Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 150
View Bryan Hayes Profile
View Bryan Hayes Profile
2015-06-12 11:48 [p.15014]
Mr. Speaker, our government is focused on what matters to Canadians, jobs and economic growth. Our plan for jobs is tax cuts, trade and training.
Since the recession, 1.2 million net new jobs have been created, and almost 59,000 jobs in May alone.
Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance update this House on what the government is doing to make life more affordable for Canadians?
View Bryan Hayes Profile
View Bryan Hayes Profile
2015-06-11 14:13 [p.14961]
Mr. Speaker, the hard-working middle-class workers of Sault Ste. Marie reject the Liberal leader's plan to impose a mandatory $1,000 tax hike. By promising to enforce the Ontario Liberals' dramatic hike in payroll tax across Canada, the Liberal leader would hike every middle-class family's taxes and force employers to cut jobs, hours and wages. According to the Meridian Credit Union, the majority of Ontario's small-business owners believe that this could be their greatest challenge ever faced.
Instead of introducing reckless high-tax plans, our government believes in helping families succeed. We lowered taxes to the tune of $6,600 this year for a typical family. We expanded the tax-free savings account so that Canadians can save more tax-free.
Now is not the time for risky high-tax Liberal schemes and untested leadership.
View Bryan Hayes Profile
View Bryan Hayes Profile
2015-05-29 10:33 [p.14335]
Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to rise in the House today to speak in favour of Bill C-42, the common sense firearms licensing act. As its name suggests, it would restore a good deal of common sense to our firearms laws.
For too long, hunters and sports shooters have been treated like criminals for simply wanting to take part in their hobby. These activities are a shared part of our Canadian heritage, and a huge part of my northern Ontario heritage. Although I did not move to northern Ontario until the age of 23, I did not realize how huge a part of the heritage it was until it came time for moose, deer and bird hunting season. Life in northern Ontario really revolves around that, the drive to get that moose tag, and the number of American visitors who come to northern Ontario to take part in that, as well as the number of Torontonians who come to northern Ontario in the hopes of bagging a moose. Therefore, it is an incredible part of our heritage.
It is shameful that decades of previous Liberal governments took steps to try to dissuade people from becoming involved in these activities, whether through needless red tape, the possibility of jail time for good faith errors or processes that stigmatized. These measures did nothing at all to keep Canadians safe. I am proud to be part of a government that rejects this idea and has adopted a safe and sensible approach to firearms policies.
What precisely does this mean? It means that we crack down on dangerous criminals who use guns to commit crimes. That is why we have passed tough new measures to combat drive-by shootings. It also means that we reduce needless burdens for those Canadians who work hard and pay by the rules. That is why we ended the wasteful and ineffective long-gun registry once and for all.
It is clear that our approach is working. According to Statistics Canada, the firearms homicide rate in Canada is at its lowest point in nearly 50 years. There has been a 30% decline in the rate of handgun homicides since 2008. In fact, in the year after the gun registry was ended, firearms crime was down by more than 80% in Toronto. This is a strong record of which our Conservative government can be proud. The commons sense firearms act builds on that strong record.
There are three strong measures that will improve public safety.
First and foremost, firearms prohibition orders will be strengthened for those convicted of domestic violence offences. It is clear that having a firearm in a volatile situation like that is dangerous. This change makes good—
View Bryan Hayes Profile
View Bryan Hayes Profile
2015-05-29 10:39 [p.14335]
Mr. Speaker, I will pick up where I left off.
Second, we will be making firearms safety training courses mandatory for first time firearms owners. Currently, approximately 35,000 people per year get their firearms licence without taking a training course. This legislative change will ensure that all new gun owners have a common understanding of safe firearms handling practices.
Third, we will make a technical change to allow information sharing between CBSA and the RCMP on the importation of restricted and prohibited firearms. This is a change that our provincial partners have been requesting for some time.
I would like to point out that during quorum call there were only two Liberals in the House, and now I believe there is only one Liberal in the House.
We are also making five changes to make our firearms laws—
View Bryan Hayes Profile
View Bryan Hayes Profile
2015-05-29 10:41 [p.14335]
Mr. Speaker, first, we are merging possession only licence and possession and acquisition licence. This will give 600,000 experienced firearms owners the ability to purchase firearms.
Second, we are restricting the authority of the Chief Firearms Officer because the unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats have been exercising their powers willy-nilly for far too long. The bill would bring oversight to these bureaucrats.
Third, we will create a grace period at the end of the five-year licence. This will prevent otherwise law-abiding gun owners from becoming overnight criminals due to an error in paperwork.
We will also end needless paperwork around authorizations to transport restricted and prohibited firearms by making them automatically issued with a firearms licence. If people are qualified to have a gun in their homes, they are qualified to safely transport it.
Last, but certainly not least, we will create an ability for the elected government to oversee the classification of firearms.
As we all remember, in February 2014, tens of thousands of Canadians became criminals overnight when the Canadian firearms program unilaterally decided to reclassify the CZ858 and the Swiss Arms family of rifles. It did this without seeking approval and without so much as a heads up to their elected boss, the Minister of Public Safety. This is completely unacceptable, and we will create a process so this never happens again.
I can confirm that as soon as the bill receives royal assent, we will move to restore these firearms to their previous classification of non-restricted.
This is clearly good legislation, but do not just take my word for it.
The National Post editorial board said that the common sense firearms licensing act was: “good news for responsible gun owners, and good news, as the name suggests, for common sense”
Greg Farrant of the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters said:
The changes proposed in Bill C-42 will make life easier for these people because there will be less needless paperwork....Bill C-42 proposes reasonable amendments to sections of the Criminal Code that make sense, that eliminate red tape, and introduce additional public safety measures. It does not make guns easier to get. It does not allow firearms owners to transport them at will wherever they want, and it does not put guns in the hands of the “wrong people”..
Tony Bernardo, the Executive Director of the Canadian Shooting Sports Association, said:
The Canadian Shooting Sports Association supports Bill C-42. Our members believe it's a positive step toward fairness for lawful firearms owners, and it has absolutely no negative impact on public safety.
Despite this wide range of support from experts, the NDP and Liberals still oppose these common sense measures. Both parties are evidently still dead set on returning to the wasteful and ineffective long gun registry.
The NDP leader was unequivocal that if he were to form a government, he “We will bring in something that allows the police to track every gun in Canada”. The Liberal Leader has said, “If we had a vote tomorrow, I would vote once again to keep the long-gun registry”.
Clearly, neither party understands the realities of rural Canada. Our Conservative Party will always stand up for the rights of rural Canadians and for the rights of law-abiding gun owners.
I know firearms owners are interested in this legislation and are following these debates very closely. Websites like Gun Owners of Canada are very useful tools for spreading information and these individuals will be judging how they will vote in the upcoming election accordingly.
I hope members opposite can cast aside the orders of their big Ottawa bosses and vote the will of their constituents, and vote for the common sense firearms licensing act.
View Bryan Hayes Profile
View Bryan Hayes Profile
2015-05-29 10:46 [p.14336]
Mr. Speaker, there are courses available all over.
I had the opportunity to sit on the public safety committee during the debate on this legislation. That did come up. One of the concerns was that people used to be able to challenge it, and now they could not. The reality is that to even challenge the course, people actually have to travel to challenge that course.
At that time when the question was posed to me in committee, we talked about it. In my mind, as a chartered professional accountant, I sense that there may be a business opportunity here. I am certain the course will be delivered in areas that need it.
View Bryan Hayes Profile
View Bryan Hayes Profile
2015-05-29 10:48 [p.14337]
Mr. Speaker, on the Liberal Party position, the Liberals are out there saying that because of this legislation, people will be able to bring restricted firearms to grocery stores and shopping malls. They are using that as a donation tool on websites. That is in fact not true. It is a myth that is being spread by the Liberal Party.
There is a myth that the Liberals are stating that this bill would take the power to classify firearms out of the hands of police, the experts in keeping Canadians safe, and put it in the hands of politicians. The fact is that the RCMP does not classify firearms; Parliament does and did so in 1995 under a Liberal government.
The Canadian firearms program interprets this legislation, and sometimes it makes mistakes such as with theSwiss Arms guns. In these cases, the common sense firearms licensing act would allow elected officials to fix these situations.
View Bryan Hayes Profile
View Bryan Hayes Profile
2015-05-29 10:50 [p.14337]
Mr. Speaker, our position is that law-abiding gun owners, hunters and sport shooters are not criminals.
I understand that fully. I am not a licensed gun owner, but moving to northern Ontario, as I mentioned in my speech, I became very aware of the great quality of that industry in my riding. I have tremendous friends who are hunters and sport shooters. This is part of our Canadian heritage.
View Bryan Hayes Profile
View Bryan Hayes Profile
2015-05-28 14:14 [p.14289]
Mr. Speaker, Canadians can trust only our Conservative government to help families save more of their own money for their priorities. The New Democrats and Liberals have said that their focus is to raise taxes and kill jobs. The leader of the Liberal Party has even said that “benefiting all families is not what is fair.”
He demonstrated this by pledging to scrap our universal child care benefit, scrap income splitting, and take away tax-free savings accounts. He wants to replace our family tax cut with a family tax hike. Yesterday he even announced that he will hit Canadians with a massive new payroll tax. He said, “We're looking at an expansion and a mandatory expansion of the CPP of the type that Kathleen Wynne put forward in Ontario.”
The Liberal leader's plan would cost someone earning $60,000 over $1,000 in take-home pay. The Liberal leader's assault on the middle class is simply unacceptable.
View Bryan Hayes Profile
View Bryan Hayes Profile
2015-05-15 11:08 [p.13998]
Mr. Speaker, our Conservative government is committed to safe and sensible firearms policies. That is why we were pleased to fulfill our commitment to end the wasteful and ineffective long gun registry once and for all. However, owing to a bureaucratic loophole, it was still possible to access outdated copies of the long gun registry through access to information legislation.
The will of Parliament is clear: all copies of the registry must be destroyed. Not surprisingly, the NDP has come out swinging to oppose any measure that would make it harder for them to bring back the long gun registry, which the NDP leader has promised to do.
I call on the members from Timmins—James Bay and Thunder Bay—Rainy River to do the right thing, to do what northern Ontarians want, and support our measures. Canadians know that only our Conservative government stands up for the rights of gun owners. If those members vote to keep gun registry data, their constituents will know what to do in October.
View Bryan Hayes Profile
View Bryan Hayes Profile
2015-05-11 15:44 [p.13727]
Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Etobicoke Centre.
I am proud to be a member of the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs. I actually asked to be on this committee because I care very much about the well-being of our Canadian Armed Forces, and I care because I am an air force brat, travelling the world with my parents and siblings for 17 years, my father having had a distinguished 37-year career in the Royal Canadian Air Force.
Both of my sisters and brother-in-law also served their country very well, again, in the Royal Canadian Air Force. My immediately family has over 100 years in the Canadian Armed Forces. I am the only one who did not have military service, so as a member of the veterans affairs committee, this is my way of giving back to armed forces and veterans to the very best of my ability. As a committee, we have recommended substantial improvements, many of which the government has adopted.
Canadians recently marked the 70th anniversary of the liberation of the Netherlands and Victory in Europe Day, or VE Day, as we call it. I know a number of our colleagues had the opportunity to be there and experience that. We all saw Canada's veterans being welcomed with open arms by grateful Dutch citizens. We saw friendships rekindled and happy reunions, along with very moving ceremonies.
We also know that things did not simply go back to normal for many of our brave Canadian soldiers, sailors and airmen and women when they returned home after the war was over.
Certainly for Canadian Armed Forces members today, a homecoming may not be the easy return to the routine one might expect. Rather, for some, they return to a different world. A loving home, one hopes, but a jarring new reality shaped by severe and perhaps permanent injury or illness. Home may now be a place of stress, of uncertainty, of what may seem to be insurmountable challenges. That is as true for family members as it is for the full-time armed forces member, the reservist or the veteran.
This was painfully clear last week, as I attended the second annual Sam Sharpe breakfast, held in his honour to recognize the struggle of Canadian servicemen and women who suffer from operational stress injuries and to highlight individuals and organization dedicated to assisting Canadian Forces members, their families and veterans.
Many may not be aware, but Lieutenant-Colonel Sam Sharpe was first elected to the House of Commons in 1908 as the sitting member for Ontario North at the start of World War I. After suffering mental injuries on the front, he returned to Canada and took his own life on May 25, 1918, at a Montreal hospital.
During the breakfast, we heard two very emotional stories of how PTSD impacted the lives of two of our veterans and how, with the help of services provided through Veterans Affairs, they were managing their PTSD, although, and this message was very clear, they would never be the same.
The people in the Government of Canada have a duty to such brave men and women in need of immediate and perhaps lifelong assistance. They must know that we are here for them. They must never doubt the intensity or sincerity of our care, compassion and respect.
I know I speak for all members in this place when I say that while politics may differ or approaches, ultimately every member of Parliament, from the government and the opposition benches, supports our veterans and expects the highest level of assistance to those in need.
That said, I am concerned with the political undertones of the NDP motion. I am troubled that the New Democrats have proposed this language a month after our government tabled the largest improvement to veterans benefits and supports since forming government. While I agree with the spirit of the motion and the vast majority of what is said in it, I am disappointed with the New Democrats for their continued political manoeuvring, using the noble cause of supporting Canada's veterans.
Perhaps many know, last week our government tabled economic action plan 2015 act. In particular, there is a section that proposes a series of new benefits for veterans and families affected by injury and illness sustained during service to Canada.
This bill also presents a welcome statement of purpose for the new veterans charter, one that goes far beyond the motion being debated here today and that would be formally legislated and approved by both Houses of Parliament. It reads:
The purpose of this Act is to recognize and fulfill the obligation of the people and Government of Canada to show just and due appreciation to members and veterans for their service to Canada. This obligation includes providing services, assistance and compensation to members and veterans who have been injured or have died as a result of military service and extends to their spouses or common-law partners or survivors and orphans. This Act shall be liberally interpreted so that the recognized obligation may be fulfilled.
I hope the member for New Westminster—Coquitlam will support this purpose clause contained in Bill C-58 when the time comes to vote for it in Parliament in the coming weeks.
I was proud to have played a part in the unanimous report of the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs. So many of the recommendations have been adopted by the government, including adding a new retirement benefit so that veterans have stable, reliable monthly income after age 65.
I want to make something very clear in this debate. Our government has a tremendous obligation to provide assistance to members and veterans of our forces who have been injured as a result of military service. We have an obligation as well to the families of those injured while in service.
I would like to take a few moments to highlight the new retirement income security benefit, which is arguably the largest of the new benefits we have introduced as a government over the past few months. The new retirement income security benefit would directly address this issue for moderately to severely disabled veterans and survivors. Beginning at age 65, eligible veterans would continue to receive monthly benefits totalling at least 70% of Veterans Affairs Canada's financial benefits received before the age of 65. This benefit would be determined on a case-by-case basis, taking into account other sources of income beyond the age of 65.
The key word here is “security”. As per our government's veteran-centred approach, potential recipients in receipt of financial benefits administered by Veterans Affairs would be contacted before they reached the age of 65 to ensure a smooth transition to that security. For disabled Canadian Armed Forces veterans nearing 65, that would mean being better able to save for retirement and anticipate future earnings. Further, when that veteran passed on, his or her survivor would continue to receive approximately 50% of this lifelong monthly payment.
This was one of the key recommendations made by the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs, and I am so pleased that the government acted swiftly to include it. I look forward to the recommendations being put forward and passed by the government.
Lest we forget.
View Bryan Hayes Profile
View Bryan Hayes Profile
2015-05-11 15:54 [p.13729]
Mr. Speaker, I would point out that the Liberals and the NDP are providing misinformation with respect to this. For Veterans Affairs, the budget is established. It is a Conservative budget. It is established to ensure that there are enough funds for every veteran that requires service. During the course of the year, over those nine years, six times, maybe even nine times, we asked for additional fund authorizations throughout the year in the event that we needed service.
What happens a lot of times with a budget is that a service simply is not required. It is very difficult to predict exactly how much service is going to be required. It is those authorizations, which totalled almost the exact amount the member opposite referred to, that were, in fact, not required. Every single veteran that required service during that time period received service. There was never a situation where service was not received because of a lack of funds. That is a fallacy.
View Bryan Hayes Profile
View Bryan Hayes Profile
2015-05-11 15:56 [p.13729]
Mr. Speaker, I too, as a member of Parliament, have veterans come to my office. As a member of Parliament, I provide the direction they need and the assistance they need.
Through Veterans Affairs Canada, the programs and services are in place. As I mentioned in my comments, I had an opportunity to attend a breakfast the other morning where two veterans spoke. These are veterans who have achieved those services. They knew where to go, and they had assistance.
I think it is the role of all of us as members of Parliament to make sure that we are reaching out to our veterans. I do that through my office, and my staff does that. I am sure the member opposite does that. It is the role of a member of Parliament.
I reiterate that the services are there, and our new legislation, Bill C-58, would expand upon those services. It is a fantastic piece of legislation that would benefit our veterans. I would really like to thank our Minister of Veterans Affairs for bringing this bill forward and his predecessors for their work in bringing this forward. It was one of the recommendations brought forward by the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs, on which I am so proud to serve.
View Bryan Hayes Profile
View Bryan Hayes Profile
2015-05-06 14:15 [p.13529]
Mr. Speaker, our government makes no apologies for ensuring middle class Canadians are aware of the measures that put more money back in their pockets.
For example, we want Canadians to know about the new family tax cut and enhanced universal child care benefit, which will benefit 100% of families with children, the vast majority of benefits going to low and middle-income families
The Liberal leader's plan will do the exact opposite. Instead of a family tax cut, he will bring in a family tax hike.
Unlike the NDP or the Liberals, Canadians like those in my riding of Sault Ste. Marie can depend upon this government to leave more money in their pockets.
Results: 1 - 15 of 150 | Page: 1 of 10

Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data