House of Commons Hansard #187 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was million.

Topics

The BudgetGovernment Orders

5:55 p.m.

Liberal

Charles Caccia Liberal Davenport, ON

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the question. The government has given priority in the budget to health issues. Evidently health is intimately connected to environmental issues. The allocation of $11.5 billion to health is a good foundation on which to build an approach to environmental issues in the next budget.

I regret to note that the Reform Party amendment before us urges the rejection of the allocation of $11.5 billion to health which the budget has launched. For the life of me I cannot understand why the Reform Party is taking such dog in the manger position instead of supporting the very fact that the government is injecting a substantial amount of money into health over the next few years. It should support this measure and it should indicate to its constituents that this is a good move in the right direction.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

5:55 p.m.

Reform

Dale Johnston Reform Wetaskiwin, AB

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member led us to believe that he understands that lowering taxes is bad for Canadians. He said something to effect that if we lower taxes we will then have to lower services for Canadians.

Does he not realize that the interest charges on the $600 billion that we owe would provide tremendous amounts of programs for Canadians? As a matter a fact, it would be $44 billion or $45 billion worth each year.

How would he address that? Would he mind clearing that up for me? Would lower taxes in his opinion be bad for Canadians?

The BudgetGovernment Orders

5:55 p.m.

Liberal

Charles Caccia Liberal Davenport, ON

Mr. Speaker, there is a lack of knowledge of economic realities on the part of the hon. member and his party that requires further education.

I will put it this way. The Reform Party fails to understand the fact that the debt as the economy expands remains the same and proportionally becomes smaller and smaller as years go by. Therefore the debt is no longer an economic preoccupation.

The preoccupation of the government is the right one, namely by putting its money into health, education, technological development and research to provide the foundation for a positive economic future, not by looking backward in terms of reducing the debt which in proportion to the total national wealth is becoming smaller and smaller.

Liberals believe that the role of the government is to make investments and not to make the banks happy.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

5:55 p.m.

NDP

Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is saying that the danger of reducing taxes is that programs would have to be cut.

Would he agree with me that cutting employment insurance has hurt working people? My question is very simple.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

5:55 p.m.

Liberal

Charles Caccia Liberal Davenport, ON

Mr. Speaker, I fully agree with the hon. member.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

6 p.m.

Liberal

Hec Clouthier Liberal Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is slightly humbling to speak after the valiant veteran from Davenport but I will intercede on behalf of my colleagues in the House to bear with me for eight or ten minutes as I give a dissertation of the great qualities of this 1999 budget that the wonderful Liberal Party has brought forward.

It may come as no surprise to my colleagues that I stand in support of this Liberal government's 1999 budget which will increase prosperity and lead Canadians into a new world economy for a new century.

At the beginning of this century the prosperity of the Canadian economy was of course dependent on entering a world economic environment that provided funds for investment and markets for exports. One hundred years later, after Sir Wilfrid Laurier, who was responsible for this rather profound and provident policy, this current Liberal government is continuing to keep Canada at the forefront as one of the top industrial nations in the world.

For my constituents in the great riding of Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, the 1999 budget represents a continued commitment to the military and the revered Liberal institution of universal health care which some of the members opposite want to eviscerate.

Increased tax cuts will also improve everyone's standard of living, including the hon. member from Sleepy Hollow opposite, and create the foundation for much needed economic growth and development not only in the great upper Ottawa valley but throughout this tremendous country called Canada.

It was clearly evident to this Liberal government after consultations with Canadian from coast to coast to coast that health care should be the number one priority in this budget. Without a doubt health care was our number one priority and, I might be so bold, it should be the number one priority for some of the members opposite because I think some of them should indulge in good health. I know we have on occasion a boxer over there and a former professional athlete, but I think that was something like 40 or 50 years ago.

On this health care issue we have given back over $11.5 billion. This was hard earned money Canadians really needed and really wanted. They stuck with us. The Liberals won the election in 1993. Thank goodness we did because this country was going nowhere fast, hitting the wall because the Conservative government left us with an astronomical $42 billion a year annual deficit. We had to eradicate that deficit.

How did we do that? We did that in consultation with all Canadians. They agreed with that. We were honest with them, we were truthful with them. We said when we have balanced the books without a doubt we will put that money back to where we believe it is most needed and health care is the number one issue. We have given that $11.5 billion back. As a matter of fact, the funding now in 1999 is higher than it was in 1990.

In the province of Ontario some people have tried to somehow extrapolate that it is the federal government's fault for closures of hospitals and the downsizing of the health care portfolio. Everyone knows that the provincial Tory government in Ontario must have been cerebrally incapable of understanding basic economics that if it gives 30% tax cuts which amounted in Ontario to about $4.5 billion it will have to find the money somewhere else or make dramatic cuts. In the province of Ontario those dramatic cuts came in the health care field. That government should never have done that until it balanced the books.

We have now balanced the books in two consecutive years. That has not been done since 1952. This Liberal government has done that. We have done it in a fair and equitable manner. Now we have decided to give back.

Another important area where we must give money back is to the military which we have done to the tune of $175 million a year for the next four to five years. Hopefully, as long as we keep balancing the books, which rest assured we will do, we can continue this.

Reformers just talked about this. They talked the big line in their no start or fresh start, whatever they call it, that they were going to balance the books in 2000. We on this side of the House did it in 1998.

There is an old axiom in life that talk is cheap. I think they are just blowing smoke. I do not think they ever had the will power or the capacity to actually balance the books. We did it. When they are yelling, screaming and making rather inappropriate and intemperate remarks, it is probably just blatant jealously that we actually could do something that they could not.

We have balanced the books for two consecutive years. It has not been done since 1952. We have given money back to the military. I have a great military establishment in my riding, CFB Petawawa. We are looking after those people because the quality of life for the military certainly was not there. Unquestionably it needed more money and we have delivered.

I know the hon. member opposite wants to talk about taxes, lowering taxes. We have lowered taxes. Six hundred thousand Canadians are no longer on the tax roll. If the hon. member for Wild Rose makes a big salary then he has to pay his taxes. He should look after the poor people. My goodness, go on a diet and you will not have to spend so much money.

We got rid of the 3% surtax that was an egregious tax brought in by the former Conservative government. It made a dramatic mess of the economy. We spent the last six years trying to clean up the mess it made and, I might add, we are doing a remarkable job.

I quoted Sir Wilfrid Laurier. He was one of our great prime ministers. I want the members opposite to pay strict attention to this. Sir Wilfrid Laurier said that liberalism is inherent in the very essence of our nature. It is the desire of happiness with which we are all born into the world. We constantly gravitate toward an ideal which we never attain. We dream of good but never realize the best. And thus it will be as long as people are what they are. As long as their immortal soul inhabits a mortal body their desires will always be vaster than their dreams.

Our desire on this side of the House is that as we move into a new millennium we follow that Laurier legacy. We will thrive and survive under a Prime Minister who knows what has to be done and goes ahead and does it and with a government that is caring and compassionate for all Canadians.

We are leading a national effort, this Liberal Party, an effort which will spread to all sectors of society, to equip Canadians to compete in a changing world, a new world for a new millennium, I say to the member for Wild Rose. That is why we are investing in knowledge, innovation, research and development. It will mean expanding opportunities for not only ourselves but for our children and for the hon. member's great, great-grandchildren because I am sure he has some.

Twenty years from now in the year 2020 it will be our children, my children, not the hon. members' great, great-grandchildren, who will be leading the great riding of Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke and leading Canada into the 21st century. They are our future. They will be looking after us in our old age.

The future belongs to societies whose economies are sound, whose children are well prepared and which invest in knowledge, innovation and education. However, these changes cannot be achieved by the federal government alone. They require a partnership at all levels of government, the public sector, the private sector, the trade unions, the volunteers and even members opposite, although sometimes we would not need their input to tell you the truth.

This 1999 budget and future budgets will take us into the future and into a new millennium.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

On questions and comments there is a lot of interest. We will keep strictly to 35 seconds, the same as question period.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Reform

Myron Thompson Reform Wild Rose, AB

Mr. Speaker, I have not quite got to great-grandchildren but I am working on it.

Do hon. members believe in miracles? I do because I have seen one. In 1993 when I came to the House of Commons I went to this gentleman's riding at least half a dozen times and he showed up at all my meetings three or four times. He was an independent then and gosh he liked the things I was saying. He used to shake my hand and say way to go, young fellow. All of a sudden he shows up here and lo and behold he is a Liberal.

There is $11.5 billion put back into health care after stripping out about $20 billion. Of course the $11.5 billion is over five years. The $2.5 billion I understand—

The BudgetGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

Sorry, that is the member's 35 seconds.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Liberal

Hec Clouthier Liberal Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

Mr. Speaker, in response to the hon. member's question, I do not know about the post office but I will send him over some Viagra if he wants to have some great, great-grandchildren.

As far as appearing in my riding, the people in my riding had never seen a buffalo from out west. I am used to seeing moose, so I went to every meeting that the hon. member was at because I wanted to explain that is a buffalo from out west and not a gentle moose from my riding.

I know about the $11.5 billion.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

NDP

Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB

Mr. Speaker, I do not know whether the member for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke thinks coast to coast means going from Lake Ontario to Lake Huron. I can tell him it means going from the Atlantic to the Pacific.

In 1969, the federal government paid 50% of health care costs across the country, in each province. In New Brunswick, there is a Liberal government; in Nova Scotia, there is also a Liberal government; in Newfoundland, there is another Liberal government. And yet, they still cut health care.

I would like our colleague to tell us about the Liberals currently in power, who have cut. What sort of government are they, these Liberals?

The BudgetGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Liberal

Hec Clouthier Liberal Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

Mr. Speaker, I would ask my colleague to calm down. There is a problem here, because it was the Liberal Party that introduced health care. That should not be forgotten. It is our party, the Liberal Party.

What my colleague has said is terrible; it is not correct. The Liberal Party has always thought about the health of the people, of Canadians from coast to coast to coast.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Bloc

Odina Desrochers Bloc Lotbinière, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to put a question to my colleague.

I understand his enthusiasm. If we look at what Ontario got, $1 billion, with $150 million for Quebec, I understand his happiness, like that of most of his colleagues from Ontario.

However, I would like to know if he is aware of the Constitution of Canada. All the budget did was encourage interference in provincial jurisdictions. Does the hon. member really know his Constitution?

The BudgetGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Liberal

Hec Clouthier Liberal Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleague to tell the people of Quebec the truth.

The truth is that several billion dollars in equalization payments are leaving Ottawa for the Province of Quebec. It wins all the time with equalization payments. We must be careful and tell people the truth. Is he afraid to do so?

The BudgetGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Rick Borotsik Progressive Conservative Brandon—Souris, MB

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member made a comment about the Liberal government being caring and compassionate. I wonder if the member may wish to expand on that a bit and talk about his caring and compassionate government as it refers to hepatitis C, as it refers to the gutting and the destroying of the health care system in this country and perhaps the caring and compassionate Liberal government when it chased our children from this country to the United States because of an overburdened taxation system.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

6:15 p.m.

Liberal

Hec Clouthier Liberal Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

Mr. Speaker, I stand unequivocally by my statements.

On caring and compassionate, I would like to ask the hon. member opposite, does he call a party that doubles the national debt in a nine year term caring and compassionate? Let us get serious here.

There is more than one big moose out west. There is another big moose and you are all heading to the stampede in the wrong direction.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

6:15 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

This brings an end to the debate. I know we do not want to put this behind us but it being 6.15 p.m., it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the amendment now before the House.

The question is on the amendment. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the amendment?

The BudgetGovernment Orders

6:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

6:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

No.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

6:15 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

All those in favour of the amendment will please say yea.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

6:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

Yea.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

6:15 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

All those opposed will please say nay.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

6:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.

The BudgetGovernment Orders

6:15 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

In my opinion the nays have it.

And more than five members having risen:

The BudgetGovernment Orders

6:15 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the amendment, which was negatived on the following division:)