Skip to main content Start of content

FINA Committee Meeting

Notices of Meeting include information about the subject matter to be examined by the committee and date, time and place of the meeting, as well as a list of any witnesses scheduled to appear. The Evidence is the edited and revised transcript of what is said before a committee. The Minutes of Proceedings are the official record of the business conducted by the committee at a sitting.

For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.

If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.

Previous day publication Next day publication

Minutes of Proceedings

42nd Parliament, 1st Session
Meeting 197
Tuesday, February 19, 2019, 11:04 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.
Presiding
Hon. Wayne Easter, Chair (Liberal)

Library of Parliament
• Andrew Barton, Analyst
• Michaël Lambert-Racine, Analyst
The Committee proceeded to the consideration of matters related to Committee business.

The Committee resumed consideration of the motion of Francesco Sorbara, moved on Tuesday, February 5, 2019, — That the Standing Committee on Finance undertake a study on open banking and report back to the House on: a) whether open banking could provide benefits to Canadians; b) how potential risks related to consumer protection, privacy, cyber security and financial stability could be managed; and c) what steps, if any, the Government should take to implement an open banking system.

And of the amendment of Greg Fergus, moved on Thursday, February 7, 2019, — That the motion be amended by adding after the words “open banking system” the following: “that the Committee dedicate up to four meetings to the hearing of witnesses in Ottawa; that the Committee examine opportunities to travel to jurisdictions that have implemented a framework for open banking, including the United Kingdom; and that the Committee report its findings to the House no later than Friday, June 7, 2019”.

The debate continued.

At 11:12 a.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 11:15 a.m., the sitting resumed.

Subamendment

Tom Kmiec moved, — That the amendment be amended by: a) replacing the words “up to four meetings” with the words “three meetings”; b) replacing the words “that the Committee examine opportunities to travel to jurisdictions that have implemented a framework for open banking, including the United Kingdom” with the words “that the Committee not travel outside of Ottawa for the purposes of this study, but welcome experts and stakeholders from outside of Ottawa to appear before the Committee through teleconference;” and c) replacing the words “no later than Friday, June 7, 2019.” with the words “no later than Monday, April 1, 2019”.

Debate arose thereon.

The question was put on the subamendment of Tom Kmiec and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 5.

The Committee resumed consideration of the amendment of Greg Fergus.

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Greg Fergus and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 2.

The Committee resumed consideration of the motion, as amended, — That the Standing Committee on Finance undertake a study on open banking and report back to the House on: a) whether open banking could provide benefits to Canadians; b) how potential risks related to consumer protection, privacy, cyber security and financial stability could be managed; c) what steps, if any, the Government should take to implement an open banking system; that the Committee dedicate up to four meetings to the hearing of witnesses in Ottawa; that the Committee examine opportunities to travel to jurisdictions that have implemented a framework for open banking, including the United Kingdom; and that the Committee report its findings to the House no later than Friday, June 7, 2019”.

The debate continued.

Amendment

Tom Kmiec moved, — That the motion be amended by adding after the words "open banking system” the following: “d) current data security risk and threats posed by domestic and foreign actors to the private data information of Canadians; e) how best the government can ameliorate such risks and threats posed to the private data of Canadians; f) the appropriateness of government bodies collecting the personal banking information of Canadians; g) the current landscape of the financial services sector in Canada, the major actors, levels of competition, and the sufficiency/stringency of regulations governing financial institutions; h) how the market share of Canada's banking and financial services industry compares to other jurisdictions around the world and how an expansion or concentration of such market share might impact Canadian consumers; i) how the development of new Canadian fintech innovation has been advanced or curtailed by broader government policies including, but not limited to the levels of taxation imposed on small and medium-sized enterprises, corporate welfare, payroll taxes, openness to foreign direct investment, and the retention of skilled labour; j) how open banking could impact the process of applying for a loan or mortgage, and why such processes ought to be improved in Canada; k) how open banking should be prioritized for the current government, considering the Minister of Finance's mandate letter that was given to him by the Prime Minister in 2015 and the various priorities that were outlined for the Minister in this letter; l) what the appropriate level of government regulation over Canadian financial service providers ought to be, considering the history of the Canadian context as well as that of other jurisdictions around the world; m) how the principle of financial transparency latent in the idea of open banking ought to be applied more broadly to the public accounts of the Canadian government;”.

Debate arose thereon.

At 1:00 p.m., the Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.



David Gagnon
Clerk of the Committee