Mr. Speaker, as custom dictates, in light of the fact that I have been elected a second time, I would like to salute all the citizens of Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles who have placed their trust in me.
I today invite my colleagues to do likewise and reject the Bloc’s motion because it is against the interests of Quebec. Our measures in this budget are perfectly consistent with the spirit of open federalism that underpins our overall approach toward restoring the fiscal balance. I invite my colleagues to examine our record in this regard. The facts are most eloquent.
First of all, the government is fully honouring its commitment to pay the provinces increasing, long-term transfers to restore the fiscal balance. The federal transfers have never been so high, and they will continue to increase. The Canada health transfer is increasing by 6% per year, and the Canada social transfer by 3% per year. Federal infrastructure support to the provinces is at record highs. Equalization today stands at $14.2 billion, compared with $8.7 billion in 2003-04 under the Liberal government.
Second, Quebec is the province that has benefited the most from the measures we have taken to restore the fiscal balance. Far from decreasing, Quebec’s equalization payments and total transfers are at historic highs and continue to rise, but the Bloc persists in tabling its motion against the population of Quebec. Transfers to Quebec for equalization alone have risen 74% since 2005-06, placing the province far in the lead of the recipient provinces in terms of the increase in these transfers.
Equalization has been very advantageous for Quebeckers over the years, and the government has worked energetically to ensure that this program continues to grow in a sustainable and equitable manner. The measures it has taken were necessary because of the unprecedented and unexpected volatility in commodity prices in recent months.
As my colleagues know, just after the introduction of the 2007 equalization formula, commodity prices steadily increased, with oil prices tripling in a few months before plummeting 75% in the middle of 2008. These exceptionally high resource prices pushed up the costs of equalization, and under the effect of the new formula, they would have continued to push them up for years. If nothing had been done, equalization costs would have risen over $26 billion over the next five years. This pace of growth was clearly unsustainable, and the government would have had a lot of difficulty avoiding a long-term structural deficit.
When it submitted its final report on equalization, upon which the new program is based, the O'Brien panel of independent experts could not imagine that oil prices would reach $150 a barrel or that Ontario would become eligible for equalization. But that is what happened, and it could weigh heavily on future charges. On the other hand, the O'Brien panel recognized that the equalization program could well pose certain problems. It came up with some very wise advice in this regard, which can be found on page 43 of this final equalization report.
The O'Brien report recognizes that the long-run sustainability of the equalization formula is the Government of Canada's responsibility. We are taking this responsibility seriously and we are acting accordingly. I want to emphasize the fact that these measures do not reflect any reduction in equalization payments. In fact, these changes are only meant to ensure that the growth of the program follows that of the economy. They set a threshold to avoid a contraction of the whole program, and they provide transitional protection to offset their impact on the provinces benefiting from equalization, including Quebec.
The provinces were informed of these changes at the finance ministers' meeting held in Toronto, on November 3. They even got advance notice regarding their rights to equalization for 2009-10, to allow them to plan their budgets on solid ground.
Even if these changes recently generated a broad political debate that was strictly academic and only served to create dissension, I want to point out that they had been welcomed when they were first announced at the finance ministers' meeting, back in November.
In fact, at a press conference that followed the meeting, the Quebec Minister of Finance, Mrs. Jérôme-Forget, said that these changes were “reasonable”. They are indeed, particularly under the circumstances that all governments are facing because of this serious global economic recession.
That is why we are defending the changes that we made to ensure the equalization's viability. And we are also defending the way that we implemented these changes.
On behalf of all Canadians from all provinces, including Quebec, I am asking my fellow members to do likewise, to reject this motion—which goes against Quebec's interests—and to support our budget.
I have here many statements made by various groups from Quebec that support the measures proposed in our budget. For example, the Quebec City chamber of commerce said:
The moneys committed by the federal government to infrastructures will certainly have a quick and significant impact on the economy—The personal income tax reduction is also a good measure that will stimulate the economy, just like the rebates for renovations and for first time home buyers.
But they voted against those measures.
Also, François Dupuis, chief economist at the Desjardins group, which is in the riding represented by the member for Lévis—Bellechasse, said the following:
—we believe that the measures proposed by Ottawa will work. The government is hitting several targets at once. For families, this is a breath of fresh air.
They are voting against it.
Norma Kozhaya, research director and chief economist with the Conseil du patronat du Québec, said:
I think that these are good measures both for the short term, given the recession, and for long-term positioning in terms of making businesses more competitive, getting people back to work and increasing taxpayers' purchasing power.
They are voting against it.
The president of the Coalition pour le renouvellement des infrastructures du Québec and mayor of the City of Laval, Gilles Vaillancourt, said:
This budget takes into account the reality of an economy that is going through a recession and responds to the Coalition's repeated demands for more funding to help municipalities accomplish their mission, undertake work to upgrade and renew basic infrastructure, and ensure safe, adequate services for citizens. The new funding program will enable municipalities to plan infrastructure more effectively.
They are voting against it.
The Rivière-du-Loup RCM's chamber of commerce said:
This is extremely good news for the RCM of Rivière-du-Loup.
They are voting against it.
The Alliance des Manufacturiers et Exportateurs du Québec said:
The federal government's budget [...] puts forward measures that will help the manufacturing sector and stimulate the Canadian economy [...] The 2009 budget [...] includes a number of positive measures that will help our businesses during this time of crisis. These measures must be implemented as quickly as possible.
They are voting against it.
We should listen to these groups, reject this anti-Quebec motion, and pass the Budget Implementation Act as soon as possible.