Paul Martin

[Taxation, February 10th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I told the Conseil du patronat yesterday that we intended to review and abolish a number of tax loop-

holes. That was our position yesterday, that is our position today, and it will be our position in the upcoming budget.

[Petro-Canada, February 8th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, as you know the previous government did sell off a portion of the Petro-Canada shares. The matter is obviously under advisement.

There is a question of market judgment and at the time when the situation is propitious, we will take the decision that is required.

[Crown Corporations, February 8th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the nature of these corporations is that they are responsible to their boards first and ultimately, as in all other things, they are responsible to the Government of Canada and therefore to the House.

The position of the government on most of these issues is that we agree with the Auditor General. We intend to put into effect the Auditor General's recommendations. There are some exceptions and this is one of them.

[Crown Corporations, February 8th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the exemptions are perfectly in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. They are principles that have been followed by the government for quite some time and they in no way imply that proper supervision of crown corporations is not taking place.

[Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, February 8th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my response to the second question is the same as the first.

[Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, February 8th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I will take the member's question under advisement and when I have the details I will be glad to respond.

[Cigarette Smuggling, February 8th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, from the federal government's point of view, the fact is that the more provinces that participate, the greater the legal sales that will occur and therefore the less the hit on the federal government.

The numbers that we have, and these are really based on an average, show that in the first year, as the Prime Minister has said, there would be a $300 million hit coupled with an approximately $150 million inventory rebate. That will very quickly decline to $25 million in the second year. In fact by the third year the nation's fisc begins to show a substantial improvement, rising to $150 million to $275 million.

In addition to the costs that I outlined at the beginning, it would appear that there would be approximately $150 million to $160 million of enforcement costs arising out of RCMP, customs, justice and health.

That does not lead to very substantial government revenues that are going to occur immediately as a result of the tax measures that the Prime Minister announced in his speech this morning relative to the companies themselves.

[Income Tax Act, February 4th, 1994]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-9, an act to amend the Income Tax Act.

Mr. Speaker, I am told that all I have to do is to stand and nod and not speak.

However since this is an historic day, this is the first bill I have introduced, I thought I would just tell members about it. It is an act to amend the Income Tax Act.

[The Budget, February 4th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, as I expressed very clearly at the workshops in Calgary and at the other three as well there are differences of opinion as is natural. My statement was that at virtually every conference there was tremendous support for building equity into the tax system.

If we take a look at the member's question, I would say that not only virtually every member at those conferences but virtually every Canadian would like to see the government augment its revenues. Certainly we do on this side of the House. We recognize the best way for that to happen is to get the economy going and Canadians back to work. That is why we were elected.

[Taxation, February 4th, 1994]

First of all, Mr. Speaker, if I am helping him put his questions, it is just that I think our questions are better. We have more experience.

I have read the article the hon. member just quoted and I found it very interesting. I also find interesting the fact that, unlike the Reform Party, the hon. member believes that eliminating tax loopholes would really make the tax system more fair and equitable, and is not just another way to increase taxes. I am glad he is making this distinction, which the Reform members do not seem to be able to do.