Thank you, Mr. Chair.
If there is more time, Mr. McColeman has one more question, I understand.
Mr. Chair, I do want to clarify what Mr. Dhaliwal said. Of course it was James Moore in opposition who nagged and nagged the Liberal government to implement the gas tax funding for municipalities, and now of course he is the heritage minister. The record speaks for itself on that.
To our witnesses today, thank you very much for coming.
I understand that in essence today we are debating a hypothetical. We don't know what is going to be finished on time. We don't know what's not going to be finished on time. We are collecting information on it, of course. Infrastructure Canada has told us that. But in essence we're dealing with hypotheticals. We have more than six months to go in a program that really was a two-year stimulus fund.
Dealing specifically with your three points, I understand that what you're not asking for is a blanket extension. Just going through your three points, you're saying show flexibility for communities who have played by the rules and worked hard, work with the communities to adjust schedules on specific projects, and work with the provinces in the same regard.
I see a nod to the affirmative. So that's correct.
Now, my understanding, in speaking with Infrastructure Canada, is that this is exactly what they are doing. They're trying to be fair and reasonable with those people who have played by the rules and have tried hard. If that's not the case, I would invite you and ask you to come back to the committee and tell us that, giving specific cases with specific information, because our information here today is that they are working to be fair and reasonable, along the exact lines that you've suggested.
Finally, I do have a question on this. You say that infrastructure spending is two times more effective at creating jobs. Now, any economist, I think, or at least the ones who taught me, will tell you that this is true--in the short term, hence “stimulus” fund.
Is it fair to say--I see your head nodding again, Mr. Miller--that in the long term it's just not sustainable, that in fact tax cuts over the long term will provide more jobs because that stimulates the economy? It gets rid of the freeloaders, where people don't pay taxes and have a false economy, which happens in many, for instance, developing countries?
So it's fair to say that, short term, as the government has done, we're trying to create jobs, and it's two times more effective, but over the long term it's not sustainable. Is that fair to say? Because of course you will run out of tax money after a period of time.