Madam Speaker, I have been in the House most of the day and have had a chance to hear the remarks of the members on both sides of the House.
One thing is crystal clear: this government has made decisions in its budget to create an annualized deficit, which is what it promised during the election campaign, specifically, a $10-billion deficit a year for about three years. Scotiabank issued a statement today, on top of all the others it has issued over the past few weeks, to inform Canadians that the deficit will not be $10 billion, as it had previously announced, but rather somewhere between $32 billion and $35 billion. That is three times higher than planned. In just one year, the Liberals will have created the deficit that was supposed to be spread over the next three years.
The government tells Canadians that it is going to invest, say yes to everyone, and hand out money like candy. However, at some point, someone has to pay for all this.
The difference between the Liberals and the Conservatives is that we managed to make many significant investments, in infrastructure among other things, without running a deficit.
During the election campaign, the Liberals said they would run small deficits of $10 billion. This is year one and we already have the deficit that was projected for year three or four. The fundamental problem with all this is that there is no plan to return to a balanced budget. I have heard that a number of times here today. No government member has talked about returning to balanced budgets. None of them have.
Later I will ask how it is that these members and this political party can run a deficit with no light at the end of the tunnel, because there is nothing to indicate an eventual return to balanced budgets. I am sure that my colleagues will continue to ask the same question tomorrow. This is an extremely dangerous road we are going down.
I heard my colleague across the way say that the government was giving an extra $900 to seniors. When the government says that it is going to hand out money left and right, the problem is that it gives with one hand from its own pocket and takes with both hands from the taxpayer's pocket. The carbon tax is a good example. It is a $2,500 tax. The government is giving $900 with one hand and taking $2,500 with the other.