SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 270 - Jan/29/24

Jan/29/24 6:57:06 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the irony of these points of order interruptions, by the way, from a procedural perspective, is that there is limited time for this debate. The more points of order we have, the less time will be available for questions and comments. I welcome the opportunity for debate. If members do not interrupt on points of order, there will be more time after my speech for us to have an actual debate in the proper format. The point of highlighting what happened with the arrive scam and talking about how—

92 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Jan/29/24 6:57:44 p.m.
Watch

I would prefer if members could tell me which standing order they are referring to when they rise on points of order. The hon. member for Courtenay—Alberni.

29 words

Mr. Gord Johns

Jan/29/24 6:57:58 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we are talking about relevance. The member is deep into OGGO and ArriveCAN. He is going through a list of “gotchas” instead of talking about relevant debate that is happening here in the House. That is exactly what is happening here.

45 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Jan/29/24 6:58:18 p.m.
Watch

Again, I want to remind members that there is latitude. The hon. member is just getting back into his speech from a previous point of order. I want to remind the hon. member again that, if he could refer to the motion and specific points within it, that would help his ability to not be interrupted with points of order. The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.

69 words

Mr. Garnett Genuis

Jan/29/24 6:58:43 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the NDP member says this is just a “gotcha”. The NDP is really “got” here, I have to say, and that is why they are objecting. What I have been talking about for some time is how this issue with the Speaker, the issue with ArriveCAN and the investigation we wanted to do on the Prime Minister's vacation are all examples of the NDP choosing to cover for their coalition partners in the Liberals. The NDP could have done the right thing and joined with the opposition in standing for integrity and consistency in the Speaker's office. The NDP could have joined with us in demanding accountability for those who are trying to penalize those who spoke out— Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

132 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Jan/29/24 6:59:44 p.m.
Watch

I want to ask members to wait until it is time for questions and comments. The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan has the floor.

27 words

Mr. Garnett Genuis

Jan/29/24 6:59:58 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I know members have been missing me over the Christmas break. It is good to see everyone back and to be restored to my friends here in the Chamber. It is sad in a way, because many of them will not be here after the next election. We should spend as much time together in fruitful, substantial debate as possible. The point is that we have a concurrence report regarding the actions of the Speaker. It should have been a clear case. After repeated instances of partisan activity by the Speaker, including an incident involving being in the Speaker's office, wearing the Speaker's robes and so forth, it should have been clear that the Speaker would not continue with the confidence of the full House. However, the governing coalition, backstopped by the NDP, chose to defend scandalous behaviour. The NDP is consistently tied up in knots, because it wants to be tough and challenge the government. It wants to be in opposition and in government at the same time. However, Canadians can see the hypocrisy. They can see how, every time there is an important vote or Liberals are under investigation, which is a lot these days, their friends in the NDP will back them up. We are calling for a restoration of integrity in politics, where people do the things they say and where they are consistent in what they say, regardless of where they are or whom they are talking to; where politicians do not take on an office and then do things that are contrary to the requirements of that office; and where politicians do not attack the government on the one hand and then provide them with a blank cheque on the other hand. That is what this debate is fundamentally about. I challenge the NDP, in particular. Liberals are going to act in a scandalous way, but the NDP should stop covering for them. What I said when this coalition deal came about was that we were at risk of getting the worst of both worlds: NDP economics and Liberal corruption. That is what we have: radical left-wing NDP economics with typical, same old Liberal corruption.

366 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Jan/29/24 7:02:43 p.m.
Watch

It being 7:02 p.m., it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings on the motion at this time. The question is on the amendment. If a member present in the House wishes that the amendment be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

73 words

Mr. Yves Perron

Jan/29/24 7:04:11 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I request a recorded division.

7 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Jan/29/24 7:04:16 p.m.
Watch

Pursuant to Standing Order 45, the recorded division stands deferred until Tuesday, January 30, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

25 words

All Topics

Mr. Gord Johns (Courtenay—Alberni, NDP)

Jan/29/24 7:04:45 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-310

Madam Speaker, it is a great honour for me to table petition e-4594, which was signed by 16,724 people from coast to coast to coast in support of Canada's volunteer firefighters and search and rescue volunteers. Petitioners are asking the government to increase the tax credit from $3,000 to $10,000 to help with recruitment and to help deal with the cost of inflation, but most importantly, to let them know they are valued. These volunteers put their lives on the line, and it works out about $450 a year with this tax credit. It would be increased to just over $1,200. This is based on them doing 200-plus volunteer hours a year. I hope everyone in the House of Commons will join these e-petitioners in support of that, and I hope the government will acknowledge it in the upcoming budget. I have 91 certified petitions for any member in the House if they would like one to table in support of the volunteer firefighters and search and rescue volunteers of this great country.

181 words

Mr. Warren Steinley (Regina—Lewvan, CPC)

Jan/29/24 7:05:58 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-318

Madam Speaker, I present a petition. Whereas employment insurance, maternity and parental benefits provide parents with critical financial support while they care for and bond with a new child, and having a parent at home longer in the critical first year of a child's life or placement within a family better supports healthy attachment and the well-being of a child, adoptive and intended parents are at a disadvantage under the current EI system. All parents are deserving of equal access to parental leave benefits. Bill C-318 would deliver equitable access to parental leave for adoptive and intended parents. The Speaker of the House of Commons has ruled that the passage of Bill C-318 requires a royal recommendation. The undersigned citizens and residents of Canada call upon the Government of Canada to support adoptive and intended parents by providing a royal recommendation for Bill C-318.

149 words

Mr. Ryan Williams (Bay of Quinte, CPC)

Jan/29/24 7:07:35 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is quite unusual to be here tonight debating RBC taking over HSBC because it already happened. We were in debate on this important motion in December, and there was an adjourning of the debate made by the NDP, of all parties, which supported the Liberal government. Lo and behold, during the Christmas break, the finance minister approved the merger of RBC, with the number one bank in Canada buying the number seven bank in Canada, and its 800,000 mortgages, in one big gulp. The result is going to be a disaster for Canadians. Why is that? Well, we have a monopoly problem in Canada. Canadians pay the highest fees in the world for cell phones, with the largest cell phone bills on the entire planet. Two airlines control 80% of all the airline business in Canada. Five groceries stores, three Canadian and two American, control not only 87% of groceries but also the wholesale for groceries. Insurance companies are dominating with oligopolies in Canada. It is a travesty that 85% of Canadian beer is owned by two companies, and neither is Canadian. Six banks control 87% of the mortgage market, but now that HSBC has been bought by RBC, it means that five banks will control 90% of all Canadian mortgages. The government, and its lacklustre Competition Act, protects monopolies and oligopolies, and we have a monopoly problem. We have an over-regulated government industry that protects them. Our banks are an oligopoly, which is a word invented in 1930 that literally comes from the word “oligarch” because it means “a few sellers”. It stays true to its name of a few sellers because it only benefits a few, such as its stock owners and the government, but not consumers. Our monopoly problem means that consumers lose with higher fees, less choice, higher mortgage rates, lower investment, lower productivity, fewer start-ups and, more importantly, really bad service, lower wages and low wealth inequality. Some hon. members: Oh, oh! Mr. Ryan Williams: Madam Speaker, the NDP may want to listen to this because monopolies and oligopolies—

355 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Jan/29/24 7:09:54 p.m.
Watch

There seem to be some conversations going on at the other end that are disturbing the speakers in the House. I would ask members, including the minister, to please step out to the lobby and have their conversation there. The hon. member for Bay of Quinte.

46 words

Mr. Ryan Williams

Jan/29/24 7:10:20 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the members may want to listen to this because we are in the worst housing crisis in the history of this country right now and the worst housing bubble in the whole world. In eight years, rent has doubled, mortgages have doubled and the amount needed for a down payment has doubled. Sixty-six percent of the average Canadian income is needed now to pay for a mortgage payment. A down payment in Toronto averages $220,000, and in Vancouver it is $237,000. It takes 25 years to save up for a down payment when it used to take 25 years to pay off a mortgage. Tent cities are popping up all over Canada, not only in major cities, but also in rural cities like my hometown of Belleville, Ontario. In 2015, the Prime Minister made an election promise to expand the the learn to camp program, which, when he was elected, was meant to help Canadians camp. However, Canadians did not have in mind that they would not be camping in the wilderness for fun, but on public land just to survive. This is a distinct Canadian problem. Canadian housing prices are 45% to 75% higher than our American counterparts. A lot of the time in border cities the prices are 100% higher. Canada built fewer homes than it did in 1972, which was 50 years ago. When it comes to HSBC, it was a competitor. Most importantly, it was a competitor in the areas of Vancouver and Toronto. It held 10% of Vancouver's mortgage book and 5% of Toronto's. These are areas that are some of the most expensive and unaffordable in all of Canada. When it provided rates, if we want to talk about a scrappy competitor, a month and a half ago it provided five-year variable mortgage fixed rates at 6.4%. If we compare that to RBC at 7.15%, it means that HSBC would save a family with a half a million dollar mortgage $312 a month, and good luck having a half a million dollar mortgage in Vancouver. When we look at the number one bank, RBC, with $1 trillion in assets under management and total assets of $2 trillion, buying the number seven bank, HSBC, with $120 billion in assets and 800,000 mortgage customers, we have taken that competitor out of the market and given it to the largest bank, making that oligopoly and monopoly larger. However, there was a fail-safe: the regulator. How the Competition Act failed to protect consumers was that the minister, the regulator, could have rejected this deal on behalf of Canadians who are in the worst housing crisis this generation and country has ever faced. However, she approved the deal to protect HSBC from having to find another buyer or, at the very worst, having the remaining banks competing for its clients. I say that she approved it because we had a debate schedule in December. We passed a motion at the finance committee, which was approved, to reject the merger, to have real debate, and again the NDP shut down debate and stopped us from having a debate before the merger was approved by the finance minister. It will be going through in March. The NDP member for Elmwood—Transcona shut down debate in the House of Commons. At the end of the day, we have to look at why. When we look at Vancouver and B.C. mortgage holders who are having a tough time making their mortgage payments as a whole, but are really trying to find ways to keep their homes, why would the government approve a merger that would raise prices for those consumers? This happens all the time with a monopoly. Dozens of studies now show that, every time a merger goes through, prices go up. More importantly, this is the comment I have for the NDP. More studies now are showing that, through oligopolies and mergers, wages are going down. Dozens of studies now document how monopolies and oligopolies are driving income inequality. An OECD study of seven European nations found that oligopolies reduced wages an average of 7% overall, but 13% for the working class. A U.K. Competition and Markets Authority study published a report last week that said that there is mounting evidence of suppressed wages from labour market concentration, or oligopolies, and wages are on average 10% lower in the most concentrated markets. Economists in the U.S. found that going from a very competitive industry to an oligopoly resulted in a 15% to 25% reduction in wages for workers. Therefore, this vote and this debate to allow an oligopoly to get bigger, and it is not just about prices, which are really important, is about wages in a country that cannot afford any more wage erosion. That is easy to see. We can go all the way back to 1776 when Adam Smith wrote The Wealth of Nations. For those who have never studied this, he talked about the invisible hand. If there are many buyers and sellers, price is negotiated and price goes down. It is the same thing for wages with the invisible hand. When there are many employees working for the same employer, with competition and the invisible hand, wages go up, but when the invisible hand is eliminated, it means we create monopolies and oligopolies. With the invisible hand, losing those employers and concentrating that, we not only have high prices, but low wages, and that is what the NDP supported when it adjourned this debate. At the end of the day, monopolies and oligopolies are destroying the economy and the way of life of Canadians. Because I have the option, I am going to talk about what happened since the minister approved this merger. HSBC had variable mortgage fixed rates at 6.4%, which was pretty low compared to RBC at 7.15%. Since the merger has been approved, those rates went to 6.55%, meaning it just cost a Vancouverite $750 a year on a half-million dollar mortgage. It is not hard to see since the evidence is barely a month old that approving mergers and acquisitions, concentrating our banking industry in the hands of a few, hurts consumers. I shudder to think how this is going to affect workers going forward. It is not just one industry, as I have indicated. The banking industry has concluded that this merger should never have gone through, but it is following another merger that is giving pains and fits to Canadians at a time when they should not be seeing increased costs. There is the cellphone industry and the merger between Rogers and Shaw. There was an announcement only about three weeks ago that Rogers is increasing its prices by 9%. The average monthly cellphone bill for Canadians is $106. Australians pay $30 a month. Canadians, who are already paying the highest cellphone bills in the world, are going to have their bills increased by Rogers and Shaw by $9 a month, which is 14.5%. At the end of the day, Canadians are going to be paying four times what Australians pay for cellphone bills. That is for 50 gigabytes a month and unlimited talk and text, the minimum that Canadians are looking for just to survive. When we talk about cellphone bills, we need to talk to our families and friends, and talk about education, job and workplace navigation, but also safety. Cellphones are what saved Canadians when they got alerts this summer, if they could get alerts during the Rogers outage, when the wildfires were raging across this country. At the end of the day, the RBC-HSBC report from the Competition Bureau stated that the HSBC company was a scrappy competitor and that there were high barriers for other companies to get in. It talked about low and flexible mortgage rates. Leaders in Vancouver say that in losing HSBC, they are losing a company that donated locally to many charities and organizations. They talk about a head office that is not guaranteed to be there after two years or even six months. That is going to disappear and it is a loss for Vancouver. Of course, these things are lost when we look at what oligopolies want and we are not looking after Canadians. More importantly, we are losing start-ups. Canada has 100,000 fewer start-ups and entrepreneurs compared to 20 years ago, despite our population growing by 10 million people, and it is easy to see why. When we consolidate these industries, we block new competitors from coming in. I have a consumer-led banking bill that is coming up this Thursday that would give an option for that. Instead of protecting the oligopolies, it would allow many new entrepreneurs and financial tech organizations to compete with banking. It would do one thing: create competition in banking. In the meantime, the government held that back six years and yet it approved the HSBC-RBC merger within several months. The Competition Bureau knows that competition is broken because it wrote a report on it. It said that from 2000 to 2020, the concentration rose in the most concentrated industries, the top firms are less and less challenged, fewer firms have entered industries and we are seeing profits and markups rise. We see that prices are up and wages are down. Nobody wins with oligopolies and monopolies. At the end of the day, Canada only wins when we have new start-ups, new entrepreneurs and many industries competing for Canadians' dollars because that is how we drive prices down, that is how we create Canadians jobs and that is how Canadians win. The government has failed Canada by supporting our uncompetitive monopoly problem. When we say monopoly, which is what we use interchangeably, we think of the board game. We all learned young what happens when someone owns all the railroads or all the utilities, or they own one block of properties. If someone owns one block of coloured-coded properties, the rent doubles right away, and we have seen that happening in Canada. Monopolies and oligopolies result in higher prices, less service, lower wages, greater wealth inequality, and lower productivity and innovation. We should be embracing competition. We should be ensuring that we create Canadian companies. We should be leading the world in IP commercialization, meaning we have companies that create great ideas as we have done in the past, and then commercialize that to create paycheques and great wealth. However, the government is intent on protecting oligopolies and monopolies, and really protecting what these big companies and their shareholders want, rather than Canadians and stakeholders. The only answer is to push forward quickly with consumer-led banking to create competition in the banking sector and hopefully we are going to allow some good news for Canadians in a whole lot of hurt. Before I finish, I want to move an amendment. I move: That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word “That” and substituting the following: “the 12th report of the Standing Committee on Finance, presented on Wednesday, November 1, 2023, be not now concurred in, but that it be recommitted to the Standing Committee on Finance for further consideration, in light of the recent decision of the Minister of Finance to approve the RBC-HSBC merger, despite the finance committee's unanimous decision, on October 23, 2023, calling for the merger to be rejected, and to allow the House an opportunity to pronounce itself on this merger before the ratification process is completed.” The hon. member for Beauce will second it.

1957 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Jan/29/24 7:22:58 p.m.
Watch

The amendment is in order.

5 words

All Topics

Mr. Chandra Arya (Nepean, Lib.)

Jan/29/24 7:23:49 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, in general, I agree with the member on the issue of monopolies and oligopolies in Canada because of the lack of competition in the banking sector and the telecom sector. As the member mentioned, we are not getting a fair deal in terms of consumers. The cost of banking is high. The cellphone cost he mentioned is also high, but importantly, so are the data charges, which are becoming necessary today. Access to Internet is no longer a luxury; it is a necessity. What can we do to increase competition so the banking sector—

97 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Jan/29/24 7:24:27 p.m.
Watch

The hon. member has asked his question. We are out of time, but I will allow the hon. member to answer briefly. The hon. member.

25 words

Mr. Ryan Williams

Jan/29/24 7:24:35 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is great to hear from the other side that they are seeing what is happening here as being a travesty. I hope the member has a strong voice in his caucus to talk about this. What we need to do is increase competitors and stop the mergers; it is really important. There are three mergers we could have stopped: RBC and HSBC; Rogers and Shaw; and WestJet and Sunwing. I hope he can speak up in caucus.

80 words

All Topics

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Jan/29/24 7:24:59 p.m.
Watch

It being 7:25 p.m., pursuant to order made earlier today, all questions necessary to dispose of the motion are deemed put and recorded divisions are deemed requested. Pursuant to Standing Order 66, the recorded divisions stand deferred until Wednesday, January 31, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

54 words

All Topics