John McCallum

[Jobs and Growth Act, 2012, November 29th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, as the member should know, the Conservatives' so-called hiring credit will actually punish small businesses if they either hire new employees or pay higher wages to existing employees.

In fact, companies that qualified in 2011 but then grew too big to quality in 2012 could face an EI premium hike of as much as 14¢. This is eminently fixable. We Liberals proposed an amendment in the finance committee that would have fixed it. We were supported by CFIB, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business.

My question to the Conservatives is: Why are they forcing EI premium hikes on Canadian small businesses?

[Ethics, November 19th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism once had a petition on his web site asking people to praise him, and now we learn that he had his department spend taxpayer money on monitoring his popularity, even in the middle of the federal election campaign.

Will the President of the Treasury Board ask the Public Service Commission to investigate and to ensure that the political neutrality of the public service was not compromised by the immigration minister's vain desire to know how popular he was?

[Committees of the House, November 5th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I am rather shocked and surprised at this decision by the government because the committee worked in an entirely non-partisan way. Other than one small issue which came in supplementary reports, all government members agreed with all opposition members. The President of the Treasury Board had expressed enthusiasm for our work and we spent many meetings with many witnesses.

I wonder if the government side can tell us why it is rejecting the recommendations, not only of Liberals and New Democrats, but their own Conservative members, and why after all this work is it necessary for the committee to restudy these questions?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, November 5th, 2012]

With regard to ministerial revenue, broken down by department for each fiscal year from 2006-2007 to present, what are: (a) all sources of ministerial revenue and the amount the department received from each source; and (b) each individual exchange that resulted in the government receiving more than $100,000, (i) the specific good or service provided by the government, (ii) the exact amount for which the good or service was sold?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, November 2nd, 2012]

With regard to every non-profit housing project funded under s.95 of the National Housing Act: (a) what is the name of the project; (b) what is the location of the project; (c) for each project that has a mortgage with the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, and for every mortgage, what is (i) the date the mortgage was signed, (ii) the length of the mortgage, (iii) the interest rate of the mortgage?

[Questions on the Order Paper, November 2nd, 2012]

With regard to every decision by the Treasury Board to reprofile money from one departmental program or activity, broken down by fiscal year from 2006-2007 to present, what is: (a) the department that made the application; (b) the date the decision was made; (c) the program or activity the money was reprofiled from; and (d) the program or activity to which the money was reprofiled?

[Eid al-Adha, October 30th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the occasion of the Association of Progressive Muslims of Canada's 18th annual Eid al-Adha dinner this evening. Marking the occasion of the Hajj, Eid is a time when Muslims in Canada and around the world take time to consider the most disadvantaged members of society, to donate to charities and to share a meal with the less-advantaged members of their community. It is also an occasion for Canadians of different backgrounds to see first hand the rich cultural and religious mosaic that is one of the defining features of Canada.

I would also like to thank Mobeen Khaja, president of the Association of Progressive Muslims, whose work in promoting intercultural and interfaith dialogue has contributed to the tolerance, respect and mutual understanding that are the cornerstones of the society we are privileged to be part of.

I look forward to attending this year's dinner and wish everyone a very happy Eid al-Adha. Eid Mubarak.

[Jobs and Growth Act, 2012, October 30th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the hon. member for his speech. As with other Conservatives, he spends a lot of his time boasting about assistance for small business while, in fact, the opposite is the case.

It is true that there is a credit related to EI worth $205 million per year, but what he totally forgets to say is that the Conservatives are bringing in an increase in EI premiums as of January 1 next year worth $410 million. On a net basis, far from reducing the taxes of small businesses, Conservatives are increasing those taxes to the tune of $205 million based on higher EI premiums, which is a direct tax on jobs.

Is the member in love with higher taxes? How can he support this tax raising bill?

[Jobs and Growth Act, 2012, October 30th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the member for not mentioning the Canadian Wheat Board in his speech, which, as I have told him several times, is really a red hot issue in my riding.

The member mentioned small business a number of times. I would like to ask him a question about taxation of small business. Thanks to the Conservative government, as of January 1 of next year, businesses, including small businesses, will pay an extra $410 million in EI premiums. Small businesses hate this tax, because it is a direct tax on jobs, and it affects them disproportionately. Partially in compensation, the government is providing a tax credit worth half that amount, $205 million, which means that net, the government is increasing taxes on small business to the tune of $205 million a year. How can the member support a bill that imposes big new taxes on small business? Is he that much in favour of higher taxes?

[Jobs and Growth Act, 2012, October 30th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question about pensions for the parliamentary secretary.

She waxed lyrical on how marvellous these pooled pensions, which the government introduced in its budget, were. I will acknowledge that we Liberals supported that measure but only because it is better than nothing. I submit that a supplementary Canada pension plan, which we proposed, would have been far superior. This is largely because the government's proposal is private sector and Canada has one of the highest management fees in the world, whereas the supplementary CPP would be much lower cost and would have provided competition for this private sector. As well, a difference of only one percentage point in the management fee can have a huge negative effect on a person's pension because of the power of compound interest.

While PRPPs are better than nothing, would the member not agree that, for the reasons I have just given, it would have been much better to have a supplementary Canada pension plan?