Ted Menzies

[Small Business, October 22nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, our Conservative government recognizes the contribution that small businesses make to this economy. We have actually consulted with small businesses, and they have asked us to extend the hiring tax credit that was in last year's budget. That is there for this House to support.

It supports the creation of 536,000 net new jobs. It is a $200 million tax credit to small businesses. I have no idea why the opposition is going to vote against that.

[Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, October 22nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, speaking about failed Liberal policy, it was under the Liberal watch that the CMHC actually moved to 40-year mortgages. The Liberals sat and watched that happen. We are watching out for Canadians. We are helping Canadians. We are not intending to make any changes to CMHC, other than the ones they are planning on voting against, and those are to provide more oversight over CMHC.

[Canada Mortgage Housing Corporation, October 22nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the hon. member that her party actually voted against strengthening the rules to protect CMHC. Opposition members stand in the House and criticize what we are doing to ensure we actually protect the savings or Canadians. We put in place improvements to our pensions, to pension plans for Canadians. They voted against that.

I am not sure what it would take to offer something that the opposition would actually vote in favour of that helps Canadians.

[Canada Mortgage Housing Corporation, October 22nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the suggestion of that hon. member is incorrect. There are no plans to privatize that at this point.

We have recognized that there are challenges and we have, on four different occasions, reduced the amortization period for homeowners. That is prudent, and we have actually seen the improvements in the market.

Canadians are investing in homes, but they are investing prudently.

[Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, October 22nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, as I said, there are no plans to do that at this time. However, we always need to recognize that we can strengthen oversight in our country. We have seen examples in other countries where there was a lack of oversight. That is why we have actually strengthened CMHC's role.

[Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, October 22nd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the fact is, despite what The Globe and Mail said, there are no plans to make that change at this time. Our government is focused on implementing economic action plan 2012 and if the opposition members had cared to read that, they would have seen that we had actually included action to improve the oversight at CMHC.

[Business of Supply, October 16th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what we did. There was ample opportunity to discuss it in the House. There was obviously ample opportunity to discuss it at committee. There was lots of opportunity to talk about something other than just the process.

Comprehensive legislation is required in difficult times. I would suggest that we are not out of difficult times. We are facing the challenges of indecision outside our borders. We have to react to that. It requires comprehensive changes. It requires a comprehensive plan, and that is what we have put forward.

[Business of Supply, October 16th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I should take a moment to thank the finance committee members for the long hours that they did indeed spend, making sure that everyone who wanted to appear before them had the opportunity to bring forward their ideas and their thoughts.

If I do recall, we went through a rigorous process. There were many hours in this House debating. I cannot help but keep going back to the comment that it was very factual, and if anyone wants to read Hansard, they would find out that the opposition simply protested because it did not like the process.

This honoured House is about debating substance, not process. We came here to pass legislation that will help the economy grow and help my constituents by making sure they have jobs and a future, not to talk about process.

[Business of Supply, October 16th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I have the greatest respect for the Standing Committee on Finance in the House of Commons. It does great work. I spent a number of years on that committee myself, and all members are great contributors to that. We have a wonderful chair, too. The member for Edmonton—Leduc has done a great job of shepherding that committee.

I would suggest that there are some inaccuracies being suggested. There were 145 presentations to that committee and the subcommittee of the finance committee.

Not only that, but members of Parliament have a responsibility to consult with their constituents. We always encourage that. We encourage every member to speak to their constituents when we are at the beginning of a budget process. We are at the beginning of a budget process coming up to the 2013 budget now, and we are encouraging all members to consult with their constituents and bring back those ideas.

There were 145 witnesses who physically appeared, but each member of Parliament has the responsibility to bring back the thoughts and ideas from their own constituents and contribute to this debate. That is when they bring that to the floor of the House, rather than someone reading from their BlackBerry, like the member for Burnaby—New Westminster did for hours and hours.

[Business of Supply, October 16th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the one relevant comment made is that the Liberals did vote against all of those things that were actually beneficial.

We passed a budget that required us to open up many pieces of legislation because it was a comprehensive budget. We all knew that when we were debating it.

It has been suggested that there was not ample time to discuss it. The opposition seemed to be so focused on process, as it was during the budget debates, that it actually forgot to debate what was in the budget.

There were 214 speakers. That is fairly comprehensive list of speakers to discuss a budget. The people I heard who were actually talking about the substance of the budget, what it was going to accomplish and how it was going to help the economy, were on this side of the House.