Just to back up, yes, since probably 2000 we've seen a dramatic reduction of roughly a little over 20%, to 15% next year, in the corporate income tax rate. It does raise an issue. Have we seen, based on the reduction of those corporate rates, improvement in investment, improvement in business productivity, labour productivity, and multi-factor business productivity?
On the first part, I think most economists are disappointed and scratching their heads, asking why, after all those corporate income tax reductions, we haven't seen more productivity. We wish we would have more productivity. We know we need that productivity.
Going forward, we have a structural deficit in this country, in terms of the current year, of about 1.5%. As we move over the medium term, this deficit, in our projections, at the structural level is more or less eliminated—over the medium term—because of spending restraint. If we get the spending restraint, we will eliminate for the most part that structural deficit. As we move to the longer term, we see that structural deficit opening up because of aging demographics.
So yes, one could say that all tax cuts, whether corporate or PIT.... At one point we cut a little bit too deeply. Or you could argue on the other side that as a result of additional spending, which was structural in nature, that has contributed to the structural deficit.