Madam Speaker, let us hope we do not have to call upon the hon. member for a supplementary.
I want to put some context around this discussion. At the present time Newfoundland and Labrador receives about $679 million from the federal government, representing about $1,313 per person. With the enhancements and equalizations separate from this particular accord that we are talking about, there will be a further $87 million in additional payments, and I do not have a per person allocation there.
We are talking about a situation in Newfoundland where there are legitimate grievances, frankly. Newfoundland has lost, over the last 10 years or so, about 10% of its population, and its population is aging. I think the average is going to be about 47, where the rest of Canada it is about 43. Younger people earn money; older people do not earn money.
We agree that Newfoundland is in a difficult situation and we have responded. The Prime Minister has responded in a fashion which gave Newfoundland everything that it asked for in the discussions it had during the election period.
As the hon. member knows, we have increased equalization funding by $33 billion over the next 10 years, a significant portion of which will benefit Newfoundland. In the context of these meetings we have also provided the government of Newfoundland and Labrador with greater benefits around the economic growth that is funded through its offshore revenues. This is represented by a long series of negotiations and discussions. The difficulty here is the desire on the part of the federal government to treat all provinces equally and fairly.
The idea is that Canadians should have the same quality of access to their health and social services regardless of where they live. We agree with that and that is a constitutional principle that we adhere to. The way in which we implement it is through the equalization program.
The idea here is to transfer money to the less prosperous provinces in accordance with a formula after a measurement of fiscal capacity. That means that as a province becomes more prosperous, its equalization payments decline. That is the problem here for Newfoundland and Labrador. Because of its offshore revenues, it is in fact becoming more prosperous.
It is important to note that both Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia currently receive special offset payments to support the development of their offshore resources and increase their own source revenues. They are getting more revenues out of their offshore resources.
In fact, the existing offshore arrangements have allowed Newfoundland and Labrador to keep 95% of the money that is generated. Newfoundland collected something in the order of about $660 million in offshore revenues over the last while. Equalization brought it down by $640 million, but because of this special accord, the revenues were then replaced by $635 million pursuant to the accord. So Newfoundland, over that period of time, has only lost about $5 million and therefore retained about 95% of its money.
We are proposing that 100% of its offshore revenues be subject to no such provision. The caveat that we have is that its fiscal capacity should not exceed that of Ontario in any given year. Without such a limit the per capita revenues would not continue to greatly exceed those of other equalization receiving provinces, but also those of Ontario. This would simply not be fair to the other provinces because it would be asking them to disproportionately fund another province's development.
One can understand that as a matter of simple fairness, one province cannot continue to receive equalization payments and have a special side deal. Everyone understands that one cannot ask the taxpayers of Ontario to provide equalization payments to a province whose per capita fiscal capacity is higher than Ontario's.
I trust that my hon. colleagues would agree that the new framework to increase stabilization and equalization is consistent with the overall principles of fairness, equity and transparency.