Mr. Speaker, it is with considerable pride that I stand in the House today to make my submission to the first significant prebudget consultation
process in Canadian history. On behalf of the constituents of Vancouver South I want to thank the Minister of Finance for this opportunity to express our views.
Let me begin by saying that there continues to be a tremendous amount of confidence within my riding for the Liberal plan for reducing the deficit to 3 per cent of GDP by 1996-97.
As many have remarked in the House before, this 3 per cent target serves as one of the major benchmarks for entry into the European Union. It is also a target that has not been achieved in Canada in 20 years. Still there are those on the opposition benches who continue to argue this 3 per cent target is not tough enough.
What is indisputable is that the Liberal government made a promise to the Canadian people on October 26, 1993. We promised Canadians we would meet this target within the specified time. Then we would begin our ultimate objective, the complete elimination of the deficit. I would like to quote the Minister of Finance: "Come hell or high water we will meet this promise to Canadians".
Recently the Reform Party attempted to bring some credibility to its original zero in three claim, which I know is very difficult for it to do. I am glad that today the leader of the Reform Party has changed that zero in three to zero in five, to do it in five years. He is learning that our goal is much more rational and balanced. He has moved from a zero in three approach to a zero in five. I ask my colleagues to check the record.
The members of the Reform Party have outlined a remarkably vague and draconian plan to cut a number of government programs. All one has to do is read the Edmonton Journal which is often quoted on the other side to understand about what has been brought forward.
This plan along with the announcement of more brutal cuts to come to programs like post-secondary education and old age pensions demonstrates what I will call the half-marble approach to deficit reduction, an approach that only deals with half of the whole solution. Dealing with the deficit in Canada requires a two-sided approach: decreasing government expenditures by streamlining programs and services and increasing government revenues by promoting a healthy and vibrant economy.
Trying to solve Canada's economic problems through extracting $25 billion from the economy in two years without any plan for economic growth is like trying to roll half a marble. Like the marble, it is an idea that will not go very far.
Further, anyone who believes that government revenues will not be seriously diminished through a plan which, while cutting regional development spending, also cuts Canada's social security system is not only trying to roll half a marble but is not playing with all the marbles.
If members take a moment to look at the plan of the Reform-I do not know from where it gets its economics-it thinks that by cutting $42 billion over three years that will somehow create great confidence in the economy and will create jobs. Then everybody will be spending money and we will get a tremendous amount of growth. The Reform Party has a lot to learn. What we are presenting is a much more balanced and rational approach. Canadians see that.
Recently I took the question of how to solve some of Canada's economic problems back to small business owners in my riding through the venue of a public policy forum. I would like to share some of their valuable ideas with the House today.
Overall, my constituents have requested that the budget continue to reflect the commitment of the government to promoting the health and growth of Canada's small business community. I am sure all my colleagues would agree with that.
With regard to access to capital, my constituents feel that the federal government should introduce strong measures to ensure that Canadian financial institutions are more equitable and accountable to small business owners.
With regard to federal deficits, my constituents feel that the federal government should do everything possible to find areas of waste and overlap, duplication and extravagance and eliminate them immediately. I know I will get lots of support from the other side on that issue. In terms of government expenditures on programs and services, there is considerable support among my constituents for the extensive program by program review currently under way.
With regard to taxation, they felt that the federal government should begin reducing the tax burden on average Canadians through a reduction in personal income taxes. It should begin harmonizing and simplifying the tax system so as to decrease administrative costs, expensive paper burden and overall taxation. It should lower payroll taxes through savings made through the UIC system. It should give serious consideration to the recommendation made by the Canadian Federation of Independent Business and supported by the region's small business working committee to increase the small business tax deduction to $400,000 from $200,000.
As I have noted before, this measure has not been adjusted since 1982 when it was first introduced and should be increased to the rate of inflation.
With regard to the most effective role for government, small business owners stated that they want their governments to offer a hand up not a hand out. They feel that the best route to take is not through grants, subsidies and expensive tax deductions, but
through addressing wide ranging concerns such as interprovincial barriers and global trade.
They feel that government should promote a healthy business environment with low taxes and minimal regulations and that they should support the business sector in meeting their own needs in job training and knowledge networks.
They feel that the federal government should target businesses operated by Canadians with special needs but should do so by reallocating current budget expenditures, not by making further expenditures.
With regard to women in small business, my constituents feel that the federal government should give serious consideration to a system of affordable national day care, allowing more women the freedom to begin small businesses. This can be done either directly through the federal government or with government support. They feel that the federal government should find ways of offering training which will help female entrepreneurs get started and expand their business operations.
In conclusion, there was a reason I went to my constituents for their advice. I knew the government was listening to Canadians. For the first time in Canadian history a government has gone to the people for their input on the budget before the budget is introduced. For the first time the government is making a genuine attempt to include Canadians in the decision making process that will affect them. These prebudget consultations, like the other extensive government consultations currently under way, are part of the Liberal election promise to do things differently, to make government more inclusive and to make government more responsive.
We promised to listen to Canadians and that is exactly what we are doing. I am proud to be a part of this government.