Debates of Nov. 6th, 1997

Supply

[Odina Desrochers, Bloc, Lotbinière, QC]

Madam Speaker, I do not know what to say about this confused, distorted and erroneous lesson in history. You know, I really wondered where the hon. member for Abitibi was living today. Was he living in the past, in the present or in the future? Was he talking like a Conservative or a Liberal? At times, I could picture him here, or in his riding, even at the National Assembly. Figures were quoted to us, right and left. Everything is so confused.

It only goes to reinforce our request. All these figures, all the unclear statements like the ones we just heard, led us to submit a legitimate request to have an independent expert panel that would finally shed the light on this issue. I do not think arguments like those we have heard since the beginning of today's debate will convince us to back down. On the contrary, we will fight and we will get our $2 billion in GST.

[Guy St-Julien, Liberal, Abitibi, QC]

Madam Speaker, I have a lot of respect for the hon. member. I know that the hon. member for Lotbinière has a lot of respect for Quebec, but I hope he has some respect for the National Assembly. What I have received today is the truth; it does not contain any error. The figures I quoted came for the province of Quebec and contain no mistake. Based on the assumption that the taxes would have been fully harmonized by 1990, and according to the formula applied to all of the provinces, Quebec, just like Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia, would not be entitled to any adjustment assistance.

Throughout the process, the Canadian government was very transparent. Civil servants had a lot of discussions to clarify some data. The latest figures I quoted today, that take into account the comments made by Quebec, were submitted in February 1997. I think it is important to point that out. The hon. member talked about errors being made and said that we received this information back in February. The rules are the same for everyone and the results are fair to all the provinces, in this area as on all the other issues where, very often, Quebec is a big winner, just like Jacques Villeneuve.

[Yvan Loubier, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask a question to the hon. member for Abitibi. He just told us that there were figures transmitted between Quebec and Ottawa officials, that everybody was getting along fine and that there was no problem. Where did he get that? The last figures laid on the table deal with a $2 billion claim from the Quebec government stating that the federal government has shown blatant unfairness to Quebec in the matter of GST harmonization.

He can quote any old figures he wants—and he did come up with just about any old figures—the fact remains that, when looking at the tax structure before and after harmonization, when taking into account the need for Quebec to increase corporation taxes because the federal government did not give it any compensation, one can see there has been a cost, and this cost has been assessed and duly, seriously, calculated by the Quebec government and by the officials, and also endorsed by a consensus arrived at by every Quebec participant in the economic summit of last year. It has been endorsed also by the Canadian premiers at the St. Andrews conference.

There comes a time when we have to stop talking nonsense here. There is a $2 billion claim on the table, there are formulas, there are cost assessments that have been made, and now we are asking that an objective panel review our figures and those of the finance minister. He should understand that. That is not hard to understand. If there is something simple for him to understand, it is that an objective, non partisan panel can make a serious analysis whereas he says just about anything. He should understand that.

[Guy St-Julien, Liberal, Abitibi, QC]

Madam Speaker, I am trying to be fair. I received these figures today.

We never know when the opposition will present a motion. We learn about it in the morning when we get up with the chickens, at 5.30 a.m. The member said: “I do not understand the member across the way”.

[Yvan Loubier, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

You do not understand a thing.

[Guy St-Julien, Liberal, Abitibi, QC]

In 1990—I am giving you the background, it is important—on December 14, 1990, people accepted the GST in the National Assembly. A former member said “We will abolish the GST”. Premier Lucien Bouchard should go to the National Assembly, instead of visiting other countries, and say to Quebeckers “We will immediately abolish the GST”. The Party Quebecois members could vote on that. They can do it. They have a majority.

The figures I mentioned today are real figures. I can tell you that when Quebec's needs or situation require it, the federal government is always there to give its financial support to our people, the people of Quebec, the people of Abitibi.

[Some hon. members]

Down with the GST.

[Angela Vautour, NDP, Beauséjour—Petitcodiac, NB]

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing by time with my colleague for Winnipeg North Centre. I do not know if I will be using all of my 10 minutes.

What I have to say about the HST will not take ten minutes. We must look at what is going on in New Brunswick and in the other Atlantic provinces. It is interesting to hear the Reform members and the government members talk about hypocrisy. I would say that if you put two cats in the same bag, only one will come out.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

[Angela Vautour, NDP, Beauséjour—Petitcodiac, NB]

The Liberals had promised to get rid of the GST. In my province, instead of getting rid of the GST, we ended up with a tax that makes no sense. We have low income families who now must pay 15% on diapers, 15% on electricity, and those people are not getting any compensation as was mentioned a few moments ago. We must look at how much these people are paying and how little they are getting in the end.

While a mother is paying 15% more for diapers, the person who has money and who wants to buy a $45,000 car is paying less. This is not my idea of justice. To me, this is just another tax on the poor, and the rich are paying less once again. That is the Liberal way. It is clear.

This morning, I was in the human resources development committee, and even senior officials in the department were saying that Atlantic Canada was affected the most by unemployment insurance reform, by the fact that no jobs are being created in our region. And we are hit by this tax on top of all that. We are the provinces who pay the most for a stamp in this country. In the regions, where there are no jobs, there are no longer any programs to help people. There are Liberals in this House who are really proud of what they are doing. I think they should be ashamed of themselves.

We have to look at what the tax really brings. There are people who have no more money to buy things and this affects our merchants. Our small and medium size businesses are really affected by the BST—and we have a good definition for this BST where I come from.

[An hon. member]

Could you tell me what it is?

[Angela Vautour, NDP, Beauséjour—Petitcodiac, NB]

We are not allowed to say such things in this place.

I think we really have to go see what happened. The Liberals criticized the Conservatives. They got elected on the GST, really. They came back and said “Yes, yes, the deficit was bigger”. First things first, the deficit—that has to be settled right away. Who has paid down the deficit? It is the unemployed, it is old people, it is students, people without jobs, people receiving social assistance. Those are the people who paid down the deficit.

I do not see any large corporations in this country that put a lot of money on the deficit. But nobody mentions that.

I congratulate these people. Each time I have the opportunity I congratulate them for having paid down the deficit because without the underprivileged in this country, it would have never been paid down. The government did not look elsewhere to pay for it.

So the people from the Atlantic region are very disappointed with the GST or the BST. It was just another tax. They say they are not increasing taxes, but people are paying 8% more for electricity and heating. It is not a tax. They did not increase taxes. I would not want them to admit that they increased them.

It is very sad, in our regions, when we see the rate of unemployment and the rate of poverty, and when on top of that, we have a government that imposes such a tax on us. This is unacceptable. Our businesses are being affected. The number of personal and commercial bankruptcies continues to rise, and this has to stop.

So I do not have to take 10 minutes to tell you that the GST stinks for me and its stinks for the majority of the people in New Brunswick and the Atlantic region. Only Prince Edward Island escaped from this.

It is true that there was a bribe. It is true that the former Premier of New Brunswick hurried to collect his $1 billion in taxes in an attempt to save the face of the Liberal government. They were trying to find a way to say that they had gotten rid of the GST. But who is paying for that today? It is us, the people from the Atlantic region. It is always the people who have a hard time making ends meet.

So I will end on that.

People in the three Atlantic provinces that have the BST are very upset. It is a very unfair tax. It is the people at the lowest scale of income who are paying the most. They are paying tax on electricity. They are paying 15% tax on children's clothing starting from the first dollar. However, if you buy an article that is over $93, you will pay less. There are not a lot of people down home who buy articles over $100. A lot of families cannot afford that. They buy just the necessities but they are the ones paying the most because of the blended sales tax.

On behalf of the people that I represent, I want it on the record that we are very disappointed in the Liberal government for their broken promises and a tax that is very unfair to the people of my riding and the Atlantic provinces.

[Darrel Stinson, Reform, Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I have listened to the hon. member and I sympathize with her.

When the tax was debated in the House I remember speaking against the BST being introduced in the Atlantic provinces. I did not call it the BST but I did use two of those initials. I may have dropped the t a few times.

Many things were said by the government. Actually, its members were the official opposition when the GST was brought in. At that time Liberals said that public and private libraries would have to reduce the purchase of books and newspapers by about 10% annually because of the GST. The present Prime Minister said that.

The minister of finance said at that time that the goods and services tax was a stupid, inept, incomplete and incompetent tax.

All through the debate today we have heard about hypocrisy. I would think that this is the height of it. Now we have the Prime Minister saying it is his personal tax and how much he loves it. When he leaves the country and talks to other leaders around the world, he brags about how he introduced it and not the Conservatives.

I know the hon. member was not in the House during the time of the BST and the debate in this House. I wish she had been here. Perhaps we would have had more help. I do not recall hearing from her party at that time. I would like to know if anybody from the east has put into dollars and cents how much the blended sales tax has really cost the people back home.

[Angela Vautour, NDP, Beauséjour—Petitcodiac, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I do not have the figures with me but I can say, on a humane basis, that the figure is very high. That is the important part. It may be millions or billions. The important part is that the people from low income families are paying through the nose because of this tax. That is the only thing that is important. It is a very unfair tax that makes lower income people pay more again. That is what concerns me and my people.

[Ghislain Fournier, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the hon. member for Beauséjour—Petitcodiac who, unlike Liberal members opposite, has impressed me a great deal with her respectful, intelligent and heartfelt remarks. She spoke with great humanity. She is bringing to this House an attitude of great respect and she raises the level of our debates, whereas Liberal members keep attacking and belittling Quebec. She speaks about citizens in general and she does it respectfully.

I congratulate her.

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)]

The hon. member for Bourassa on a point of order.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the House should know that each time the Bloc speaks nonsense and accuses the government of belittling Quebec, well, it is not Quebec we belittle, but Bloc Quebecois members.

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)]

That is not a point of order. It is a point of debate. The hon. member for Manicouagan.

[Ghislain Fournier, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member opposite shows a lack of respect. He should know that we are legitimately elected representatives of Quebeckers. We have 60% of all members from Quebec. We represent a majority in Quebec.

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)]

We will give the hon. member for Beauséjour—Petitcodiac a few minutes to wrap up before we proceed to the next speaker.

[Angela Vautour, NDP, Beauséjour—Petitcodiac, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his kind words. It is true that respect is sorely lacking in the House. It is something that can be felt by outsiders. I hope it will get better over time. This House is not necessarily known for its respect for people.

[Judy Wasylycia-Leis, NDP, Winnipeg North Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to participate in the debate on the opposition motion sponsored by the Bloc concerning the GST and the harmonized sales tax. I understand its reasons for putting forward this motion and the kinds of concerns that have been raised.

It is putting us all in an interesting position to debate the unfairness of some changes to a measure that is inherently unfair to begin with. As my colleague indicated in her comments, we are really discussing how two wrongs can make a right. It is important for us to deliberate on the very question of the need to introduce the GST by first the Conservatives and then the Liberals.

I will raise a couple of points in this discussion. The GST is a very regressive tax measure. That has been enunciated by a number of other speakers. It is in fact a good tax, but it is a good tax for business. It is a very bad tax for individuals. As we all know, unlike all other sales taxes, corporations do not pay the GST.

We are widening the gap between the haves and the have nots, creating an ever-widening gap between those who are struggling day by day to make ends meet and those who are enjoying an incredible amount of profits, dividends and luxury.

The people in our society today who need a break, some real tax relief, are the hard working women and men who have been trying desperately to make ends meet as real wages keep falling. What we are dealing with, and we have all experienced this for a number of years, is a tax measure that makes it even harder for those ordinary working women and men to make ends meet, who are forever left asking the question “Why is there so much month left at the end of the money?”

It was an inherently unfair tax to begin with, brought to us by the Conservatives and harmonized by the Liberals, a harmonization that heaps an even greater burden on individuals, hard working women and men, and gives an even greater break to the big corporations who are already enjoying incredible profits like we have not seen in recent times.

We are not only dealing with an inherently unfair tax, whether we are talking about the GST, or the BST or any other terminology that describes this harmonized sales tax, but we are also talking about a tax measure that was introduced in a most dishonest way. We know the idea originated with the Conservatives. Canadians will never forget that it was the Conservative government that forced the GST through even though at that time fewer than 10% of Canadians supported it.

At that time it was the Liberals who strongly opposed the GST. They made very strong public statements about that opposition. I want to quote the Prime Minister who said on October 29, 1990, “I an opposed to the GST. I've always been opposed to it and I will be opposed to it always”.

I want to quote the Minister of Finance who said on April 4, 1990, “I would abolish the GST. The manufacturers' sales tax which the GST replaced was a bad tax but there is no excuse to repeal one bad tax by bringing in another one”.

What did the Liberals do after making those strong statements? They did a double take. They practised deceit and dishonesty when it came to the Canadian public and at the earliest opportunity in government supported the GST. It went further and moved to harmonize the GST and increased the burden on working Canadians everywhere.

That whole move to harmonize, to blend, the GST with provincial sale taxes, if applied across this country, represents a shift of another $6 billion to $7 billion of the tax burden from corporations to people. As we know from the debate today, families in Atlantic Canada and Quebec are suffering very much from this policy.

By breaking their commitment, by breaking their word, the Prime Minister and other Liberals in this Parliament abandoned an opportunity to make Canadian families better off.

Speaking of inconsistencies and shifting positions, let us not forget to mention the position of the Reform Party. Reform members are standing in this House today expressing concern about the GST, raising concerns about the whole debate we are having today with respect to the blending of sales taxes.

It was the Reform Party that said in this House in 1994 in a report on the GST that the Liberal Party was to be congratulated on its attempts to harmonize the GST with provincial sales taxes.

It was the Reform Party at that time that recommended that consumption taxes should be levied on the broadest possible base. This of course would mean extending the GST to food, to medication and nursing home charges.

Canadians were hoodwinked on this issue. They did not support the GST. They believed the Liberals prior to 1993 when they said they would not move forward on the GST. Instead, they got hit with a double whammy, support for the GST and now a move to ensure a blending of the GST with provincial sales taxes across the country.

Our opportunity today is to suggest to the Liberal government particularly that there is an alternative to this kind of regressive tax policy. There are alternatives available to this government for both collecting necessary revenues and ensuring a measure of fairness in our tax collection system.

I raise in particular one such proposal since it is very much in the news currently and very much represents the unfairness in our system today. In about a month's time a group entitled Project Loophole will bring a matter to the courts pertaining to the fact that in 1991 Revenue Canada ruled that one family trust could transfer $2.2 billion in assets to the United States without paying taxes.

That raised a whole lot of questions about how many other family trusts are being provided this option. How much money earned here as a result of hardworking Canadians is being moved out of the country without taxes being paid? How much profit is being earned by corporations and wealthy individuals without contributing to the tax base of this country? That is but one example of the unfairness in our tax system and the need for this government to look seriously at alternatives to the GST and the BST.

We are talking about people under financial stress searching for meaningful work, trying to combine two and three part time jobs just to make ends meet everywhere in this country, being faced ever and ever with a burden that is just beyond their reach and beyond human capacity for responding to.

I urge today that in this debate we come to some consensus around the need to look at a fair taxation system and with real determination to actually end this harmonized sales tax and phase out the GST.

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is quite interesting listening to the hon. member opposite discussing the motion, but it does not sound like she was discussing the motion.

I would like to know if she supports the merits by the Bloc's contention. The Bloc contends that Quebec is owed $2 billion from the harmonization of the Quebec sales tax with the GST. Members have heard over and over again that Quebec has actually benefited by its harmonization to the tune of $700 million extra per year.

Does the member agree with the Bloc motion that Quebec is owed $2 billion as a result of having harmonized Quebec sales tax with the goods and services tax. That is the motion. I would like to hear from the member on that.

[Judy Wasylycia-Leis, NDP, Winnipeg North Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, with all due respect to the Liberal member opposite, I believe I have answered the question.

I indicated from the outset that two wrongs do not make a right. We are dealing with an unfair regressive tax measure to begin with. The blending of the GST with provincial tax does not make it any better.

Our position has always been and will continue to be to reverse the Liberal government's decision to harmonize the GST and the PST in Atlantic Canada and in the province of Quebec. We believe we must stop any further negotiations for harmonization in other parts of Canada. We would work to immediately to remove GST from books, magazines and family essentials like children's clothing. We would phase out the GST in the context of comprehensive tax reform.

That kind of package is workable. It provides a real alternative to the Liberal government. I would heartily ask for their support for this kind of alternative.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I always have a little trouble following the NDP's arguments. I understand that they are bleeding hearts and they are all for motherhood and apple pie.

I would like to mention two facts, however. The first is that we have seen the results of the NDP government in Ontario. It was an expensive lesson to the people of Ontario. The NDP supposedly represented social justice, but we saw what it cost.

Second, we can see what is happening in Saskatchewan. I would like her to explain to me, because I am sure she has very close ties with the premier of Saskatchewan—