Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for the facts and figures. He articulated the problem very well. It is almost akin to the softwood lumber tariffs that are affecting this country so disastrously.
What is the outcome of putting 38 firms out of business? It is to put many people out of work. What is the impact on the revenues to the government? It is to lessen them.
The intelligent thing to do would be to enable the microbreweries to function properly. The government should not have a tax system worth 9¢ a litre in the U.S. and 28¢ a litre in Canada. Parity would be smarter. If the government believes it would have less revenues, that is actually incorrect. Instead of the microbreweries closing down, they would stay open. Thirty-eight microbreweries would be open. Thirty-eight microbreweries would be hiring people. Thirty-eight firms would have people who were working and paying taxes as opposed to collecting employment insurance.
That is not only smart for Canada, it is smart economics. The government ought to have some level of parity with the U.S. in the tax structure. By doing that we are confident our microbreweries could compete and win on a North American scale. We owe it to them morally to give them a level playing field so they can do the fine work that they do, hire Canadians and generate tax revenue for the government.
Some years ago when Brian Mulroney was prime minister he briefly lowered the tax structure. Revenues to the government went up because the private sector could expand. More people were hired. More individuals were working and paying taxes and fewer people were acquiring funds from the public coffers through EI.
The smart thing to do is to lower taxes. It produces higher employment and lessens the demand on employment insurance and welfare. It is good for the public coffers and it is good for Canadians.