House of Commons Hansard #156 of the 35th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was cuba.
Doug Peters LiberalSecretary of State (International Financial Institutions)
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to confirm for the hon. member that we will be presenting a budget showing that we will reach our 3 per cent interim target on our way to the zero deficit target.
Doug Peters Liberal Scarborough East, ON
The timing of it is not certain. We will have rolling two-year targets so that we meet those targets. There is no point in going out like members of the previous government and saying that there is going to be a certain deficit in so many years when they have no intention of achieving it.
We are going to meet our targets in rolling two-year periods as the finance minister has said.
Stephen Harper Reform Calgary West, AB
Mr. Speaker, we all know about the imminent downgrade of Canadian debt by Moody's. Moody's primary concern is not the deficit for this year or next year. It is mid-term factors. It knows full well that the 3 per cent target will leave the government open and an inevitable downturn in the U.S. economy will cause an escalation once again in the debt-GDP ratio. The minister knows that.
Once again, will the minister tell the House, if he has no idea how the government is going to achieve its ultimate target, how they can assure investors that the deficit-GDP ratio will not again spiral out of control once we have a downturn in the U.S. economy?
Doug Peters LiberalSecretary of State (International Financial Institutions)
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has some economics training and knowledge. He should look at the structural pattern.
Doug Peters Liberal Scarborough East, ON
There seems to be some disagreement among my colleagues. He should look at the structural pattern in the deficit. We have made some major changes in the structure of the deficit.
Our structural deficit is much lower than it ever was. It is a matter of the changes we made in the last budget and the changes that will be made in this budget which will make that deficit target achievable in the near term.
Stephen Harper Reform Calgary West, AB
Mr. Speaker, the minister who also has some economics knowledge will know that a 3 per cent GDP target at the top of a cycle is a very high structural deficit.
On Friday, once again, the Minister of Finance blamed the previous Conservative government for the problem, saying that it had left a huge accumulated debt. The House will remember that the previous Conservative government used to blame the Liberals before them for the large accumulated debt.
When will the government stop with these excuses, stop saying it suddenly discovered compound interest and abandon the go slow, go nowhere policies that caused millions of Canadians to abandon the Conservatives?
Doug Peters LiberalSecretary of State (International Financial Institutions)
Mr. Speaker, the millions of Canadians that abandoned the Conservatives gave the hon. member an opportunity to run for Parliament.
Let me tell the hon. member that the changes we made in the last budget were the biggest changes in spending cuts that have been made in any budget in a decade. We are going to continue to move on our path to get the deficit down.
Jean-Marc Jacob Bloc Charlesbourg, QC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Defence.
The Ottawa Sun reports that three generals intervened directly during the military police inquiry into events in Somalia implicating enlisted personnel and officers of the Airborne Regiment in Petawawa.
Can the defence minister confirm that three generals did intervene directly in the military police inquiry to protest the way the military police had conducted its activities in the case of Lieutenant-Colonel Carol Mathieu, claiming that those conducting the inquiry were going too far?
David Collenette LiberalMinister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member must know that it would be inappropriate for me to comment upon any matter relating to the investigations surrounding the deployment of the Canadian airborne regiment to Somalia in 1992 and 1993.
Jean-Marc Jacob Bloc Charlesbourg, QC
Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time the minister has replied. I think that is indeed pertinent to what I am asking him. I would like him to answer.
Does the minister acknowledge that this totally inappropriate intervention by three generals on behalf of Lieutenant-Colonel Mathieu discredits and seriously calls into question the military police inquiry following which Lieutenant-Colonel Mathieu was acquitted by a court martial?
David Collenette LiberalMinister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs
Mr. Speaker, I have repeated the same answer a number of times.
There will be an inquiry headed by a civilian. It will be public. It will answer all questions relating to the deployment to Somalia. The hon. member should wait until that time.
Jim Abbott Reform Kootenay East, BC
Mr. Speaker, the Canadian people have said very clearly no tax increases.
At noon today the Canadian Taxpayers' Association presented on the Hill 230,000 petitions against taxes. Our party has received over 15 sacks full of mail strongly advising the finance minister not to increase taxes.
My question is for the Minister of National Revenue. Will he take this anti-tax message to the Minister of Finance? More important, will he vote against any net tax increases in the next budget?
David Anderson LiberalMinister of National Revenue
Mr. Speaker, I can assure the hon. member that the Minister of Finance and other members of the government are listening with great care and attention to the public on many issues related to tax, but I can assure him that we will not be dissuaded from proceeding with our deficit reduction plan outlined, as the Secretary of State for Financial Institutions mentioned a moment ago, in last year's budget.
We will achieve those goals regardless of protests that might occur.
Jim Abbott Reform Kootenay East, BC
Mr. Speaker, I really expected that answer from the minister. He was quoted in the newspaper about 10 days ago as saying that tax protesters do not make any difference to him or his government anyway.
May I ask the minister: Would he care to join me in the lobby outside following question period where I will be happy to give
him 15 sacks full of messages from ordinary citizens? Will he join me in the lobby outside after?
David Anderson LiberalMinister of National Revenue
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has referred to a statement made in Vancouver. Just for the record, I would like to read it out to him because he obviously does not understand it. I said: "Obviously we will be listening to the public and obviously I have had many meetings with groups of Canadians on tax matters, but Mr. Martin's approach to the budget will not be altered simply by protests here or there. He has objectives he must meet".
Again I repeat to the hon. member that he cannot blow and suck at the same time. Either he is in favour of reducing the expenditures of the government and meeting our deficit targets or he is not. He cannot keep saying that we must give in to every protest that might come along either on one side or the other.
TaxationOral Question Period
The Speaker
Our expressions are getting a little more colourful as we go along.
Michel Bellehumeur Bloc Berthier—Montcalm, QC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Solicitor General.
By lowering taxes on cigarettes last year, the federal government wanted to put an end to smuggling. The Solicitor General promised at the time to set up a complete plan to stop smuggling.
Since the government has decided to raise taxes on cigarettes, are we to understand that the Solicitor General's plan for fighting smuggling has actually led to the dismantling of all of the smuggling networks?
Herb Gray LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, we said a year ago that it would take time to dismantle the smuggling networks. We have had considerable success up to now, and this is why it is now possible to raise taxes on cigarettes to a certain extent.
Michel Bellehumeur Bloc Berthier—Montcalm, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to believe the minister, but I would remind him of one thing as well. He has not yet submitted a report to this House on the results of the fight against smuggling.
What assurance can the Solicitor General give us that an increase in taxes will not help rebuild the cigarette smuggling networks?
Herb Gray LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, we are acting on the advice of the RCMP and other police forces. According to their advice, we can raise taxes as proposed last week in the ways and means motion, in order to increase government revenues without threatening our plan to fight vigorously against all sorts of smuggling.
Ed Harper Reform Simcoe Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, it is amazing how quickly viewpoints change when a party becomes the government.
In opposition the Liberal rat pack railed against the Mulroney government patronage perks and pork. Now in government the rat pack has become the fat pack. They fought against changes to their lavish gold plated pension plans and they appear to have won. The Liberal government has backed off reforming the pension plans of the fat pack and any other MP with more than 10 years of service.
My question for the President of the Treasury Board is: Why will he not introduce pension reform that cuts equally across the board?
Art Eggleton LiberalPresident of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure
Mr. Speaker, the government is not backing off anything. We have made it quite clear that we are going to deal with the matter of pension reform. We are going to live up to our obligations that we made in the election campaign.
The Prime Minister said in this House not more than one week ago that it would be done either before the budget or at the time of the budget and it will be done.
Ed Harper Reform Simcoe Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, on Friday the President of the Treasury Board said the government will acquit itself of its obligation with respect to MPs pensions mighty soon. The only obligations in the red book deal with double dipping and the age of eligibility.
Will the President of the Treasury Board confirm today that real cuts will be made to bring all MPs pensions into line with the private sector and not just the obligatory scrapes mentioned in the red book?
