Evidence of meeting #5 for Finance in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was garon.
A video is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Jasraj Singh Hallan Conservative Calgary East, AB
Do you agree with the PBO saying that it's “very alarming”, “stupefying”—
Liberal
François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC
If you just want to ask the question with no answer, Canadians will probably use their judgment.
Liberal
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
Chair, I know it's the informal practice at committee, because I've been on many committees, to give the minister at least as much time as it took the member to ask the question. The minister wasn't even able to get the first word out.
Conservative
Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Crowfoot, AB
The minister ran my colleague's clock earlier in the round. I think it works itself out.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Karina Gould
Mr. Hallan, I'll just ask everyone to maintain a respectful atmosphere.
Thank you.
Conservative
Jasraj Singh Hallan Conservative Calgary East, AB
Definitely.
Okay, I don't see the minister answering that. We all believe the PBO, who said that the finances are unsustainable.
Moving on, you said in your statement that you want to make operational spending, whatever that is, and balance it in three years. Mark Carney, the Prime Minister, tried this failed experiment in the U.K. last year. It failed horribly, and now you guys are trying the same accounting trick here in Canada. At the end of the day, the bottom line is still the bottom line.
I'll quote the PBO and what he's saying about your claims about splitting it between operating and capital costs. The PBO said, “we haven't seen a clear definition of what would fall into capital and what would fall into operating.” He further said about your operating budget, “We currently don't have a definition of the operating budget”. He went on to say something very alarming: “The bottom line of the government will not change.” That means debt is still debt at the end of the day. It doesn't matter how many columns you try to present in front of Canadians to try to trick them.
He went on to say:
The international public sector standards that everyone uses to measure the deficit and levels of debt will not change. The first reason that won't change is that those are the accounting standards. The second reason is that the ratings agencies won't let you change it. That's the first thing they're going to go to, and if they have a sniff that somehow something...that there's a change in presentation, you can bet your boots that we're going to be paying more for debt pretty quickly.
You guys are going to try the same failed experiment that Mark Carney advised the U.K. government on just last year. Are you guys going to be cooking the books, trying to trick Canadians with these tricky accounting practices, or both?
Liberal
François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC
Madam Chair, I think it's irresponsible for a member of Parliament to use language like that. I will say that. It's irresponsible. The member knows full well that we're not replacing anything; we're adding. This is a new lens for people at home to understand the distinction—
Conservative
Liberal
François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC
Madam Chair, I'm happy to listen to his questions, but if I'm not allowed to respond with the same time.... I've been a minister for quite some time in this House, and normally—
Conservative
Liberal
François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC
—I have the same time as the colleague.
Canadians deserve to have the record corrected, because that was an irresponsible statement.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Karina Gould
Thank you, Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Hallan. That's time for that round.
We're going to move on to Monsieur Leitão.
Liberal
Carlos Leitão Liberal Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
Minister, good morning.
Mr. Forbes, good morning, it’s good to see you here.
First, I would like to make a comment. The Canadian economy is not in decline.
Economic growth in 2025 will be plus 1.2%, according to the PBO, whom our esteemed colleague has just mentioned so many times. What has changed, though, is the economic environment. We now live in a much more complex and much more uncertain world, which requires a strong adjustment on the part of our government.
Minister, I would like to hear you talk about this a little more, since you haven’t really had time to express yourself.
In this climate of uncertainty, we need to commit to implementing measures that will help us get through this period. What are the main measures you are taking in this regard?
Liberal
François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC
Thank you, Mr. Leitão. You are a renowned economist and former minister of finance of Quebec. Thank you for pointing that out. Indeed, the forecasts predict economic growth in this country. As I reminded our colleagues, that was an irresponsible comment, because we all know that Canada is one of only two G7 countries, along with Germany, to have an AAA credit rating, and that it has the lowest debt-to-GDP ratio. We can therefore agree to tell Canadians that Canada is in a strong fiscal position.
Now, as you said, some macroeconomic changes are taking place. The global economy is changing. People see everything that is happening in the world, and that is why we have said that we need to reduce spending on current operations so that we can invest more in the future. I think this is a generational opportunity.
Canada attracts talent from all over the world. It is a country that builds airplanes, cars and ships. It has critical minerals and abundant energy resources. Canada is the only G7 country that has a free trade agreement with every other G7 country. So when I hear some of the comments from our colleagues, I think we have a responsibility as parliamentarians to promote Canada and talk about what it can do. I look at Canada’s fiscal position and I have confidence in Canadians and the Canadian economy.
Furthermore, with regard to the comments made earlier by our colleagues, that is precisely why we are implementing a new way of presenting the budget. This will give Canadians a better understanding of which part corresponds to investments and which part corresponds to spending. People listening to us at home understand that when they pay their mobile phone bill, it’s an expense, but buying a house is an investment. It’s better to provide Canadians with more clarity and transparency.
In fact, the new budget cycle, which means that we now present the budget in the autumn, was requested by the committee. Parliamentarians asked us to change the budget cycle. Furthermore, within the G7, it is the norm rather than the exception to table a budget in the autumn. Canada was the odd one out in that group. So this will certainly increase clarity, not only for parliamentarians, who will now have the opportunity to see the budget before voting on the main estimates, but also for the provinces and territories. I have spoken to my colleagues in the provinces and they are very happy with this change because, for them, there have been several years when the federal budget was presented after the provincial budgets. You were minister of finance, Mr. Leitão, so you know that this is not ideal. I see you smiling.
On the other hand, tabling the budget in the fall will also allow people to better align with the construction season. Having spoken to contractors, I know that they want predictability. So if the budget is tabled in the fall and the provincial budgets are tabled around February or March, that gives people time to prepare for the construction season, when we need to do more in this country. In short, with this new formula, parliamentarians, Canadians and construction contractors all win, because everything is clearer.
This is a new way of presenting the budget, but it does not replace anything. The deficit will be calculated according to the same accounting rules as before, as will the debt. What we are adding is a way of presenting the figures. Obviously, there will be an accounting reconciliation exercise, and the public accounts will still be based on the same accounting rules that apply to the Government of Canada. There is no change on that front. We are simply adding more clarity and transparency.
In fact, Madam Chair, I would even say that we are giving the committee more tools to play its role, which is to oversee public spending. This will allow our colleagues to conduct pre-budget consultations in the summer. They will have the entire summer to do so, as we did this year, and I think this will inspire confidence among Canadians.
Liberal
Carlos Leitão Liberal Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
I just want to inform the committee that, as a former minister of finance for Quebec, I do indeed find that this new budget cycle will greatly facilitate the preparation of a provincial budget. In that regard, it is very good.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Karina Gould
Thank you, Mr. Leitão.
Mr. Garon, you have the floor for six minutes.
Liberal
Bloc
Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC
Mr. Champagne, you were appointed minister in early 2025. You did not table a budget. Your Prime Minister called an election, your financial platform was riddled with errors and was not balanced, and it included $20 billion in tariff countermeasures. It was embarrassing.
You returned in May, and on May 14, you announced that there would be no budget this autumn. You were publicly contradicted by your own Prime Minister. Last spring, you were asked to prepare a budget for this autumn, but you refused. Finally, after coming under pressure, you decided to prepare one.
For several weeks, we have been asking you whether there will be a budget next spring. You refused to say ‘yes.’ You refused to say ‘no.’ It was a complete lack of transparency. Meanwhile, the committee’s work was stalled. More than 200 groups in Quebec were unable to be heard in public, before the committee, rather than behind closed doors with the Liberals, at your home or at the Prime Minister’s home. These more than 200 groups will not be heard by the committee, even though you are championing pre-budget consultations.
Minister, is this the government’s new transparency, with the Prime Minister conducting consultations behind closed doors? You receive oil companies and your friends behind closed doors. Groups come to our offices to tell us that they have not even received acknowledgements of receipt from your department.
Is this the new way of making decisions for Canadians?