Madam Speaker, I would interpret from the remarks of the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle that he will not be supporting the Reform motion, and I congratulate him for that.
He mentioned some of the programs that would be cut implicitly by the motion that was presented by the Reform Party. I will name a few, for those who are interested in what is in the budget.
For example, there is an additional contribution of $900 million for the Canada Foundation for Innovation, which helps universities and research hospitals acquire the infrastructure they need to help prepare our economy and to prepare Canadians for the new world in which we live.
Another example is the $900 million which will go to fund research chairs for new positions in universities and colleges so that we can be at the leading edge of new technologies and attract and keep the best and the brightest.
Another example is the $160 million for Genome Canada, which will put us at the leading edge of the biotechnological thrust in which Canada will have a very competitive position.
These are all grants and contributions. This is not some obtuse theory. This is what is in the budget. This is what would be cut if the Reform Party's motion went forward. I could go on and on.
Another example is the $700 million for the environment, which will be dealt with through grants and contributions so that we will have clean air and clean water, and we will be able to prepare ourselves to eliminate greenhouse gases and meet our Kyoto commitments.
The member for Regina—Qu'Appelle talked about topping up the CHST, which of course he knows is at an all-time high. In fact, the federal contribution is around 32%. He mentioned reducing the GST and topping up the CHST. Where would he find the money? If he were to reduce the GST and top up the CHST, how would the arithmetic work?