House of Commons Hansard #68 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was finance.

Topics

The Budget
Government Orders

4:45 p.m.

Some hon. members

No.

The Budget
Government Orders

4:45 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)

Mr. Manning, seconded by Mr. Solberg, moved the following amendment: “That the motion be amended by replacing all the words after the word “That” with the following:

“the House of Commons reject the Budget statement by the Minister of Finance because it denies Canadians debt and tax relief by spending away the federal budget surplus, thus killing opportunities for job creation and economic growth; it leaves Canadians saddled with the highest personal income tax rates in the G-7 countries, resulting in systematic brain drain to jurisdictions with lower taxation levels; it allows interest charges on the national debt to consume one third of every tax dollar collected by the federal government and to exceed spending on health care, education, and old age security combined; it continues the steady decrease in real disposable income for the average Canadian through tax hikes; and it does not keep the government's promise of committing 50 percent of the surplus to new spending and the remaining 50 percent to some combination of debt reduction and tax relief”;

Mr. Loubier, seconded by Mr. Perron, moved the following amendment to the amendment:

Shall I dispense?

The Budget
Government Orders

4:50 p.m.

Some hon. members

No.

The Budget
Government Orders

4:50 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)

That the amendment be amended by deleting all the words after the words “Minister of Finance” and substituting the following:

“because he has, by creating the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation, broken the promise to respect provincial jurisdiction over education, he has provided nothing to stimulate job creation, he has not provided for adequate income tax reductions for middle-class families, he has continued to appropriate the huge employment insurance fund surplus, he has obstinately refused to table anti-deficit legislation and he has not returned to the provinces the money he cut from their transfer payments, while pursuing his planned cuts up to the year 2003”.

The question is on the amendment to the amendment. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the amendment to the amendment?

The Budget
Government Orders

4:50 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

The Budget
Government Orders

4:50 p.m.

Some hon. members

No.

The Budget
Government Orders

4:50 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)

All those in favour will please say yea.

The Budget
Government Orders

4:50 p.m.

Some hon. members

Yea.

The Budget
Government Orders

4:50 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)

All those opposed will please say nay.

The Budget
Government Orders

4:50 p.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.

The Budget
Government Orders

4:50 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)

In my opinion the nays have it.

And more than five members having risen:

The Budget
Government Orders

4:50 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the amendment to the amendment, which was negatived on the following division:)

Division No. 95
Government Orders

February 26th, 1998 / 5:20 p.m.

The Speaker

I declare the amendment to the amendment lost.

It being 5.25 p.m., the House stands adjourned until Monday, March 9, 1998 at 11 a.m., pursuant to Standing Orders 28(2) and 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 5.25 p.m.)