Lost his last election, in 1997, with 26% of the vote.
Excise Tax Act February 10th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I apologize to stand on a point of order again, interrupting the speaker across the way. That is not my intent.
However, he referred to an individual member. I am not certain whether he is referring to my colleague who just spoke on a point of order with regard to comments that were made or if he is speaking about some other colleague. I would like to have clarification.
Excise Tax Act February 10th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to have the opportunity to join in the debate on this most important topic.
For the benefit of the House we should take the opportunity to review the famous GST and where it came from. As most members are well aware it is derived from the former manufacturers' sales tax. The previous administration decided that it would have a GST at 7 per cent across the country. Of course the proposal was that the government would use it to reduce the deficit.
We know the legacy that the Tories left us in paying the deficit, that each and every goal and projection that was set went in the opposition direction. For some reason instead of the deficit going down, it continued to go up until this government assumed office and assumed a $42 billion deficit at that time.
What happened to that $14 billion to $15 billion that was projected as new revenue from the GST? It went into the general revenue fund. The manufacturers' sales tax had disappeared. The new GST was here. Contrary to what others have said, and I admit I can only speak for myself, I know what the policy was of my party when I was campaigning. People did ask me what I thought would happen to the GST. Of course they loved it so much they wanted it left completely alone.
I said it would be changed to a fairer and more equitable tax system both for the small business people in our communities as well as for the consumers. I pointed out very clearly and in many cases said it twice: "Hear me, it has to be replaced in order to provide approximately the same amount of revenue".
Originally we were told that the GST would provide enormous additional dollars in revenue that would expedite paying down the deficit and we would reach a balanced budget much faster in the early 1990s.
It was projected that the $14 billion or $15 billion that came from the manufacturers' tax which was replaced by the GST actually came to approximately $28 billion. When the rebates and the additional administration costs were taken off so we were back to the the $14 billion or $15 billion figure which was the level of income from the previous manufacturers' tax.
When the government looked at possible ways of replacing that revenue, the finance committee travelled across the country from one end to the other, including my home province of New Brunswick of which I am very proud.
In New Brunswick I listened to presenter after presenter. Some were from the business sector, some from the industry sector, some from agriculture, some from the education sector and some from the consumer sector. They said we had to have a simpler system. We had to come up with a harmonized system that would reflect the total of the taxes they are paying. I agree it has to be very up front and very forward.
Following all of the presentations and hearings across the country after some two and half years, the finance committee came forward with its recommendation to harmonize the two taxes, the provincial sales tax and the GST into a new harmonized sales tax.
The first three provinces that came on board, in addition to the province of Quebec that had the harmonized sales tax, were the provinces of Newfoundland, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. Some have criticized and complained about the formula that was arrived at, not for those three provinces, but for every province in Canada to use. It is a formula that would be fair and equitable to all provinces and treat each and every one in the same fashion.
What does harmonization do for the business sector and the retail sector? I have talked to many business people. First of all it means that they have to keep one set of books instead of the previous two. It means that they have to issue one cheque instead of the previous two. It means that one tax auditor will come in and review their books instead of two. It is a much simpler system for every business person throughout the communities that are involved in the retail sector.
What does it do for the consumer? Report after report and survey after survey have indicated that the consumer does not want any more surprises when he or she arrives at the cash register and wants to know exactly what amount must be paid.
There is no intent to hide the total amount of taxation that would be paid on any product that is taxable at the cash register. As a matter of fact the proposal stated very clearly that consumers want it shown on the cash register tape the price of the product, the tax that is included and the total. On the shelf the consumer will see the price that is being paid which includes the taxes.
It is not a hidden tax. It is a tax that is very up front. Right on the cash register tape is everything that is purchased. Let me look at some of the key elements.
It says: "Consumer in participating provinces will benefit from the removal of the provincial retail sales tax from business inputs. This advantage, combined with the benefit of a lower rate and lower compliance costs for businesses, will lead to lower consumer prices on many goods. Tax inclusive pricing rules will ensure that consumers know the full price of the good or service before paying for it while keeping the amount of the rate of sales tax payable visible on the receipts".
As I mentioned, it is simpler for the business community, simpler for the consumer and it provides the revenue toward decreasing the deficit that we know the government assumed at $42 billion plus. We know that Canadians want the government to put its financial house in order. That is exactly what is being done.
We are not the first government ever to set goals. There have been others. However, I suspect we are the first government in recent time to have been able to achieve those goals, to meet or exceed them in each and every instance and we will continue to do so.
Fisheries December 13th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, Bill C-62, the new fisheries act, includes a provision that fishers, fishery associations and fishing communities have been requesting for years.
Can the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans explain to the House how the new partnership agreement proposals in the bill will work? What is being done to ensure that all interested parties will be included as part of the consultation process?
Jason Brown And Darren Vickers December 10th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, this past Saturday I had the pleasure of joining the Goodine family in Woodstock, New Brunswick at a special reception in order to pay tribute to two young boys who through their quick actions and calmness under pressure avoided a tragedy for their 13-year old friend Billy Goodine.
Jason Brown and Darren Vickers were honoured for the responsible action that they took in July during a serious biking accident when Billy Goodine was seriously injured.
To elaborate further, Billy Goodine's neck was broken in the fall which could have led to full paralyses or even death. However, Darren and Jason's refusal to move Billy, coupled with excellent ambulance care by the St. John Ambulance and several weeks of hospitalization and rehabilitation, Billy was able to return home and to school on September 27, 1996.
We hear much about today's youth but-
Excise Tax Act December 5th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. I listened to the recent comments made by the member from the Reform Party. I can tell you that he is not accurate and not factual with his statement and by so doing-
Trade December 5th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister for International Trade. It concerns the recent trade agreement with Chile.
Members of the aquaculture industry are concerned that a subsequent NAFTA agreement will allow low cost Chilean aquaculture salmon products into Canada and the U.S. due to Chile's low hourly wages and virtually no environmental standards requirements.
Can the minister ensure Canada's aquaculture industry a level playing field in Canada's agreement with Chile and in any subsequent NAFTA agreements?
Excise Tax Act December 4th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to the hon. member's presentation and to the subsequent questions and comments which came forward. I wonder if the hon. member is aware of three relevant points to this debate.
One point relates to small business. I have talked to a number of small business people in Atlantic Canada. They have said that with the harmonization they will have one set of records to keep, one cheque to issue, one auditor to review their books and accounts. This will replace the current two sets of books, one for provincial sales tax and one for GST, two cheques to issue, and two auditors coming in from time to time to review their accounting systems.
They have said this is a tremendous cost saving to them in the operation of their businesses.
Second, in my home province the current provincial sales tax is 11 per cent and the GST is 7 per cent. Is the hon. member aware that currently there is 7 per cent and 11 per cent on top of that 7 per cent on purchases of such items as automobiles, refrigerators, stoves, paper towels, Kleenex, bathroom tissue, paper supplies, all the normal things that we use day in and day out? To harmonize that into one system with a single 15 per cent tax is a savings. There is no question about it.
According to the GST listing there are other products that will go on. For some of those a credit system will come forward but overall there will be a tremendous savings for the consumer and the business person. This proposal is supported by the majority of people in Atlantic Canada.
Campobello Business Centre November 25th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, last Tuesday evening, November 19, I had the honour of participating at the official opening of the Campobello Business Centre on Campobello Island, New Brunswick.
The realization of this infrastructure project was the result of co-operation and partnership between the sponsor and the federal and provincial governments. Not only does this new business centre provide necessary services to the citizens of Campobello Island, it has also directly provided 14 new jobs for Campobello Island residents.
The Campobello Business Centre is a textbook example of what can be accomplished through partnerships when the community and community groups work together with all levels of government. The infrastructure program has been and will continue to be a great success.
I take this opportunity to add the Campobello Business Centre to the growing list of infrastructure accomplishments from across Canada.
Congratulations to all of our partners and the citizens of Campobello Island for a job well done.
Supply November 21st, 1996
Mr. Speaker, I listened very intently to my hon. colleague's presentation. I certainly want to congratulate him on it. As usual he is very astute when it comes to families, family relationships and once again has portrayed that to this House. My compliments to him.
We hear a great deal about the family today and we know that over the last number of years there have been changes to what we considered the traditional make-up of the family.
However, we know that even with all the challenges that our young people and our students face today, there is a tremendous opportunity in the future with the education opportunities for our young people, the changes in the world of technology and their adaptation to those new technologies. I think it is a tremendous challenge and a tremendous opportunity for the youth of today to develop the future of this country. I believe we have a glorious future when I think of our young people. Quite often we hear a small percentage of criticism, but it is the 98 or 99 per cent of the young people who are going to carry the country forward into the future.
I would ask my hon. colleague to comment on that in his perspective with regard to the family.
Supply November 21st, 1996
Madam Speaker, I would like to hear from the secretary of state exactly how we differ from previous administrations. Exactly how many increases are there on the record for this House that this administration has brought forth in personal income taxes since this government took power?
Could he explain exactly what the advantages have been of bringing our deficit under control, meeting our targets and bringing down interest rates to the lowest levels in the past 30 or 40 years? What has this meant to Canadian families regardless of the make-up of Canadian families, and how has that put money in their pockets?
Finally, the question was put forth about when we would have a balanced budget. It would seem to me with the hon. Minister of Finance's projections of reaching a deficit reduction of $9 billion by 1998, that the step subsequent to that would be a balanced budget in this country for the first time in decades.