Absolutely, Mr. Speaker. In other words, I will make sure I quote from it but I certainly will not show it so that anybody will know what I am quoting from.
Here is what the Reform wants to do with payroll taxes. Apart from on page 45 "having a benefit structure requiring two weeks of work for one week of benefits" here is what the Reform says. It says that it wants to "ensure that savings from reform of UI translate into deficit elimination". The Reform Party recommends "the establishment of a permanent reserve fund for UI until the budget is balanced. Funds from this reserve would be applied against the deficit. After the budget was balanced this fund would
remain to balance revenue and expenditure fluctuations under UI throughout the economic cycle".
It goes on to say: "Any additional savings from the restructuring of UI after the deficit has been satisfied" after this huge fund has built up, then Reform says: "savings will be passed on to employees and employers in the form of a reduction".
Imagine using unemployment insurance premiums not only to completely retire the deficit, not only to satisfy the debt of this country but then to build up an additional fund and somewhere down the road they are going to pass along a saving to an employer or an employee.
A tax is a tax. A tax is a tax is a tax. If it is on the employer, if it is on the employee, a tax is a tax is a tax. Basically what we have here are the opposition parties in this Chamber who do not like the record of this Liberal administration. No-