The House is on summer break, scheduled to return Sept. 15
House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was board.

Last in Parliament April 2025, as Conservative MP for South Shore—St. Margarets (Nova Scotia)

Lost his last election, in 2025, with 41% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns November 19th, 2024

With regard to on-the-water and dockside enforcement patrols carried out by Fisheries and Oceans Canada enforcement officers in lobster fishing areas 34 and 35 from July 1, 2024, to September 20, 2024: what are the details of each patrol, including the (i) date it occurred, (ii) number of enforcement officers present, (iii) duration, (iv) lobster fishing areas covered, (v) number of tickets with fines issued, (vi) number of arrests, (vii) number of individuals detained, (viii) number of lobster traps confiscated?

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns November 19th, 2024

With regard to board of directors' meetings at the Canada Infrastructure Bank in which a declaration, conflict, potential perception of conflict, abstention or recusal was noted in the meeting minutes from December 1, 2022, to April 30, 2024: what are the details of each instance noted in the meeting minutes, broken down by director, including (i) the decision in question, (ii) the amount of funding tied to the decision, (iii) the name of the entity receiving funding related to the decision, (iv) the name of the board member for whom a declaration, conflict, potential perception of conflict, abstention or recusal was noted, (v) the reason for which the declaration, conflict, potential perception of conflict, abstention or recusal was divulged by the board member, (vi) whether the board member held a private interest in the decision?

Questions on the Order Paper November 19th, 2024

With regard to the announcement made by the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry on June 6, 2024, that effective immediately Sustainable Development Technology Canada funding would resume under reinforced contribution agreements with Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED): for each agreement, what (i) is the name of the company with which it was signed, (ii) is the name of the project that is receiving funding, (iii) is the projected environmental benefit that is expected from the project, (iv) is the projected emission reduction that is expected from the project, (v) is the total cost of the project, (vi) is the total amount of funding announced, (vii) is the total amount of funding distributed thus far, (viii) is the total amount of funding received for the project from other granting agencies managed by ISED, (ix) are the criteria considered to be eligible for a project?

Committees of the House November 7th, 2024

Madam Speaker, we request a recorded division.

Committees of the House November 7th, 2024

Madam Speaker, what we have here, besides interruptions, is the issue that the Liberals do not want to talk about. That is why they are not doing anything about the oligopolistic economy, which includes the fees that Canadians pay for their banking services and, in particular, the fees around a company called Interac. It is on the back of our cards. Interac is an association, but it is basically owned by the four big banks: RBC, CIBC, Scotiabank and TD. Then there is a fifth one, Desjardins. They own it, and they charge a fee any time we move money around. They do about 19 million transactions a day in Canada, but one issue is moving our own money to somebody else through an e-transfer. I am sure members will be shocked to learn that the two companies that chair the board of Interac, which are RBC and TD, get a preferential rate over all other financial services companies. They only charge themselves six cents; they charge smaller and smaller financial institutions, particularly those that are not part of the Interac board, almost 44¢ to 46¢ per transaction. That is huge.

I understand that there is a $1.50 charge on each end on that. Technically, that is a three-dollar charge. If someone does not keep a minimum balance in their account, they get a three-dollar charge from the banks. RBC, TD and the big guys are only paying six cents for that transaction, so they are making a 98% gross margin. If there is a small credit union that is not part of the government-protected oligopoly of Interac, which basically has a complete monopoly on the movement of money in Canada, then it is out of luck. It must pay 44¢ to 46¢ to the big banks that own Interac for this service.

That is why we are here. It is because we had witnesses in committee who refused to table any of their fee structures, even though they are a protected government business. We also had witnesses who came before the committee in the credit card study on the issue of what is called the “interchange fee”. The government made a big announcement that it is reducing the fees that small businesses have to pay to credit card companies for every transaction. It is usually a per cent, somewhere between 1% and 2.9% of the transaction, if someone pays with their credit card, that a small business has to pay to the big banks and the Visa card companies.

There are companies that are the plumber of the system that do that, and one of them is called Stripe. Another one is called Moneris; some may have heard of it. Moneris agreed to the voluntary fee cut that the government asked for, but Stripe decided that it was not going to. Its representatives said that it is because they are being charged a new GST fee and cannot afford it. It is actually a GST fee that they were paying all along, but it was delayed for 12 months because of a court action. However, Stripe representatives used that as an excuse, either because they are greedy or because they are just not as efficient as the other providers of that service. We will be the judge of which one it is.

An interesting thing is that a person on the board of Stripe, which is one of the biggest companies in the world at doing this, is Mark Carney, the special adviser to the Prime Minister on the economy. He is the boss above the Minister of Finance, and he is the next Liberal leader. This is the same fellow who is on the board of a company called Brookfield; the entire company has just decided to move from Toronto to New York to avoid paying Canadian taxes.

Mr. Carney preaches that Canadians should pay more for everything with a carbon tax; carbon tax Carney loves the carbon tax and thinks it should be 61¢ a litre. At the same time, he moves all his business interests to the U.S. and avoids the things that the Department of Finance is trying to do. This is the character of an individual who supposedly aspires to be Prime Minister of Canada. However, he thinks it is better for the companies that he sits on the boards of to dodge Canadian taxes and move to the U.S., where they can pay lower taxes.

I do not know why carbon tax Carney wants to help the newly elected President Trump by moving his head office to New York. Apparently, he admires him more than he admires the current Prime Minister, or he would not be doing this.

As such, why is it that the Liberals continue to filibuster in committee to stop these examinations from happening? The parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Industry has done nothing but filibuster every time we bring up a motion to bring carbon tax Carney, disclose the financials of Mastercard or disclose the financials of Stripe, which carbon tax Carney is on the board of. The parliamentary secretary does not have the guts to vote against it. He just keeps talking and talking, stopping us from getting to a vote. That is the reason we are in this situation in the House, and we have to use the power of the majority to try to get that study done. It is because the parliamentary secretary is too afraid of having this debate in committee.

It makes me wonder what that individual is trying to cover up for the government by preventing these studies from happening. We had one of the banking executives from RBC, who is co-chair of Interac and sits on their board, before committee. One of our members asked him a number of times if he knew the fees of the company he is on the board of, where he represents his bank. His bank owns this company, which is called Interac. He said he does not know the fees.

I have served on private boards and Crown boards. I always knew what the fees were of the businesses I was on the board of. It defied believability that this senior banking executive in Canada would not even know the fees he charges or gets charged on Interac. This is the kind of obfuscation we see happening on this credit card study, and that has prompted this motion. In fact, all the banking heads were before the committee, and we told them we did not want them to betray their confidential commercial stuff, but they all judge themselves publicly on something called “return on equity”. That is how much profit a year the company makes per share that shareholders own. The companies overall, the banks overall, have anywhere from a 10% to 15% return on equity. This means that, for a $10 share, they make $1 to $1.50 in profit a year.

We asked them to share what their credit card business is as a percentage, not the overall revenue numbers or their expenses, as they do on their overall business. What do they make in their credit card business? They said it is all confidential. Of course it is confidential. Some may know that I used to work for a bank at one time, a long time ago. I had hair then. When I worked for the bank on Bay Street, it had a return on equity of 52%.

Some might call that loansharking, but that is the level of return they get. That is why they do not want to do it. That is why the government does not want to do it. We had finance officials in industry committee this morning. We asked them if they knew those numbers on their credit card business. They said they never asked. We had the senior finance officials in committee this morning and asked if they ever looked at the anti-competitive pricing of Interac and what they do between the owners of RBC, TD, Scotiabank and CIBC, and what they give themselves as a cut rate versus all the other financial institutions. They said they have never looked at it.

I asked if the Minister of Finance cares about competitive behaviour in the industry she regulates. They said they do not look at it. That it is somebody else's job; it is the Competition Bureau's job. It is not their job to look at policy and decide whether the industry they regulate is competitive. I asked the same question about these great interchange fees and carbon tax Carney's company, Stripe, which is refusing to abide by the Minister of Finance's order.

I asked if they look at anti-competitive behaviour on the interchange fees. They said it is not their job. They are just the government; there is nothing to see here. They are just the Department of Finance and the Minister of Finance; they are not concerned with competition.

That is the reason we have an oligopolistic economy. We have a Minister of Finance, a Liberal government and a Department of Finance that do not care about the fact that we have an oligopolistic cellphone industry. We have a government that does not care about the fact that we have monopolies in banking, telecommunications and airlines.

The extent to which the government members protect their corporate buddies is incredible.

Committees of the House November 7th, 2024

Madam Speaker, points of order usually do not happen until I have started my speech. I will do something unusual, as I said a few moments ago. I am actually going to speak to the concurrence motion that is before the House right now, unlike most of the speakers today.

We are here discussing a motion to have a further detailed study on what are called the fees related to Interac. A lot of folks watching use e-transfers to send money to their friends or kids through electronic banking. We have discovered that there are what we might call usury or monopolistic fees happening.

We have a challenge in our economy right now. We are not very productive. We have been losing our productivity over the last nine years. That is due to three main things: First, this country has too much debt. More than half of that debt has been generated by the Liberals over nine years. That has caused strain on our system. Second, we are not selling enough of what we make to the world anymore; most of those issues have been generated by the antidevelopment policies of the government, which has squashed our resource industries, both renewable and non-renewable. Third, we have an oligopolistic economy, which is the federal government—

Committees of the House November 7th, 2024

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise on this motion. I am going to do something unusual. I am actually going to speak to the motion, unlike most of what has happened in this discussion.

Committees of the House November 7th, 2024

Madam Speaker, the hon. member is an experienced member and knows that we cannot hold up props. I believe that is what he just did.

Committees of the House November 7th, 2024

Madam Speaker, it really is quite humorous to hear the parliamentary secretary talk about fiscal responsibility. He is a member of a government that has not hit a single budget target and has added more debt for the government and Canadian taxpayers than all other prime ministers since Confederation.

That aside, on the issue that he raises about process, perhaps since that member is not a member of the industry committee, which this motion refers to, he is not aware of the fact that the parliamentary secretary for industry has been filibustering every motion that we have brought forward on this study. Whether they are on document production from Mastercard, where he is protecting Mastercard from scrutiny, or on document production and hearing witnesses from Stripe, which has the pseudo minister of finance on its board, Mr. Mark Carney, he is protecting his folks and stopping them from going forward. We have to come to the House to get an order because the government will not stop filibustering.

Committees of the House November 7th, 2024

Madam Speaker, I listened intently to the 10-minute speech by the parliamentary secretary about the issue we are debating here, which is Interac fees and, in particular, the anti-competitive nature of what is going on with e-transfer fees, and I did not hear a single line about it. There was one line at the beginning of his speech that claimed a tangential element, merchant fees, and that the Minister of Finance claimed they were going to reduce the fees that credit card companies charge merchants.

However, one of the big companies that has a 20% market share and charges these merchant fees is a company called Stripe, which has refused to do this. Mark Carney sits on the board of that company. He is on the board of the company that is refusing the voluntary request of the finance minister.

Could the parliamentary secretary share with the House why the adviser to the Prime Minister on the economy is refusing the request of the finance minister?