Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to take part today in the debate on the motion by my colleague for Winnipeg—Transcona. As my party's spokesperson on policies for children, I am greatly interested in everything relating to children's lives.
I must, however, admit that I am confused as to the content and scope of this motion. First of all, I believe it is essential to know what age group is targeted. Young children or adolescents? The answer to this will certainly have an impact on the extent of the activities addressed by the motion.
I wonder also about the activities eligible for the tax credit. Is the NDP member referring to hockey, ballet lessons, piano lessons? I do not know the answer but I do feel more clarification is required.
Perhaps the NDP member could inform us as to how the institutions or organizations providing these activities for youth would be accredited. What, for example, are the criteria for determining that this or that body is accredited to issue tax receipts? Is it limited to not-for-profit organizations? Are private sector institutions included? What are the criteria for obtaining the status of a tax receipt-issuing institution? Once again, the answers will have a definite influence on the impact of the motion.
Just think for a moment about the efforts and resources required to set up such an initiative. Would the government structure be even more complex than at present?
As well, the additional costs institutions will have to meet in preparing and issuing tax receipts will have a negative impact on the charge for activities. Prices will go up, and fewer families will be able to take part. Is the primary objective of the motion not to encourage more parents to enrol their children in youth activities?
Unlike the NDP, our party seeks solutions that will lighten the structure of government, and cut down on red tape.
The Progressive Conservative Party believes that the top priority is to implement an economic growth program. We also believe that tax relief should take the form of substantial personal income tax reductions. Taxes are too high in Canada. They kill initiative, they slow down and divert potential job-creating investments.
Our priority is to put more money back into the pockets of taxpayers; they will know better than the government what it should be spent on, be it on registered education savings plans or what not.
The government must also develop a job creation strategy, not a strategy to subsidize piano lessons. This is a matter of priority. Instead of the NDP government-pays-all approach, we are in favour of a co-operative approach with the private sector.
For example, sports teams could have corporate sponsors taking on the costs associated with buying equipment in exchange for displaying their corporate logo on the players' shirts. This kind of co-operative approach has proven successful so far.
It is not a priority for the government to interfere in this area. Many others require attention. Eliminating child poverty and adequate funding for health care are priorities.
Public funding should indeed be restored to the level necessary to ensure health care. Other steps could be taken to alleviate the taxpayers' burden, including full indexation of the child benefit and personal income tax brackets as well as reducing employment insurance premiums.
As long as there are children living in poverty, sick people who are not receiving adequate treatment, needy seniors and unemployed workers, we in the PC caucus will be there to defend their interests.