Debates of Feb. 19th, 1998

The Economy

[The Speaker]

The hon. Leader of the Opposition.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, I remember reading the red book on the balcony of the Frontenac Hotel. When ordinary Canadians read this red book it said: “We are moving towards a time when the budget will finally be balanced—When we reach that time, we will allocate every billion dollars”, the first billion, the second billion, the last billion, to debt reduction and tax relief.

When the finance minister says he will not keep that promise, is that not a broken promise like the—

[The Speaker]

The Right Hon. Prime Minister.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, it is going to be done over the mandate. That is clear. The budget is coming. For the first time in 30 years it looks like there will be a balanced budget. The Leader of the Opposition is just jealous.

[Preston Manning, Reform, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, this has the same shape to it as the GST discussion. I will read it to the Prime Minister again: “We are moving towards a time when the budget will finally be balanced—When we reach that time, we will allocate every billion dollars of fiscal dividend” half to reducing taxes and half to debt reduction.

Can the Prime Minister explain why he is breaking that promise on the very first budget after the last federal election?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I will read very slowly and perhaps I should add the French version too: “We will allocate our budget surpluses”, with an s because there will be more than one, “so that over the course of our mandate”, un mandat en français, “one half will be spent to improve our programs and one half will go to tax cuts and reduction of the debt”.

The Minister of Finance, as I said, over the mandate—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Edmonton North.

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Edmonton North, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the GST went way over the course of the mandate of the last Parliament. The Prime Minister went on TV in 1993 and said that he would scrap the GST. He later broke that promise. It was on videotape, though. That was the unfortunate part for the Prime Minister. Then in 1997 he went on national TV and said that he would spend half the surplus on tax and debt relief “once the budget has been balanced”.

Let me ask the Prime Minister why he always make these promises, breaks these promises and gets trapped by the truth.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, it is amazing. The budget is coming. They are trying perhaps to find a little contradiction between two texts. It is written very clearly that the surpluses the government will have will be split between programs because we believe there are people in Canada who need help.

We are not the Reform Party. Half of it will go for programs and the other half for tax reduction and deficit payments.

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Edmonton North, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that is right. What is a little contradiction? Just like the GST was a little contradiction.

The difference between videotape and this red book is that the videotapes never lie. You can seen over and over again.

The Prime Minister went on TV and told Canadians that as soon as that budget was balanced—a little contradiction—half of the surplus would go to tax and debt relief.

Why is the government doing the GST fiasco again? Why do Canadians have to sit through another episode of tax, lies and videotapes?

[The Speaker]

My colleagues, I ask you to stay away from the word lies. I do not like it used in the House of Commons. I assume you do not either.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, perhaps they will understand better if I explain it in French. We said we were going to spend half the surplus on social and economic programs and the other half on reducing taxes and the debt, over the course of our term of office.

Our term of office is four or five years. So we will do this over four or five years. During this period, they will continue to be in opposition and will have to admit that we are balancing our books, that we are not making empty promises and that we do what we said we would—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot.

Bill C-28

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

Mr. Speaker, on the GST issue, despite the evidence, the Prime Minister denied having broken his promise until the bitter end.

In the matter of the apparent conflict of interest involving the Minister of Finance, we are getting a repeat performance. Despite the evidence, the Prime Minister is denying the facts.

Does the Prime Minister not realize that the only way to maintain the credibility of his finance minister—if that is still possible—is to stop denying his responsibility and allow this confusing business to be thoroughly reviewed?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we keep hearing the same things over and over. The ethics counsellor testified before the committee. He said there was no conflict of interest regarding the bill tabled in this House more than two years ago. That part of the bill was under the responsibility of the Secretary of State for Financial Institutions, as has been clearly established.

When the Minister of Finance took office, everyone knew he was a successful businessman involved in international shipping and this has never been a problem. He always made sure that everything was in the hands of the Secretary of State—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot.

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

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister probably recalls that, in 1985, when he was in opposition, he asked for the resignation of Finance Minister Michael Wilson on the basis of an apparent conflict of interest.

Does the Prime Minister realize that we are not going that far, at least not yet, and are only asking that light be shed on this confusing matter?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member sometimes attends sittings of the Standing Committee on Finance. I suggest he uses that venue to ask whatever questions he may have.

The opposition knows full well that we will bring in a balanced budget and they cannot take it. So, they try to hit the Minister of Finance below the belt.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Saint-Maurice, QC]

Indeed. But the people of Canada trust the Minister of Finance just as I do.

[Odina Desrochers, Bloc, Lotbinière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance put himself in an apparent conflict of interest by sponsoring Bill C-28, which provides major tax exemptions for shipping companies.

Will the Prime Minister admit that the Minister of Finance should have taken other means to avoid any apparent conflict of interest regarding Bill C-28?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, it is difficult to take better means than not talk about it and have—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Saint-Maurice, QC]

He never talked about it with anyone. As provided in the guidelines, the issue was automatically referred to the Secretary of State for Financial Institutions, who did his job and introduced the legislation, through an omnibus bill, two years ago. The opposition did not even notice it.

[Odina Desrochers, Bloc, Lotbinière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, since the ethics commissioner himself said that other means should have been taken to avoid any apparent conflict of interest, can the Prime Minister tell us if his ethics commissioner—who obviously disagrees with him—informed him, as he was duty bound to do, that he did not share the Prime Minister's opinion?