Thank you, Madam Chair.
We understand that, since the amendment has been moved by the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Finance, it is practically straight from the minister's mouth. So it is not surprising since what the minister wants is to not table a budget. He was appointed in January and had just one thing to do: Prepare a budget. As I said in the House, we know what the minister is like: He makes a lot of announcements, but doesn't finish what he starts. So I am pretty sure that there is part of a budget somewhere or estimates that he could present to us.
They keep invoking Brian Mulroney's record to justify not tabling a budget. Right opposite me, though, is Mr. Leitão, who tabled a budget every year as Quebec's finance minister. Let me say that, when Brian Mulroney was elected in 1984, I was two years old. That is the only digestible example that the minister and his parliamentary secretary have been able to come up with. The government of Brian Mulroney was not just talking points like the current government is. The current senior officials were appointed by the Liberals, while the Conservatives had to set things up when they took office. In the present case, nobody had to get set up. It is true that we have lost a few very good ministers, but that's another topic, and I will not mention any names.
The Liberals' new hobby horse is saying that the election platform presented during the campaign takes the place of Parliament. We have just come from a vote in the House, and the Conservatives just voted in favour of that. They said they were voting in favour of the Liberal election platform. You can see where I'm going with this. What is being said to justify there being no budget is very important. The Conservatives are saying today that, in the end, the Liberal election campaign is sufficient to circumvent Parliament since the Liberals won. That is exactly what they are saying.
The Liberals are using the parts of their platform that suit them. By the way, the platform was very short on details and contained no legislation, analysis or appendices. And yet those are things that Mr. Turnbull would have opposed if there had been a vote a few months ago since he was an environmentalist who had been working for the Liberals for quite some time. All of a sudden, the Liberal platform is enough to circumvent Parliament, to shorten committee work, erase democracy and not invite any more witnesses, and all because there is not much time.
The Liberal election platform did in fact include a financial platform. We are being told that bills are being tabled that were in the Liberal election platform and that this justifies circumventing Parliament. If there was a financial platform, why isn't there a budget? The Liberals are picking and choosing. In other words, they are deciding to use the parts of the platform that suit them.
Let me give you an example. We were supposed to collect $20 billion in counter-tariff revenues. We are pleased that there are fewer counter-tariffs if that means there are fewer tariffs and trade wars. That is not the problem. The Liberal financial platform stated that the $20 billion would be used to help businesses and workers. That amount is directly related to the tariffs imposed. As a result, if fewer tariffs are being imposed, those counter-tariff revenues are not needed as badly to balance things out. Yet the Liberals have decided to use that $20 billion to pay for tax cuts. That is why we now have Bill C‑4, which includes tax cuts. To be clear, I am not necessarily opposed to tax cuts, but they need to be studied.
The fact is that the Liberals are unable to keep their promises and table a budget, much less a balanced budget. The Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance tell us they are working on an accounting reform based on the way it is done in Great Britain, which is a unitary state without provinces. Regarding this reform, they say that increasing transfers to the provinces would increase the current account deficit.
I see Mr. Turnbull checking the time. I have six minutes left.
Transfers to the provinces could nonetheless be used to build hospitals, but the Liberals say that increasing those transfers would increase the current account deficit. At the same time, however, under their accounting reform, the cost of building an airport or military base could be amortized over 20, 30 or 35 years. That is exactly what the Liberals are in the process of doing.
So there was a financial platform in the Liberal campaign, but it was shoddy work. It was not balanced. Not only did the minister lie to the House when it was studying the estimates—and I raised a question of privilege in that regard last week—but he is unable to tell us how he is going to fund all of that. He doesn't know—