Garth Turner

[Bank Act, February 27th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the member. I listened closely to her comments about mortgages. She seemed to indicate that her preference would be to have a higher mortgage amount or, in other words, 95% financing extended to purchasers.

I am wondering if I could ask the member to comment, because it strikes me that allowing 95% financing across the board, presumably as we do it today and even getting into what is called the sub-prime market where borrowers can actually borrow an amount greater than the value of the house, just increases indebtedness. Is that not an indenture on those very lower income people the member is speaking in favour of? In other words, increasing the amount of interest that is paid back to the financial institution over the life of the mortgage actually puts the homeowner more at risk, particularly in markets where the real estate housing market may have exceeded its true value.

Again, I am thinking of the lower mainland, where the 2010 Olympics are going to take place and we see housing prices that have risen to a new high. As for people buying into that market with 95% financing, I am a little curious as to how the member justifies the transfer of wealth from the individual homeowner to the financial institution based on that. It does not seem to make any sense from her philosophical point of view. Perhaps she might be able to enlighten us.

[Human Resources, February 26th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I asked a legitimate question of a government in power looking after the interests of Canadians.

Let us think about it: 3,000 jobs lost at Chrysler, 200 jobs lost at Canard, 300 jobs lost at Hershey and that is all the minister and his government can come up with. My constituents and Canadians deserve an answer and they deserve it now.

[Human Resources, February 26th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, last month, of the 160,000 people who entered the workforce, half of them found no work. In fact, the jobless rate has been rising since a low point reached during the last government. It is no wonder when more than $8 billion have been cut from programs such as workplace training, student employment and science and innovation.

The question is simple and direct. Where is the government's plan to train people for the jobs of the 21st century?

[Business of Supply, February 22nd, 2007]

He talked about getting things done and I would be interested in how that is part of the two things you talked about today in your statement, which were how this government is accountable and, second, how it is getting things accomplished.

I think a lot of Canadians today are interested in the views, not just of the frontbench, but also the views of the backbench, about members of the Conservative caucus. Whether the comments were above the belt, below the belt or permissible, I am just interested in knowing how that particular member feels about what his leader had to say.

[Business of Supply, February 22nd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I would be interested in having the member expand a little bit on how Canada's new government is getting things done after the display we saw in question period yesterday when the Prime Minister of Canada stood up and accused one of the hon. members in the House of being involved with--

[Automobile Industry, February 15th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, we know quite well that is no answer for Ford workers in Oakville or Chrysler workers in Brampton or any other people across the country who are facing plant closures.

Progressive governments know what to do. They know how to be innovative and competitive and give workers hope. Where is the hope here? Where is the plan? How can those members leave this legacy of layoffs, no matter how brief their watch is?

[Automobile Industry, February 15th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, it was just two years ago that the jobless rate was at the lowest point in 30 years. Only 13 months later, what a sad commentary, with massive layoffs yesterday in the auto industry and the unemployment rate going up across the country.

What explanation does the government have for people in my riding who are losing their jobs? Where is the plan?

[Byelections, February 7th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to try again. If the Prime Minister will call a byelection today, so the people of Halton will not be without their member of Parliament for a few weeks, then I will lay my seat on the line today.

Will he do that, yes or no, and will he tell the member for Mississauga--Streetsville to get with the program?

[Byelections, February 7th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I had no idea they cared.

My question is for the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister support my request of yesterday to work immediately to have a byelection in my riding of Halton, and at the same time have byelections in Vancouver--Kingsway and Mississauga--Streetsville, so we three members can be accountable?

[Byelections, February 7th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker--