You've mentioned here a number of times that until you get the information you need, it's hard to make an actual analysis of it. But that didn't stop you from going to the newspapers on January 20—The Toronto Sun, The Globe and Mail, and The Toronto Star—and commenting that you can't square it, that it just doesn't add up. You've had no problem making comments to the media, but you say you can't make specific comments until you see the actual budget and paperwork. If I'm wrong, parliamentarians can tell me I'm wrong. But I don't know of any provincial or federal government that debates and presents its budget in advance of actually presenting it to their legislature or to Parliament. I'm unaware of anyone who has ever done that.
You have a problem also with cabinet confidentiality. Now, you were in the Department of Finance and a number of departments in the nineties. I only wish that those people who criticize cabinet confidentiality right now would have had the same level of desire for open government in the nineties when the federal Liberal government was decimating provincial government budgets on health and education.
The reality is, we have cabinet confidentiality because people can benefit or prosper from advance knowledge of what's in a budget. That's the way the parliamentary system has worked. It has always worked that way. That's the way the provincial governments operate, whether they're NDP, Conservative, or Liberal.
Do you not agree that the government of the day—in this instance it's a Conservative government of the day—or any government has the opportunity and absolute right to put together what they believe is their framework, where the country should go, present it to Parliament, and then after that parliamentarians, before they actually pass a budget...?
I can appreciate that the Liberals are having trouble with this, because they don't usually show up or they vote for us when it comes to budgeting. They're in a difficult spot because they actually support everything we do, and then they go, “Wow, my gosh, we're in trouble because they're on the right course. We have to vote for them or just not show up.”
But doesn't the government, under a parliamentary system, have the absolute responsibility to treat those things that should be confidential as confidential? Then they go to Parliament, present the budget, and say, “Here it is. Vote on that budget.” And then parliamentarians come to you and say, “Based on what you see, are the projections realistic?” And then they and we can make a decision, as parliamentarians, about whether this is appropriate or not.
Sorry to be a bit frustrated on this. I think it devalues the office when we fight this in the media, as opposed to doing what we're supposed to do: look at what the government presents, make projections based on actual knowledge, and not go willy-nilly all over the place and get all upset. Parliamentary tradition has forever been that the government presents a budget it created in secrecy. That's why we have budget lock-ups. That's why there's cabinet responsibility.
Why is it that now we should be forgetting all about that and moving towards a system like the United States has, where we negotiate a budget in public? Maybe we have our little moneys here that we could sprinkle...I know that would be a Liberal attraction, because they love their entitlements--