Debates of Feb. 15th, 1999

Taxation

[Jim Peterson, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, ever since we took office cutting taxes has been one of our major priorities. Even when we were in deficit we had selective, targeted tax cuts for students, for low income families, for the disabled, for charities and for the voluntary sector.

In every budget since, we have been able to reduce income taxes. In the last budget we cut taxes for 13 million out of 14 million Canadian tax filers. We took 400,000 taxpayers right off the tax rolls. This is the type of tax—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Medicine Hat.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I think that is the most ridiculous answer I have heard since I have been in this place. Every year we see taxes go up, thanks to the government.

In fact Canadians are paying $1,800 more in taxes this year and receiving $1,150 less in health care than when the government took power in 1993. Despite running surpluses in the last two years, Canadians will get less money for health care and more in taxes after the budget.

How does the finance minister defend this disastrous record on health care and taxes?

[Jim Peterson, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, I suggest very kindly that the hon. member wait until tomorrow's budget to see what our measures on health care are.

Let me say this. In terms of tax revenues having gone up, it is very simple. If we have more people working we have more revenue. Since we took office 1.5 million more Canadians are working. This is a huge increase and in the last month alone employment went up 87,400. This is the type of real results—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Medicine Hat.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that is an absolute joke. The finance minister knows that we have seen bracket creep wring $1 billion out of Canadians pockets every year since they have been in power.

We know that this government implemented the largest tax hike in Canadian history, taking $900 from each Canadian who is working, lucky enough to have a job these days, over the next several years. The tax record of the government is an absolute disaster.

The government talks a lot about productivity. I want to ask the minister a question. How productive is it to take more money out of the pockets of Canadians and give us the highest tax burden in Canadian history? How productive is it to push Canadians into the corridors of—

[The Speaker]

The hon. Secretary of State for Finance.

[Jim Peterson, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, if it is a question of credibility, I think some very important things have been raised by members of the Reform Party which go to the heart of their very credibility. They have called for $54 billion in new fiscal goodies over the next three years. They are basing it on estimated growth rates of 5.5% per year for three years. This is more than twice the private sector consensus.

This type of pie in the sky, irresponsible budget making is what got us into so much trouble. We will not do it.

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Edmonton North, AB]

Mr. Speaker, Sherry Cooper of Nesbitt Burns has said and endorsed that fact that our plan will work.

What has happened is that the government says that a $1 billion or $2 billion so-called selective tax relief tomorrow will just make up for the $38 billion that it has slashed over the last five years.

The Minister of Finance thinks that a little $2 billion or $3 billion in so-called health care relief tomorrow will just erase the $16 billion health care deficit that the government has racked up.

No matter which way we want to slice the pie, it is exactly the same.

I ask the finance minister why Canadians are going to pay more and get less than they did in 1993.

[Jim Peterson, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, it seems to me the Prime Minister worked out an accord with his counterparts in the provinces and territories which deals with this issue. I thought the hon. member would be applauding this type of co-operative enterprise.

If we want to talk about irresponsibility, Reform's budget calls for $9 billion in spending cuts but it will not tell us where, a $9 billion black hole. Reformers ought to be ashamed of themselves.

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Edmonton North, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I will tell the House what I am ashamed of, a government across the way that has slashed $1,150 per taxpayer in health care and has the nerve to brag about it.

What is also a shame is for this government to increase extra taxes $1,800 per taxpayer and then stand there and brag about it. That is what is a shame.

What should have gone up, like health care funding, has gone done. What should have gone done, like taxes, has gone up.

The government's 1993 promises amounted to a whole lot of tax hikes and a whole lot of health cuts. How can he justify that?

[Jim Peterson, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, I find it passing strange to hear the Reform Party today talking about health care when yesterday it was calling for a two tier system for the delivery of health in Canada.

I certainly cannot use the word hypocrisy, but we will never allow a two tier health system in this country.

[The Speaker]

I ask all hon. members to stay away from that word.

Employment Insurance

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, on Saturday in the Gaspé region, I attended a meeting on employment and dignity. Those who attended, the employed, the unemployed, the general public, were crying out for help. Their despair was palpable.

Today the Minister of Human Resources Development met with representatives of the coalition for employment insurance, who presented their demands to him.

Will the Minister of Human Resources Development, whose policies and cutbacks have forced the people of the Gaspé into abject poverty, finally make the decision to use the $6 billion annual surplus in the employment insurance fund to help the unemployed?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, I remind the leader of the Bloc Quebecois that last December we announced the permanent renewal of the Canada Jobs Fund, precisely in order to invest in job creation in regions where the unemployment rate is still very high. This has already been done.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it takes a lot of nerve to say that this has already been done.

Even the Bishop of Gaspé has spoken out against the minister because his projects do nothing to help the fishers, the forestry workers, the food service workers.

Is the minister ever going to realize that the men and women of the Gaspé are not just cold statistics? He should stop playing the technocrat and start listening to people. Is this minister going to understand that one day?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, the only thing of interest to the Bloc Quebecois is to create unemployment and keep people unemployed as long as possible.

We on this side of the House have invested $2.1 billion in active measures to help the people of the Gaspé, and other Canadians, to get into the workforce.

We have the Youth Employment Strategy, with its $155 million to help young people get into the labour force. Everywhere in the country, including the Gaspé, youth unemployment is in free fall. That is what human dignity is all about: employment.

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister has developed the annoying habit of responding to our demands regarding employment insurance by talking only of active measures that are supposed to return people to the labour market.

Does the minister not understand that for the bush pilot and forestry worker who are unemployed because there is too much snow in the woods or for the fisher unable to fish because of the seasonal nature of his work, active measures are not enough, and the employment insurance plan must provide these workers with supplementary income during the off-season?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, that is the very reason we have set up other programs. I do not think we should use employment insurance for everything. It is an insurance plan.

These members keep wanting to return us to the 1960s and 1970s, to an outdated way of managing things and they want us to provide a temporary income supplement, and this is not our way of doing things. We want a dynamic approach so we have a dynamic labour market right across the country with specific tools in the difficult regions.

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, what would the Minister of Human Resources Development respond to the bishop for the Gaspé, who said on Saturday, not in the 1970s, but at a demonstration against cuts to employment insurance, that the minister was attacking the dignity of an entire region?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, is it a return to the Duplessis era and its approach that they want? I know these members see things in a way that is deeply rooted in the past.

But what I say to you is that the dignity of people lies in helping them return to the labour market, helping them find jobs by creating opportunities through programs like the jobs fund in regions where unemployment remains very high. It involves remaining attuned to needs and not keeping people dependent, as members of the Bloc Quebecois would have it.

Health Care

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, instead of a vision for the future, the federal government has blindly slashed health care. From its original share of 50%, Ottawa now pays 11% with predictable results: uneven services, families forced to take more dollars out of their own pockets, patients being shipped to the States for treatment at far greater cost.

Is this the kind of Canada the Prime Minister wants? Why will the federal government not pay its fair share for health care?

[Elinor Caplan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Health have said repeatedly that health care is a priority for this government. I encourage the member to be in the House tomorrow when the budget is read at 4.15 p.m. Then she will see that the words of the Prime Minister and the Minister of Health are reflected in the budget that will be tabled.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians do not want another budget label or another band-aid. They want a fair federal share for health care. What does this government consider to be a fair share? Is it the original 50% of health care costs that it used to pay or is it the 11% that it now pays? What is this government's formula for a fair federal share for health care?

[Elinor Caplan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, once again I encourage the leader of the fourth party, the leaders of all parties and all members to be in their seats tomorrow at 4.15 p.m. when the finance minister will read the budget. Her questions will be answered.