Madam Speaker, thank you very much for the opportunity of addressing this assembly. I would first of all congratulate the minister for presenting us with his first budget. I encourage him today to do better. That will be my objective.
In summary, what I would like to say to the assembly are basically three things: First, look at some of the positive aspects of this budget; second, examine taxation, the deficit budget proposal; and, third, make some proposals on behalf of the Reform Party to this assembly and as well to the Liberal government in terms of the priorities and some of the things it can do to bring the spending of this country in line and deal in a more responsible way with our fiscal budget.
As well at this moment I would like to offer my appreciation to the hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe-Bagot. The hon. member has been very eloquent today and has laid out a number of proposals. I do not agree with a number of the specifics that were presented to us here today, but I hope when I am able to speak en français that I am as fluent and as facile as the hon. member was here this afternoon.
This budget gives us as Canadians, and certainly members of this House, the first opportunity to judge the government on its promises. Canadians over the last few years have faced a number of difficult things: inflation, large tax increases, GST, and certainly recession.
Canadians are now asking the government a most important question. Will this new budget offer them hope, tax relief, and an end to the chronic deficits that this country has had in the last 10 years, deficits that have smothered us and created difficulties for employment opportunity, business growth and economic growth? They are asking that question and this government must answer it.
To be fair, and this is the Reform way, I want to talk about some of the positive aspects of this budget. First, I want to acknowledge what the government has done in terms of social programs, that it has started to target them toward those most in need. In these sad economic times we as Reformers believe that is a basic principle to be adhered to. In light of that principle, we
recognize the changes to the UIC and the elimination of the age credit as well for wealthy seniors.
Second, I recognize that this budget does bring about restraint, not excessive restraint or the type of restraint we would like to see, but modest restraint. If that is a slight flavour of what we are going to see in the future, then it is a good beginning. If it is not, then it is a very unacceptable start.
What we do not see along with that restraint is a real spending plan and that concerns us. We see this restraint in the military reductions. I know the hon. minister will address this today and will go into detail on some of those reductions which we hope will have fairness across Canada.
Our first review and examination of the reductions taking place regionally seem to be fair and spread across Canada as such. We appreciate the way that was handled. We were concerned prior to the budget that the cuts might be all in one province or in one region which certainly would have been very unfair.
The other area of modest restraint we see is in terms of decreases to business and regional subsidies. The red book had indicated $225 million to $250 million. They are around $150 million less but there is restraint.
The third item is the modest reduction in some of the government operations. We certainly salute that and encourage the government to pursue that direction.
When I examined the budget, and listened in the lock-up and listened to the speech by the hon. Minister of Finance, my attention was drawn to some of the comments on pages 1, 3 and 15 of the budget speech. I would like to read those comments into the record to set the tone for what I have to say later.
This is what the Minister of Finance said they want as a government:
A Canada where our public finances are in order, not ruin.
The days of government simply nibbling at the edges are over.
We need a new architecture, for government and for the economy.
On page 3 we can read this quote:
The era of tax and spend government is gone.
People told us we should freeze spending. We agree.
On page 15 is the support for what I have already quoted: "One of the reasons for the growth of the underground economy is that Canadians believe that taxes are too high. We agree". He said that; I say that. He went on to say:
We want Canadians to rejoin the legitimate economy, not leave it. Our objective is to get growth up and get the deficit down so that in the years ahead, taxes can be reduced. Ultimately, the pay-off for getting the deficit down will be lower taxes.
Those are excellent statements. When I heard them I felt as if I were flying like an eagle over the prairies of Alberta. I felt dominion over all. But all of a sudden, as I read other parts of the budget I felt as if I had crashed like a duck on the ice of Lost Lake in southern Alberta. What a change and what a let down.
When we examined the budget speech we came to the conclusion that the government was not coming to grips with some of the problems. We have renamed it the child of the red book and the budget speech is the red ink book. I am going to talk about that for a few moments today.
First, let us look at why the red ink. Canadians told all members of this House of Commons that they were overtaxed. However, if we look at the red ink book-