Debates of June 7th, 2007

Jim Flaherty Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, the question comes from a member of a party that says there is no fiscal imbalance in Canada. Budget 2007 addresses the issue of fiscal imbalance in Canada. I would have thought the member opposite would welcome the fact that this budget provides the province of Nova Scotia with massive benefits, $2.4 billion in restoring fiscal balance in the province.

Why is the member opposite opposed to $1.3 billion under the new equalization system, $130 million in offshore accord offsets, $600—

The Speaker Peter Milliken

The hon. member for Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley.

Bill Casey Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the Minister of Finance brought up the equalization payments. Every day he stands in the House and says that Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador can have the new formula and the old accord, but that is not accurate.

I know the minister will want to be accurate. I would like him to acknowledge his own amendments to the Atlantic accord, the 12 paragraphs of amendments in sections 80, 81 and 82 that amend it and the 6 paragraphs that amend the John Hamm agreement of 2005.

I would like the minister to acknowledge his own five amendments and refer to this from now on as the amended Atlantic accord.

Jim Flaherty Minister of Finance

The Atlantic accord with the provinces of Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador is the same now as it was before, Mr. Speaker. There is a choice to be made.

There is also, as I was saying, $277 million for the Canada social transfer, $73 million for infrastructure, $24.2 million for the patient wait times guarantee, all for the province of Nova Scotia.

As the member for Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley said to the Truro Daily News, “I have never seen a budget that has had more in it for the people of my riding than this one does”.

John McCallum Markham—Unionville, ON

Mr. Speaker, economists and analysts almost always couch their budget commentary in moderate, respectful language. Why did such normally polite people use the following words in describing this year's budget: “unbelievable”, “worst in 35 years”, “stupid”, “clueless”, “insane”, “idiotic”, “nut job”?

Is Canada suffering from a contagious attack of rudeness from economists, or does this extreme language reflect an extremely incompetent Minister of Finance?

Jim Flaherty Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, I think the friendly question from the member opposite is called a lob question.

That is the member who travels to Paris, France to tell the people of the world that the Liberal Party wants to raise the GST. That is the president of the save the GST club and now raise the GST, a massive tax grab, more than $10 billion, from Canadians that the Liberal Party intends to do, according to the member for Markham—Unionville.

John McCallum Markham—Unionville, ON

Mr. Speaker, he got it all wrong, but that is not surprising. He never gets anything right.

The problem goes beyond competence. The minister raised income tax, but keeps saying he cut it. He said that he would not tax income trusts and then did just that. He made solemn commitments to three provinces and then reneged on them all.

Canadians are a kind and forgiving people who might show some sympathy to a minister who is honestly out of his depth. However, how will Canadians react to a minister who is less than honestly out of his depth?

Jim Flaherty Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, since this government was elected, more than 450,000 new jobs have been created in Canada. More than 70% of them are full time jobs. We have the lowest unemployment rate in 33 years—

The Speaker Peter Milliken

Order, please. We cannot waste time. The Minister of Finance has the floor. We will have some order so we can hear his answer.

Jim Flaherty Whitby—Oshawa, ON

Mr. Speaker, we know the members opposite want bad economic times for Canada, but we have brought good economic times for Canada, tax reductions over three years of almost $40 billion, including personal tax reductions in the area of $25 billion. No wonder we have the strongest economic fundamentals, our country of Canada, in the G-7.

Carole Freeman Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC

Mr. Speaker, last July 25, the Conservative government announced that victims of hepatitis C infected before January 1986 and after July 1990 would be compensated as soon as possible, subject to the approval of the provincial courts. Ten months later, the victims are still waiting and are calling for a settlement to be made as quickly as possible.

Could the Minister of Health tell us if he intends to set up an emergency fund to pay some of the victims most affected by hepatitis C?

Steven Fletcher Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health

Mr. Speaker, there is no dispute that the previous meanspirited government denied compensation for those hepatitis victims, tainted blood victims.

The Conservative government has fulfilled its commitment to compensate the pre-1986 and post-1990 tainted blood victims. We put in $1 billion toward this fund. The victims will be receiving that money shortly after the courts have approved the agreement.