Mr. Speaker, my comments today will primarily have to do with the confidence one should have in this government, and particularly the Minister of Finance, regarding the measures included in Bill C-36.
Everything is a matter of confidence, because we are trying to figure out the government's true intention in proposing these so-called social assistance measures, particularly the millennium scholarship fund, which has a budget of $2.5 billion.
Why do I say this is a matter of confidence? Because, in my opinion, it was more important for the government and for the Minister of Finance to come up with some program or scheme that would hide any budget surplus generated during the last fiscal year.
By now, everyone knows that the government could have brought down a budget with surpluses totalling $3 billion. However, if the government had done that, it would have been forced to help those taxpayers who are paying for these budget cuts and these new programs. The government would have been forced to reduce taxes, and possibly employment insurance contributions. It would have been forced to take other measures that would have cut into its own revenues, at a time when it is building surpluses that will reach some $30 billion, or more, in the years 2000 to 2003.
I say it is a matter of confidence, because the auditor general said that by establishing the millennium scholarship fund, the Minister of Finance is including in this year's budget an expenditure that he will make in the year 2000.
In his last report, the auditor general had criticized the minister for acting like this. The issue then was the Canada Foundation for Innovation. In that case, the government had agreed to budget $800 million for a foundation that did not yet exist. That would enable the government to inflate its deficit by $800 million, which would serve its purpose since it could convince the taxpayers that the government ought to continue to make cuts at the expense of the unemployed, the poor and all those most in need.
By inflating its deficit, the government claimed it was justified in maintaining its budget restrictions. Here is what the auditor general thought of this: The 1996-97 deficit is over-estimated by $800 million. This is because an operation relating to the Canadian Foundation for Innovation was recorded as a liability, which is contrary to the accounting conventions set out by the Government of Canada in Note No. 1 of the financial statements.
This $800 million was reported as an amount owing to a body which did not exist as of March 31, 1997. The foundation had no legal existence until April 1997. What is more, the funding agreement between the Government of Canada and the foundation was not signed until July 1997. The government fiddled with the figures and made this expenditure appear a year before the fact, because this served its political ambitions.
Far from showing any remorse, the Minister of Finance had, moreover, done the same thing with the harmonization of the GST in the maritimes. The government had already earmarked $1 billion for this operation, although there were no agreements in place.
After these two experiences, there is still no remorse forthcoming from the government. After the business of the GST and the $800 million for the Canadian Foundation for Innovation, it is repeating the offence a third time by setting aside $2.5 billion for the millennium scholarship foundation. It is posting them in the books now, even though the first cheques will not be issued until the year 2000.
Why? Once again to avoid showing surpluses, which would not be in its interests because it would bring too much pressure to bear on the government. Would the same be allowed of individuals? Would an individual be allowed, for instance, to enter the expenditure of funds in this year's income tax return to avoid reporting income? Would Revenue Canada let him do this?
I challenge any Canadian to enter in 1997 expenditures which will actually be made in 1998, as the government and the Minister of Finance have done. I can tell you Revenue Canada would immediately catch it and ask him to review his financial statements.
Would a small or medium size business be allowed to do the same? Could it enter expenditures this year to avoid showing a profit at the end of 1997? No, this would no be allowed.
I challenge the Minister of Revenue to tell us whether he would allow a small or medium size business to enter this year expenditures that will not be made until next year, in order not to show a profit and, thus, avoid paying income tax on this amount. Yet, that is what the government is doing.
That is what it is doing with the millennium scholarships. Any program would have done just as well for the government; what mattered was not so much to help students as to gain visibility, to show a zero deficit in order to keep pressure at bay. That is what the main goal was.
Can we trust government that claims to want to help students but does it through a process that is secretive almost to the point of being undemocratic, a process giving people the impression it is doing them a favour when in fact it is pursuing purely political objectives? This action by the government is despicable.
Helping students was not the government's intention. In fact, even though it could now rectify the situation somewhat by giving that money back to the provinces, which would be in a better position to use it for educational purposes, the federal government has so far refused to consider this possibility.
This confidence issue will remain until the government demonstrates its willingness to be more transparent and to use accounting practices that comply with the general rules recognized by the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants, and until it demonstrates that its intentions with regard to helping a particular segment of our society are not purely political but truly meet the needs of these people.
