Mr. Speaker, there was an ominous promise in last week's budget to identify $2 billion in cuts in order to balance the books. Ominous because it failed to offer even a suggestion where these cuts would come from. Vague promises to find future savings like these are misguided from the point of view of Canadians who may lose their jobs or key services. The victims deserve to know who they are. The promises are also irresponsible and misguided from the perspective of fiscal planning. This was the Harris method. We have tax cuts today, vague spending cuts maybe tomorrow. This is a recipe for deficits.
I will explain that in more detail in a moment.
First, I want to assure the House that I do not oppose measures that increase government efficiency. Times change, programs become superfluous and the government of the day must ensure that Canadian taxpayers' money is used optimally.
Last year, I carried out an exercise of identifying low priority government spending in order to reallocate the amounts involved to high priority sectors. I provided a line by line description with each cut before the savings were spent.
It involved difficult decisions, but I think they were good. Because they were good choices, we had no problem explaining to Canadians what each of the cuts meant to them. The process was open and transparent.
Canadians deserve better than to wake up one morning and find that a service they depend on has been axed by stealth. Just look at the recent EnerGuide cuts undertaken by this government. Low income Canadians put thousands of their dollars into making their homes more energy efficient, with the clear understanding that they could recover much of that money through EnerGuide. Unfortunately, they discovered yesterday that the program had been cut, leaving thousands out to dry.
Sure, a tax cut will be welcomed by the majority of Canadians. However, if we only show them the tax cut and refuse to show them the service cuts that the lost revenue represents, then we are really only showing them half of the story, as those individuals who were ripped off by this government on previous commitments for energy efficiency discovered only yesterday.
Beyond the moral imperative, there is another reason that these cuts need to be identified now, a reason that goes right to the heart of rudimentary fiscal competence, so lacking not only in this government but in Conservative governments from Diefenbaker through Mulroney through Harris, and I could go on. A reason that goes right to the heart of fiscal competence is to not spend the money before it is in the bank.
The budget contained billions of dollars in new spending as well as billions of dollars in tax cuts. This is money that has been booked and will be spent based on the notion that the $2 billion in program cuts will be found in the savings yielded. But what if they are not found? Again, this was the Harris methodology, so well known to Ontarians.
Multiple pressures can cause the minister to fail. I ran into that during the examination of spending last year. There will be pressures within caucus by colleagues not wanting to lose jobs and funds in their riding.
Is it time, Mr. Speaker?