Mr. Speaker, I have listened carefully to the member's speech, and he has done a pretty good job of running through the index of measures in the budget. I am not sure he has actually completed the list; there are so many measures in this budget that one actually does need an index to go through it.
I am not sure that every measure in that budget is as stimulative in impact as the suggestion is here. Two items pop out.
The member could not resist his party's neo-con desire to give tax money back to the taxpayers. I am not so sure that economically that item is a stimulus. He could not resist mentioning it, which is okay.
However, there is a second thing I want to ask about. The member mentioned that the increase in the income tax personal amount would result in a tax saving to the lower-income Canadian taxpayer, but is it not a fact that the personal amount is claimed by every taxpayer, even the Prime Minister? The Prime Minister has a tax break that is similar to, or better than, the poor person's. I am going to ask the member why he did not mention that upper-income Canadians have tax breaks as good as, or better than, the one he has just somewhat myopically described.
Was it the government's intention to give a better tax break to the high-income earners than to the poor? That is exactly what this budget contains.
As for my party's alleged support for this budget, we are going to squeeze the budget through. We are going to make it fit. We are going to put the round peg through the square hole so that Canada benefits, but the government is on probation.