The point I didn't make clear in my opening remarks is I have a very utilitarian view of this. We have roughly a third of our population—the baby boomers—who are going to be retiring in the next ten years. Everyone knows this. Our costs forf health care and pensions are going to skyrocket through the sky. Anybody who supports—and I think most Canadians do support—generous social programs of pensions, public health care, and so forth should be supporting the maximization of economic growth to generate the taxes to pay for the social programs.
To me, it's a contradiction to support a high level of social programs while simultaneously putting the brakes on economic growth. My late mother, who I adored enormously, would drive down the road in her late eighties with one foot on the gas and one on the brake. That's not the way to drive a car. This is why I disagree with the Council of Canadians' position. They and the NDP support high levels of social programs. By the way, this is the problem of southern Europe: they want the programs, but they won't generate the growth to pay for the programs.