Mr. Speaker, I have seldom heard as much distortion of another party's policy at one time. The member has done an excellent job of that and I congratulate her if that is her goal. There has not been that much distortion from a single member in a long time.
The member referred to the Liberal budget and how there has been so much flexibility given to programs under the budget. I would like to ask the member how this budget gives flexibility when it will still mean adding $24 billion per year, by the finance minister's own figures, to the debt and when interest payments on the debt will increase to $51 billion per year by the end of the three-year period?
How does that give flexibility to social programs where billions and billions more will have to be taken from social programs to make interest payments? How does that give flexibility if the Canadian economy collapses and we go hat in hand to the International Monetary Fund asking for a loan and it says that we have to get rid of a lot of our social programs, otherwise it will not lend us the money? How does that give flexibility?