Debates of March 21st, 1996

Borrowing Authority Act, 1996-97

[An hon. member]

Is she the next senator?

[Doug Peters, Liberal, Scarborough East, ON]

I think she is too old to be a senator.

Even Dalton Camp, the arch Conservative, said: "According to Wednesday's media reports almost everybody liked the budget and generally approved of it. They were not offended or threatened by it. The overall editorial tone was laudatory, if not exultant, sounding like the Mormon Tabernacle Choir in a rousing finale of its rendition of the Battle Hymn of the Republic".

Some business economists have sent items about the budget. "We are on a role. There is a momentum building in the economy", said Andrew Pyle of Path International. Sherry Cooper, Nesbitt Burns chief economist said: "Evidence continues to mount that the Canadian economy is finally breaking away from last year's nearly recessionary condition". I could go on.

The export business in this country is not just moving along slowly. It is not just being promoted by the private sector. It is our Prime Minister who has taken hundreds of businessmen on trading trips, signed billions of dollars worth of contracts and has done an absolutely marvellous job.

He realizes the importance of Canada's competitiveness. We have been competitive. We are competitive. We are more competitive right now on the international scale than we have ever been in the last 40 years since they started taking the statistics. As a result of that we will probably reach very soon this year a roughly balanced international current account.

When the government took office there was close to a $30 billion deficit in our current account. That means this country had to borrow internationally $30 billion. As a result of the export promotion the Prime Minister has done, as a result of the economic policies of this government, that has been reduced to a very small figure in the last quarter in the last year.

This year we will probably record a surplus. That is the net result of the sales of goods and services and the purchase of goods and services abroad. That is a remarkable turnaround. Any economist will say that is remarkable.

It is not solely the result of the private sector. It is the result of the climate the government has produced for the private sector to grow in the export market, the efforts of the Minister for International Trade, the foreign affairs minister and especially the Prime Minister.

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Madam Chair, I am informed there has been verification as to the actual time the debate will end. It is now officially 5.27 p.m. As there were discussions, I thought we should clear that up for the record.

I wonder if members would give unanimous consent to end the debate, pass the amendments and move to third reading. We would be willing on this side to divide the time into three. The government would take ten minutes to ensure that all three parties could speak at third reading, if that is their wish. Otherwise we are perfectly willing to use up the remaining time at this stage. However, we thought it would be advantageous to all parties.

[The Assistant Deputy Chairman]

Is there unanimous consent to conclude this debate?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Assistant Deputy Chairman]

Resuming debate.

[Myron Thompson, Reform, Wild Rose, AB]

Madam Chair, I rise on a point of order. This is not a matter of debate. We are on questions. I ask that the Chair remember that we are not hearing one member for 10 minutes or 15 minutes; it is time for questions.

[The Assistant Deputy Chairman]

I remind hon. members that in committee of the whole a member has 20 minutes for questions and answers. The hon. member for Prince George-Bulkley Valley still has the floor if he wants it.

[Dick Harris, Reform, Prince George—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Madam Chair, I would respectfully like to cede my time to the hon. member for Wild Rose.

[The Assistant Deputy Chairman]

You cannot do that. The hon. member for Dartmouth.

[Ron MacDonald, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister for International Trade]

Madam Chair, I have sat here and tried to understand the concerns of members of the third party. I have listened to a multitude of their finance critics. They just keep getting up. I am not exactly sure exactly what their problem is.

They talked about the deficit. They talked about the debt. They talked about public confidence. They talked about business confidence. They are now converts to the principle of universality.

I have heard the finance critic opposite say a number of conflicting things. On the one hand he was criticizing us for not just meeting our debt and deficit projections and targets but for exceeding them. On the other hand he was telling us we should be investing more dollars into job creation. He cannot have it both ways.

They cannot on the one hand criticize us for exceeding our targets on deficit reduction and spending controls and on the other hand get up and criticize the secretary of state-

[An hon. member]

We are here to debate the budget, so ask your minister a question.

[Ron MacDonald, Liberal, Dartmouth, NS]

Perhaps members opposite could put up their hands a little faster the next time so they can ask a question. I have been here for the last hour and a half. I know some days I am not as clear in thought as I want to be, but these guys have me completely confused.

I would like to ask a couple of questions about the numbers we have been given in the budget and in the borrowing authority bill.

I would like to know whether the minister can tell me if the Minister of Finance has met the deficit targets he has put forward in each of his budgets. If the answer is in the affirmative I would like to know if he has exceeded them.

I also want to know, because members opposite seem so concerned about Canadians who are jobless, whether we have created any jobs and how many jobs have been created because of the fiscal framework of the Minister of Finance.

I think this is important for people who are watching the debate. I think I am asking the types of questions Canadians want answered.

The next thing I want to know is whether the government in the fiscal framework of the budgets it has put forward and the various borrowing authorities that have come out, has it maintained the principle of access to things like health care across the country by the priority and by the transfers? Second, in the whole area of social policy and transfers to the provinces whether it has stabilized the transfers to the provinces through things like the CHST, equalization and other programs?

I get confused when I sit here after I read all of what the government has done. I am a part of that government and I was rather proud of the platform we ran on. As a matter of fact I am quite proud of the way the Minister of Finance has done his job in the last two and a half years. He has not just met those commitments but exceeded them.

Is it true that the government, through the Minister of Finance and under the direct auspices of the Prime Minister, has done what the Reform Party obviously finds so distasteful? Has it put confidence back into the Canadian economy, made sure that Canadian investors keep up with where we are going? Has it driven down interest rates so that there is more investment in this country? Has it created an atmosphere for the creation of not 10,000, not 50,000, not 100,000 but 600,000 jobs and at the same time has its deficit projections under control?

At the same time the government has stabilized the transfers to the provinces. It has made sure that programs that are as much a part of the fabric of the country as anything else that defines us have not been savaged, as the members opposite would have done. The government has managed to do it all with the support of over 58 per cent of the Canadian public while the policies of the members opposite are in such disrepute with the Canadian public that they are mired at 12 per cent in the polls. Their members run off in all directions crying at the drop of a hat. They know that they have frittered away the opportunity that was given to them in the last election by the Canadian electorate.

[Doug Peters, Liberal, Scarborough East, ON]

Madam Chairman, when we first took office I remember the finance minister and I sitting in the Department of Finance considering just where we sat. We came into a government that was in disrepute. We came in at a time and pondered over what the previous government had done. That previous government had given an estimated deficit of $32 billion.

What was the result we were looking at? The result was $42 billion to $44 billion, close to $45 billion at the first shot. That was a disaster.

The next thing that happened was the finance minister said: "We are going to not only set targets to bring our deficit down to 3 per cent of GDP in the third year of our mandate as we promised, we are going to set those targets and we are going to achieve them". I was at that finance department meeting and he told them: "Do not make any mistake, there is no way those targets can be exceeded. I want targets met in every way every year".

The first year the target was $39.7 billion and the final result was $37.5 billion. When we put that target out what was the press saying, what was the Reform Party saying? They were saying: "You'll never each the target. You'll never make those numbers. Those are impossible targets to make". Now they say that we are too low but they were not saying that then. They were saying that we would never make our targets. The first target was not just $39.7 billion, we got $37.5 billion. It was bettered by more than $2 billion.

Our next year's target was set at $32 billion. Are we going to meet that target? You bet we are going to meet that target. We are going to beat that target and better it this year. The $24.7 billion, the 3 per cent of GDP target for next fiscal year is going to be met and bettered again. We have another target after that of 2 per cent of GDP down to $17 billion.

If the deficits are measured in the same way that the Europeans and the Americans do, that deficit of 2 per cent of GDP would fall to $6 billion or less than 1 per cent of GDP. That is virtually a balanced result and is in the fourth year of the mandate. That is a remarkable set of numbers.

The hon. member also asked me about job creation. I think he answered his own question mind you, but I would be happy to answer it again for him.

In the first year of our mandate there was 4.6 per cent of real growth, or almost 400,000 new jobs, and it continued. The second year was not as good. We did not get nearly as many.

Job growth has revived the last three months. We got 140,000 new jobs and since we took office 600,000 new jobs have been created. They have been created by the private sector. Those are full time jobs. It is because of the positive atmosphere of the government. The financial markets have said that the government is a credible government. This government has credibility.

[An hon. member]

Why are they pulling their money out?

[Doug Peters, Liberal, Scarborough East, ON]

They are putting their money there too because the interest rates have fallen 3 percentage points. This morning when I looked at the numbers, Canadian short term interest rates were below U.S. short term rates by 11 basis points. That is the key to credibility. That is the result of the credibility of this government. It is the result of doing the right thing in the budget and doing the right thing for social programs.

We have not forgotten social programs. I am going to talk a little bit about social programs because we have had-

[Some hon. members]

No, no.

[Jake Hoeppner, Reform, Lisgar—Marquette, MB]

No, no, you are getting into hot water.

[Doug Peters, Liberal, Scarborough East, ON]

Madam Chairman, I know the Reform Party does not want me to talk about the social programs because the Liberals have achieved this great budget situation not by savaging the social programs but by maintaining them and by maintaining the transfers to the provinces.

We have taken the infrastructure program which was strongly felt by the municipalities and the provinces and backed by this government and that created jobs. We have our job creation program in our youth employment program. We have a technology training program and all are the kinds of things that Canadians want. That is why the Reform Party is at 12 per cent in the polls and we are at 58 per cent.

[The Chairman]

The hon. member for Dartmouth still has seven minutes.

[Ron MacDonald, Liberal, Dartmouth, NS]

Madam Chairman, I want to commend the secretary of state. He has cleared up a lot of the misunderstanding that has been put to the Canadian public through C-SPAN because of some of the comments made by the various critics on the Reform Party side.

One thing the Reform Party members cannot stand is good news. They cannot stand the good fiscal news that is coming from this side of House.

I want to remind everybody here that in the nine years prior to the government being elected there was a right wing government. It was a Conservative government. It had promised the Canadian public that it would put the finances of this country where they should have been, or so it said.

For nine successive budgets the ministers of finance came in and each and every time made projections. They made projections about what the deficit would be. They made projections about employment.

[Jake Hoeppner, Reform, Lisgar—Marquette, MB]

Who started this mess?

[Ron MacDonald, Liberal, Dartmouth, NS]

In every single budget it missed its targets. The investment community, both domestically and internationally said the Government of Canada did not know where it was going and it was not credible when it made projections.

I was pleased to hear from the secretary of state that we do not have to worry because the government has regained the confidence of the domestic and international communities. The Minister of Finance and the government have met every target in every budget that has been brought forward.

Before I ask my question, the member for Capilano wanted projections on jobs.

[Jake Hoeppner, Reform, Lisgar—Marquette, MB]

What is the news on the GST? Let us hear something about the GST.

[Ron MacDonald, Liberal, Dartmouth, NS]

They cannot take the good news.