His imaginary friend got the better of him again.
I guess the people over at the PMO who are so good at putting out distortions of truth decided that 90 per cent was a little too much. They said to the Prime Minister: "Why don't you go to the people on the Liberal convention weekend and use 78 per cent? Do not use 79. That sounds like we are fudging it. We don't really want to get down around 75 because then people will be talking about three-quarters. Why don't we choose 78 per cent?"
We did fundamentally the same thing. The Reform Party put out a score card and came in at 30 per cent. We said the Liberals had not addressed the issue or even come remotely close to solving the issue of interprovincial trade barriers.
What did the Liberals say? This is their brand new pulp fiction, a record of achievement. Now there is a joke. Page 18 of the document states that a Liberal government will be committed to the elimination of interprovincial trade barriers within Canada and will address the issue urgently, and they have a check mark.
We noted they had not even come remotely close to it but they put it in the red book. We are talking integrity. They clearly indicated that as far as they were concerned they had achieved the objective of doing away with interprovincial trade barriers.
Why was it on Monday morning, when I was in their policy session, the following National Liberal Women's Commission resolution passed? It read:
Be it resolved that the Liberal Party of Canada encourage the Government of Canada to commit itself, in all matters of internal trade, to facilitating removal of the number and complexity of impediments to interprovincial trade.
If, when they put out this pulp fiction on Thursday they had already done it, why was the National Liberal Women's Commission passing a resolution saying they should do it the next day?
I have another one by the Liberal Party of Canada, Ontario. It read:
Be it resolved that the Liberal Party of Canada request that the federal government pursue a comprehensive agreement to complete the Economic Union of Canada by introducing a constitutional provision stating that Canada is an Economic Union wherein goods, services, people, and capital can have full mobility within the entire nation".
What a great idea but they just did it the day before, did they not? They said so in their book. What is this? That was not good enough. The Liberal Party of Ontario passed another one. It read:
Be it resolved that the Liberal Party of Canada urges the federal government to negotiate with the provinces to ensure the portability of professional qualifications between provinces.
The Prime Minister, this person with the imaginary friend, had just finished telling us they had done it. Why did they put out this book when in fact they had not done it, to the extent they even passed resolutions to say they should do it?
Now the big whopper is "an agenda for jobs and growth". This government promised Canadians jobs, jobs, jobs. Is that not terrific? It was like the promise that we would have independence in the chair in this place by putting opposition members in the chair of this place. "Oh, gee, we are not going to do that". There is another broken promise.
What about jobs, jobs, jobs? I would have been just totally mortified if my caucus had done what the National Liberal Caucus did at the convention. Believe it or not, this is really something. They actually put in:
Whereas the twin forces of economic globalization and rapid technological change have resulted in the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs throughout all sectors of the labour market;
Whereas the rate of unemployment remains stubbornly high with too many people competing for too few jobs;
Whereas the young people, in particular-
I should parenthesize that they are 18 per cent unemployed.
Whereas the young people, in particular, are finding it increasingly difficult to obtain full time employment;
This is a resolution of the National Liberal Caucus. It is the most brilliant idea the Liberals have:
Be it resolved that the Liberal Party of Canada recommends that work sharing be promoted with employers and unions as part of the effort to redistribute working time-
That is the most brilliant idea the people on the other side of the House have come up with. Then they have the audacity to send out from the Prime Minister's office, at the expense of taxpayers, distortions about where the Reform Party is coming from and that somehow we do not have any new ideas.
We do have some ideas. For example, one distortion of truth was that our program would rob the poor to pay the rich. Let us take a look at exactly what the Reform Party would do. We would
increase the basic personal income tax exemption from $6,456 to $7,900, giving tax relief to every taxpayer.
We would increase the spousal amount from $5,380 also to $7,900 which would level the playing field for parents who choose to stay home to look after young children. It would help families meet their needs in a more demanding economy.
We would eliminate the 3 per cent and 5 per cent federal surtaxes introduced by their brother in the federal Tories as part of our commitment to simplify and flatten taxes.
We would cut the employers unemployment insurance premium by 28 per cent, thereby reducing the job killing payroll taxes.
We would extend the $3,000 to $5,000 child care deduction to all parents including those who care for their children at home.
It is a matter of coming up with new ideas. It is a matter of making sure the people at the bottom end of the scale are looked after first. That is what the Reform Party is about. In this instance a family of four with one income earner would see an immediate tax reduction of 89 per cent. There would be one million fewer taxpayers at the bottom end of the scale as a result of the initiatives of the Reform Party.
At the top end of the scale for a family of four with one income earner earning $100,000 the reduction would only be 3 per cent as opposed to 89 per cent at the bottom end.
And these people have the audacity to say we are robbing the poor to pay the rich. These people are robbing the poor to pay the rich. We will do a complete turnaround so that the people at the bottom end of the scale are the people who are the most advantaged. I just do not understand these people opposite at all.
As my colleague from Lisgar-Marquette noted, if the Liberals cannot keep the small promises, how in the world can they keep the big ones? Here we have an issue of honesty, integrity and moving forward in the impartiality of the running of the House and they cannot even do that. When the National Liberal Caucus has to resort to their very best idea of job sharing, give me a break.
We have some ideas. We would create jobs through smaller government. We would put an end to overspending and lower taxes. We would make government smaller by eliminating waste, duplication and red tape. In particular, if we take a look at the portfolio I am responsible for, we would take a look at why the heritage minister felt compelled to come up with a $20 million Canada Information Office. What an absolutely brilliant idea when every department and every ministry of the government has its very own information office.
In addition, there is also Inquiries Canada with a budget of $4 million. Why did we need this? Maybe we have a bit of a clue in the way in which the Liberals went about hiring the people for the office. It does not come under any rules and regulations with respect to the normal hiring practice of government. I wonder why. I wonder if maybe they may be choosing to hire exactly the people they want. I will bet there is an election coming and they want to have some people they will be able to hand pick at taxpayers' expense to bring into this office.