned with that. That is actually one of the motivating factors for the government to take action in terms of the budget that is going to be coming up in 2024, just a couple of months away, possibly. I look forward to seeing that budget and the budget implementation bill that will follow it. I think, at the end of the day, that Canadians can feel confident, because it is not only traditionally that other prime ministers, whether it is Paul Martin or Jean Chrétien, have been there to protect our financial industry, along with consumers. We have seen that this government has not only continued that tradition but is now looking at a way we can assist by having what I call, though others would call it different things, “consumer-friendly” legislation that is going to ensure that Canadians are not being financially exploited because of fees for services and so forth. The member talked a lot about banks. I think we underestimate just how important our credit unions are. Our credit unions are a lifeline to so many and provide such a wonderful service, including providing competition, and we need to look at ways we can enhance and support these credit unions in whatever way we can. I would like to give a shout-out to all those individuals who are involved at grassroots credit unions for the fine work they do in ensuring that we have even more competition in our financial institutions. Yes, they do deserve a round of applause. I can tell members that I believe that, as a governing political party, we have been there in the past, and that has been demonstrated. Other governments around the world were envious of Canada and the work we did during the nineties to protect the banking industry and to protect Canadians by doing that. We are carrying that tradition on today by ensuring that we continue to modernize, protect consumers and protect the industry.

1232 words

Mr. Jean-Denis Garon (Mirabel, BQ)

Feb/1/24 6:54:59 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-365

Madam Speaker, I will start by thanking the member for Bay of Quinte for introducing the bill. It is a very interesting bill. As surprising as it may be, this is the first time we have the opportunity to debate open finance in the House. Even the Standing Committee on Finance has never addressed this issue. So far, the discussion has been largely left to the experts and industry representatives. The Department of Finance, the Office of Superintendent of Financial Institutions, the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada, all those fine people, are currently examining the issue. As I said earlier, the same goes for the Autorité des marchés financiers, or the AMF, and Quebec's department of finance. In fact, back home in Quebec, we have Desjardins and other co-operatives. It is also important to remember that the technology companies that would interface with customers in an open financial system are not banks. Essentially, they do not fall under federal jurisdiction, just as not all financial institutions fall under federal jurisdiction. I have been closely following the work of the Advisory Committee on Open Banking, which is referenced extensively in the preamble of the bill. This work is very enlightening. The committee heard from a wide range of stakeholders, including banks, credit unions, insurance companies, trusts, brokers, technology companies, and the list goes on. My colleague talked about that. However, no consumer advocacy groups, privacy advocates or provincial regulators, such as Quebec's AMF, were consulted. It was therefore time to broaden the conversation. For that reason alone, the bill makes a huge contribution to the debate, and I thank my colleague once again for introducing it. Implementing an open financial system constitutes a huge change with many implications. In the long term, we can envisage a system in which financial institutions would essentially be able to manufacture financial products. Customer relations would be handled by technology companies that would not offer the financial products themselves but would act as intermediaries and data aggregators. That is quite a change. The bill's preamble lists the benefits of such an open financial system. I will not repeat them here, as I think they have been clearly outlined. I would even say that it is inevitable that we will move toward an open system. It is going to happen. Since this is the first time we are discussing this subject, I will use my time today to broaden the debate a bit, because there are also challenges and risks. It is our job as legislators to talk about all that, since we are working toward the common good. Our financial system's greatest asset is its stability and the confidence that comes with that stability. It is stable because it is subject to very strict legal obligations. Ultimately, if something goes wrong, for example if there is fraud, data theft, failure to report a suspicious transaction that would enable the tracking of money laundering, and so on, then the financial institution is the one that is legally and financially responsible. These financial institutions are subject to strict prudential obligations so as to ensure they have the means of dealing with the risks in question. Since the financial institutions are ultimately responsible, they currently guard their members' and customers' personal, financial or banking information very jealously. Again, the financial system's greatest asset is its stability. However, this is also where it becomes a weakness, because it can lead to compartmentalization and a lack of flexibility. The world has changed with all the new financial products online. The development of information technologies has given rise to the data economy, which requires the data to circulate more freely in order to grow. It is unclear whether our financial architecture is currently adapted to this new environment. That is the purpose of the bill. A financial institution cannot be asked to be responsible for the use of data it no longer has custody of. Regulations and prudential standards will have to be adapted. It is far from certain that a technology company, on the other hand, has the wherewithal to take on the financial risks I mentioned earlier. For example, a financial start-up can be born and die in no time at all. That has been the case with several cryptocurrency companies. Caution is needed. That does not mean we should stand idle and fail to move towards a more open banking system. People want the flexibility this kind of system offers. People want aggregators that put all their information in one place, facilitate transactions and give individuals an accurate picture of their financial situation. When money is tight at the end of the month, these applications and services are valuable, and there is demand for them. People do not understand why they are not being allowed to do this with the technology available today. After all, our personal information belongs to us. That is why fintech companies have already started coming on line despite the legal limbo. They are responding to an obvious demand. At this point, because they are not officially part of a financial system that makes sense, they exist in a grey area and find alternative ways to evolve. Users currently provide their personal information themselves. When the app gets into an account, it extracts data from the screen and stores personal and confidential information. Financial institutions' secure networks get regular visits from actors outside the financial sector, and that makes them vulnerable. The more advanced these strategies get, the greater the risk to our banking system. I was saying that the status quo is not sustainable. It would be pointless for legislators to bury their heads in the sand as though it were 1990. In some cases, it must be said, the risks are minimal. An aggregator that scans public data to show us mortgage rates in one click is convenient and low risk. However, an aggregator that collects our personal data to give us a detailed picture of our financial situation is also convenient but riskier. Financial information is very sensitive, so it is vital to protect it. Furthermore, if the app can be used to perform transactions, which implies that it places orders, that opens up a whole new level of risk, the risk of fraud. What about the principle of needing to know the customer? That principle is the foundation of our anti-money laundering and anti-terrorist financing laws. How can a financial institution apply this principle when it is communicating via an app? Lastly, an important part of risk is the financial capacity to take on risk. Without that, the consumer could lose everything. Fintechs currently operate in a grey area, which is a problem. A clear framework is needed, with clear obligations and responsibilities, as well as oversight mechanisms and institutions to enforce compliance. The advisory committee recognized all of these difficulties, but it felt that it was important to move quickly so that Canada would not be lagging behind and so as not to hamper the sector's development, a bit like what my Conservative colleague mentioned earlier. He also said that the companies continue to operate in a grey area, which is what is happening right now and is not serving anyone well. That is why the advisory committee recommended giving clear direction. However, the committee also recommended minimal regulations so that things can move faster. Then, industry stakeholders can determine for themselves how to operationalize and resolve technical issues. In short, the committee is recommending a sort of self-regulation. It recognized that the financial strength of technology companies is an issue, but it did not propose any institutional mechanism for dealing with it. There will not be any equivalent for deposit insurance, at least not in the beginning, when the new legislation comes into force, as the committee suggests. At best, the committee mentions that people should get their own insurance. The committee also recognized the constitutional issue, but it proposed circumventing it. It proposes integrating the federal financial institutions. As for the others, for example, the large credit unions, they can join if they want to, but as second-class institutions, which is something we do not want to happen. As Quebeckers, whose main financial institution is a co-operative and not a bank, we understand that a two-tier financial system leaves much to be desired. Barring a constitutional amendment, the federal government cannot regulate these other institutions. Also, in order for the financial system to truly be open, the governments will have to coordinate. I like Bill C‑365. It requires the government to introduce legislation in a timely manner. However, I am not so sure about the second clause. Setting a deadline for introducing legislation without ensuring that we are ready and that any potential problems have been resolved seems a bit hasty and rash to me. In implementing such an open system, I would like us to follow the example of Emperor Augustus who said to make haste slowly. Let us get to work right away, because the status quo is no longer tenable, but let us take the time to get it right, because the risks are high. Specifically, let us do it right by properly consulting the Quebec government when it comes to regulating co-operatives.

1562 words

Ms. Rachel Blaney (North Island—Powell River, NDP)

Feb/1/24 7:04:58 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-365

Madam Speaker, I am, as always, proud to rise on behalf of the amazing people in North Island—Powell River. Today, we are here talking about a private member's bill from the member for Bay of Quinte, Bill C-365. This is a very interesting bill. It is about consumer-led banking systems and Canadians. Happily, I have had some constituents come and visit me about this very issue, from the Coastal Community credit union in my riding. They talked about some of the really significant issues, especially for people living in rural and remote communities. People may not have access to a bank at all in their community, or it may be a long distance to go to a bank. They may also be in a situation in which they have only one banking institution in their community and they want to go to a different one but cannot, because sharing that information can be incredibly complex. This is really key in this issue. It is making sure that people's personal banking information is accessible, so that if they find another bank that is going to meet the needs they have, they will be able to get that information sent in a way that is more transparent for themselves and for the banking system. This PMB asks the Minister of Finance to table a plan for the implementation of open banking within 30 days of this act's coming into force. I think it is really important for us to all understand that in 2018, which is a while ago, the finance minister did create an advisory committee to look into this. In 2021 it delivered a report that included a plan for implementing consumer-led banking in Canada as early as 2023. Here we are in 2024, and it is still not happening. Again, it really is about making this more accessible. I have heard from some of my constituents, and this is a particularly concerning area for me, who have apps that allow them to take multiple banks they are using and look at the information in a way that is comparable. The problem with these apps, of course, is that individuals are sharing all their banking information and all of their passwords and hoping that the app does not take that information or get hacked by somebody who might use it in a very negative way. This is very concerning, and it is something my constituents have been very concerned about. This is the other part of this bill: If the minister cannot produce a bill within the associated timeline, within the first six months of the act's coming into force, the minister must table a report. That is so there is transparency and we understand what the holdup is and what the problem is. We need to see these things done. When it comes down to it, I think what we have to assess very clearly is that competition is the key here. I have to thank my friend, the member for Windsor West, who has been doing a lot of work on competition. On our cellphones, some of the highest rates on the whole planet are here. Why is that? It is partially because we do not have appropriate competition. It is the same thing that we are seeing in our grocery stores. The gouging that is happening in our grocery stores correlates very clearly with the fact that big, wealthy CEOs are making huge profits and getting huge bonuses, and their shareholders are walking away with a lot of money. At the same time as that is happening, everyday Canadians are struggling to feed their families. People who work in those grocery stores are often not being paid well enough to afford the food in the store they work in. I think Canadians know instinctively that it is just not a fair system anymore. What we are seeing in our system is more and more gouging. We are seeing it with the oil and gas industry, which is seeing record profits like it has not seen in years at the same time as people are trying to figure out how they are going to fill up their tanks. I come from a rural riding. Some of our communities are extremely isolated, and it is not just putting gas into cars. It is putting fuel into boats to get to the places we need to get to for grocery shopping and for the basic necessities of life. I really appreciate and see a lot more people in my riding buying electric cars. There are plug-ins, and I have seen them working in places like Wasa, which is a very small community but already has a plug-in station. People are using that, which is fantastic, but we still have a long way to go. When people are suffering, we know that competition is at the very core of the issue. This is something that we actually start to take steps on, moving forward, to address the issue. When I think about competition, I have to think about basic human rights and the fact that some people are unable to afford the basic things. However, I have to say that, at this point, without a cellphone, a person might be able to get away with it if they are retired and in their 80s, but for most people today, it really leaves them unable to access things. I work with a lot of seniors in my riding who are still figuring out how to use computers, and they are certainly not interested in any way in going to the public library to do their taxes. Therefore, we do things to help and support them. However, young people today know how to use everything. They know that, if they want to sign up for anything, make an appointment with a doctor or any of those basic things, they must have access. If it is too expensive, and if we have less and less competition, then the consumer pays, and that is a big problem in Canada. Whether it be banking, grocery shopping or buying gas, it is all about the fact that we have let the ultrawealthy, with wealth that most Canadians can never even consider, walk away with lots of cash in their pockets as we are struggling. That is why the NDP continues to do the work that it does to make sure that there is more fairness. Yesterday, I was left with a lot of fear and anger in my heart. I think that, when things happen to our country, as parliamentarians, we should always stand up in this place and talk about them. What is making me afraid and very angry is the fact that, in Alberta, the premier is now putting forward legislation to say that children who want to identify as who they are in school have to get permission from their parents. I think that is a horrifying reality of attacking the basic human rights of people. If we look at our system in Canada, there are no things known legally as “parents' rights”. There are parents' responsibilities, and there certainly are children's rights. I hate to see any step in this country that will put children in a place where they are not safe. We know from statistics that children who come from the queer community are not always safe at home. They cannot always be honest with the people they love about who they are. If we do not give them a place where they can identify as they want to identify, we risk their very lives. I think all Canadians have to stand up against this. In closing, last year, I read a beautiful Canadian book titled Falling Back in Love with Being Human, by Kai Cheng Thom. She is an amazing, powerful trans writer who does a beautiful job of articulating the power and fierceness of the trans community, as well as amazing beauty, strength and solidarity. I hope that, as we face this challenge, we remember that not only are these children and young people vulnerable, but they are also powerful and strong, and they are going to be pushing back really hard. As they push back, we must do our duty and make sure that they are not damaged. I hope all people in the House consider the safety of children. I will conclude by reading Kai Cheng Thom, who wrote: “To build a better future, we need to learn how to transform in response to one another. We can't build a better world by getting rid of people; we can only build a better world by bringing them in.”

1468 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 273