Debates of Feb. 4th, 2016

Opposition Motion—Department of Finance

[Anne Minh-Thu Quach, NDP, Salaberry—Suroît, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I simply want to say that it is a fact that there was a $1-billion surplus from April to November 2015. It is written in black and white in a study conducted by the parliamentary budget officer. However, the Conservatives were only able to create that surplus by selling General Motors shares. As a result, this is a false debate. There is no doubt that the officials did a lot of work and a tremendous job. However, today, we should be debating what to do now in view of what is happening today.

Are we using the money we have to help families live better by introducing a $15 minimum wage, having affordable day care and making sure that seniors are not living below the poverty line? These are the issues that people need to hear us talking about, not whether there is enough money left or whether there is as much as we thought there was. This is really just petty partisanship. What is more, debating this issue all day is a waste of money.

Does the member agree that we need to discuss the middle class and things that can really advance debate in our society?

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it sounds as though the NDP, at least from her comments, is prepared to recognize our record and the reality of the surpluses that we run.

Of course, there are disagreements with respect to where we go in the future. The NDP agrees on the importance of balanced budgets. It wants to get there by major tax increases on Canada's job creators. The Liberals propose, though, to both increase taxes and run massive deficits because, as I said in my speech, they are desperate to outflank the NDP on the far left.

We are not going to play that game. We are going to stand up responsibly for Canadian jobs, Canadian workers, and for balanced budgets. We are going to do our best to ensure that the next generation is not saddled with a big, new, totally unnecessary deficit just because of the government's capricious attitude toward this nation's finances.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I listened attentively to the hon. member's speech. It is always interesting to hear him talk.

I would like to bring up two reports.

In 2015 Canada was ranked number one in the world by the Reputation Institute. We did not get there by doing nothing for 10 years. We got there by doing for 10 years exactly what the member was talking about.

In “The Global Competitiveness Report 2015-2016”, Canada's ranking increased from 15th to 13th. That is a two-spot improvement, according the World Economic Forum's study. Again, we did not increase our ranking among world countries without doing exactly what the member said we had done, which is good economic stewardship.

We left Canadians with the lowest tax burden in 50-plus years.

I especially like what he said about intergenerational fairness and taxation. I would like to hear him expand upon that and upon this decade of excellence that we had.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his his great work on behalf of fiscal responsibility.

The Liberals talk a lot about evidence-based policy. However, when it comes to the fiscal record of our government, they seem totally unwilling to look at the numbers. They want to talk down Canada's performance over the last 10 years. However, the reality is that Canada's middle class has performed very well. Canada's economy, overall, has performed very well.

Of course, we have been through challenging economic circumstances. However, if we compare Canada's performance relative to other countries', we have done very well.

It would be such a shame if the new government spoiled that success by moving in a totally different economic direction by running massive new, totally unnecessary deficits by burdening future generations.

The hon. member is right to talk about the importance of intergenerational fairness. It is simply morally irresponsible for us to demand, for our own purposes, that subsequent generations pay for the things we want today. We should pay for present needs with present dollars.

[Gudie Hutchings, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary for Small Business and Tourism]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time today with my colleague, the hon. member for Nepean.

With today's turbulent global economy, the motion before us is certainly timely and the stakes in this debate are very high. Let me be clear, the stakes are high and the economy is struggling because of the actions and inactions of the previous government. Indeed, the projected deficit for 2015-16 is a direct result of an economic program that left no contingency in place for low crude oil prices, and failed to take into account weakened global growth.

The previous Liberal government left behind a $13 billion surplus in 2006. The Conservative government squandered that surplus and accumulated an additional $150 billion in new debt, while still managing to deliver the worst growth record since the Great Depression. All of that was coupled with no plan for supporting the middle class, no growth agenda, and no plan to invest. The only people who believe that the previous Conservative government left behind a surplus are the Conservatives themselves. Canadians know better.

Quite simply, what is at stake is a new direction for our economy. During the election campaign Canadians said it was time to make meaningful investments in people and in our communities all across the country, from coast to coast to coast. After 10 years of weak growth, our government has a plan to grow the economy and create jobs by focusing on the middle class, investing in infrastructure, and helping those who need it the most. We are committed to leaving our children and grandchildren with a more sustainable and prosperous economy.

However, our plan needs to be realistic, sustainable, prudent, and transparent. That is why we have continued to listen to Canadians through the government's pre-budget consultations. When we set out to do these consultations, we wanted two things. The government wanted to involve as many Canadians as possible and we wanted to do things a little differently. The numbers really do tell a story. To date, the combined total number of Canadians we have reached through our channels amounts to more than 150,000 individuals. What is more, the Department of Finance has received more than 3,500 formal submissions. That is more than triple what the Conservatives managed over a six-month timeframe. We did it in just two months last year.

Since early January, the Minister of Finance connected with university students across Canada through Google hangouts and Facebook live on three separate occasions, giving the government valuable insight into the current concerns of young Canadians from across the country. More than 8,000 students tuned-in to hear from the Minister of Finance at the Dalhousie University Facebook live event. Since then, many more have replied online. At the second Facebook live event in Calgary, the government had over 70,000 tuning in live to watch the Minister of Finance take questions from students in a town hall format. That is openness and transparency, and that is doing things differently.

The pre-budget consultation hashtag, #pbc16, is still being used widely by Canadians to discuss ideas on how to implement our plan to grow the economy, and by commentators and MPs from across the political spectrum. Through these pre-budget consultations, we are engaging with Canadians, looking for input on how the federal government can support the middle class and those working hard to join it, how we can best invest in infrastructure to grow the economy, and how we can ensure that the most vulnerable do not get left behind again.

Personally, I want to assure Canadians that we are listening. We hope that this renewed interest in the political process by Canadians will make a better country for all of us, for our families, and especially for our communities. I know that the Canadian economy is going through a difficult period, and I know that the Minister of Finance is doing all he can to support people affected by this crisis, especially those living in Alberta, Saskatchewan, and my home province of Newfoundland and Labrador. We believe that in the face of this challenge, there is a real opportunity, an opportunity to put in place conditions that create long-term growth and an opportunity to do something that the previous government failed to do in its 10 years in office.

That is why in the coming weeks we will be announcing a new advisory council on economic growth. It will be composed of people from various backgrounds with experience in both the private and public sectors, and will not be just composed of Canadians. It will include leaders and citizens from other countries, people with global experience in growing a successful and inclusive economy. The mandate of this advisory council will be to help us think about how we can best tackle our longer term economic challenges. I am personally proud to serve in a government that is thinking critically about the kinds of investments that we need to spur the growth in our economy.

Although the previous government squandered a $13 billion surplus and added $150 billion to the country's debt, it also managed to have the worst growth record since the Great Depression. Members across the aisle should remember that it is their party's record, that is their economic legacy of 10 years in office.

All members would agree that investing in economic growth is the best way to improve our country's outlook in the short, medium, and long term. The previous government gave the illusion of responsible fiscal management by wrapping up debt and posting surpluses based on inflated growth projections.

Now is the time to be better, to make meaningful investments while being realistic about our fiscal situation. Together we can overcome the challenges we face and to seize the opportunities to grow our economy together.

Where does the path to prosperity lie? It lies through delivering the kind of real change that all Canadians can be proud of. It lies through investing in our economy to create jobs, and in strengthening the middle class and helping those working hard to join it. It comes through committing to a higher bar for openness and transparency in government, and it comes from delivering on all of our commitments to Canadians.

We are confident that our plan will accomplish these goals, and that is why the government is optimistic about our country's prospects going forward. Given that, I encourage all members to vote against this motion. The official opposition has had its chance to govern and now it is our turn.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Before we resume debate, I want to remind the hon. members that when referring to another member, we refer to them by their riding or their title, not by their name.

The hon. member for Burnaby South.

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to government member's speak with great interest, and I have a question. We have been talking about finances today. We heard a lot about Mr. Flaherty. We heard a little less about Mr. Martin.

Twenty years ago, Mr. Martin made a very serious statement about the measure he used to assess unemployment, which is called a natural unemployment rate. Mr. Martin controversially said that he thought the natural unemployment rate in Canada was 5%. Most economists say it is 8%.

We are wondering, as the government formulates its budget, which natural unemployment rate is the government using on which to base its projections?

[Gudie Hutchings, Liberal, Long Range Mountains, NL]

Mr. Speaker, going forward, the government is committed to being open and transparent, as we said before. We will deal with all departments, and any information we come up with will be factual, based on information we get from our valued public servants, and we will come up with a number that will be true, going forward, that we can all base all our assessments and all our decisions on.

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the member talked at length about how the Conservatives had deficits, but she forgot to tell the House and remind Canadians that in 2008, the world went into the largest recession since the Great Depression. Prior to 2008, the Conservative government had surpluses and had paid down close to $40 billion of national debt. It then promoted a low-tax plan and an investment in infrastructure that drove our economy so that Canada was number one among the G7.

As we know, KPMG said that total business costs in Canada were the best. Bloomberg said that Canada was the second best place in the world to do business. That was based on the economic action plan, the investment in infrastructure, and how the Conservative government encouraged and created jobs.

The member talks about the added billions in debt. Conservatives agree that there was some deficit spending, but it did not become a structural deficit. We came back to balanced budgets when we promised we would. We had said that it would be for a set time.

The Conservatives had a plan, a strategy, but we have seen no strategy put forward. All we heard during the election campaign was that Liberals would not run more than a $10-billion deficit. They acknowledged that there would be deficits. Now not just pundits but economists are saying that the Liberal government is going to have massive deficits, and that is based on their high-spending practices.

I would ask the member to at least reference the fact that the Conservatives paid down close to $40 billion in debt when we had a surplus. We did not have deficit after deficit and then, all of a sudden, last fall, say that we had a $1-billion deficit. In 2013-14, we ended up with a $1.9-billion surplus, and last year, we were building on a $1-billion surplus.

[Gudie Hutchings, Liberal, Long Range Mountains, NL]

Mr. Speaker, there is a great saying in Newfoundland, which is that the devil is in the details. One detail I can reference from Newfoundland is that, yes, you may have done that, sir, but you did it on the backs of hard-working Canadians. I can talk about the hundreds of jobs that were lost, affecting rural parts of our country, taking well-paying jobs out of the country, and putting vulnerable people at more risk.

I would like to reference one of the comments my colleague from New Westminster—Burnaby made in a sports analogy this morning, which I thought was quite lovely. I am not a sports afficionado, but he was referring to a season of activity, whereas my colleague on the Conservative side was referring to a football game. It is clear that the Conservatives fumbled the ball.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Before we resume debate, I again want to remind hon. members that they make their comments to the Chair and not directly to other members.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Nepean.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Mr. Speaker, to begin, I would like to address today's motion and reassure the hon. member that we support the officials in the Department of Finance. They are consummate professionals who are working hard drafting our government's first budget. Like the members on this side of the House, they know that a snapshot in time is just that. It does not tell the whole story. It is like looking at one's bank account before paying the bills.

Let us make no mistake. The projections outlined in the economic and fiscal update show that there will be a deficit in budget year 2015-16 as a direct result of the previous government's failure to prepare for a downturn in global oil prices and volatility in the global market.

Happily, we have a plan. After 10 years of weak growth, this government has a plan to grow the economy and create jobs by focusing on the middle class, investing in infrastructure, and helping those who need it most.

As the Prime Minister recently said, we fully intend to take all means necessary to support an economic growth strategy that will benefit all Canadians.

Our government was elected on ambitious economic measures. We know that there has never been a better time to make targeted investments to support economic growth. If the members opposite are patient, we will certainly provide them with our vision for the future and the details of these targeted investments.

Let me describe our starting point. As we embark on an agenda of economic growth and long-term prosperity, there is no doubt that we are facing considerable headwinds. Globally, we continue to experience what the International Monetary Fund's managing director, Christine Lagarde, famously called the “new mediocre”. In its latest world economic outlook, in January, the IMF said that it expects global growth to pick up modestly to 3.4% in 2016 and 3.6% in 2017. This is down 0.2 percentage points for both 2016 and 2017 compared to the October 2015 world economic outlook.

Although the recent performance of the U.S. economy is encouraging, the emerging economies, especially China, are causes for concern. Global crude oil prices remain at levels less than a third of what they were mid-2014, reflecting a persistent global oversupply and softening demand. What is happening beyond our borders has real and tangible effects for all Canadians.

In Canada, our economic performance in the first half of 2015 was poor, mainly due to collapsing oil prices in 2014. It has become obvious that growth in Canada will be lower than was expected in the previous government's last budget projections, in April 2015. This, of course, has important implications for our current fiscal situation. Indeed, the Department of Finance's own numbers in the economic and fiscal update, tabled in this House, show this. I find it strange that the members opposite only seem to respect the numbers from department officials when they feel that they can score political points with them. I urge them all to review the economic and fiscal update, and in the spirit of respect for this country's public servants, admit that they are dead wrong in believing that we will not be in a deficit by the end of this fiscal year.

The previous Liberal government left behind a $13-billion surplus in 2006. The Conservative government squandered the surplus and accumulated an additional $150 billion in new debt while still managing to deliver the worst growth record since the Great Depression. The “Fiscal Monitor” referred to in the member's motion is a snapshot in time and does not tell the full story.

Tough economic times call for bold measures to support the middle class and those working hard to join it. We in the government are prepared to implement these measures.

We maintain an enviable position here in Canada, with a low debt-to-GDP ratio, abundant natural resources, and one of the most educated and talented workforces in the world. Keeping our debt-to-GDP ratio on a downward path throughout our mandate remains a central plank of our economic agenda, alongside balancing the budget by the end of our mandate. To achieve this, our policies will strike a balance between fiscal responsibility and our commitments to Canadians.

One of the most important pillars of our plan is strengthening our middle class, the backbone of our economy, whose members have gone too long without a raise. This is why one of the government's first orders of business was to table a notice of ways and means motion to cut taxes for the middle class. We would cut taxes for nine million Canadians by asking the wealthiest 1% of earners to kick in just a little more. This is the right thing to do and the smart thing to do for our economy.

The middle-class tax cut and the accompanying tax changes would help make taxes fairer so that all Canadians would have the opportunity to succeed and prosper. I am pleased to note that Bill C-2, the bill to implement these measures, is now being debated in Parliament. The middle-class tax cuts would mark an important first step in our plan for economic growth.

Going forward, the government will introduce proposals in the budget to create a new Canada child benefit. Changes under the new child benefit would begin in July 2016. In addition to replacing the universal childcare benefit, which is not tied to income, the proposed Canada child benefit would simplify and consolidate existing child benefits while ensuring that the help is targeted to those who need it most.

Taken together, these measures will help strengthen the middle class and those working hard to join it, putting more money in their pockets to save, invest, and grow the economy. More broadly, they will help grow our economy in the context of a difficult global economic climate so that all Canadians benefit.

The second challenge the government faces, and the most important one, is creating long-term conditions for strong and durable economic growth. The international community, as well as leaders right here at home, have more or less arrived at the same conclusion: targeted investments in infrastructure are key to driving economic growth. With interest rates at historic lows, now is the right time to invest. Canadian cities have been growing at a rapid rate, and all governments have a shared challenge in making investments in infrastructure that create economic advantages for Canada and more sustainable urban areas.

For the next decade, we will make investments in social infrastructure, like affordable and seniors' housing, in green infrastructure, like water-treatment systems, and in public transit. We have pledged to make historic investments in Canadian infrastructure, and we intend to follow through. These investments will aim to get Canadians moving and will open more cost-efficient trade options for our exporters. These are big, meaningful measures that can have an significant impact on our long-term growth.

Unlike the previous government, we do not intend to recklessly add to the national debt on the backs of our children and grandchildren by making reckless and politically motivated investments. Rather, we intend to make smart investments that will build an even more prosperous country for our children and grandchildren.

Given the government's clear objectives listed today, I would strongly encourage hon. members to support the government in our efforts to strengthen the middle class and grow the economy.

[Alex Nuttall, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I cannot help but take issue with some of the comments that were just made.

In the comments regarding picking which reports members on this side of the House want to accept from the finance department and which ones we do not, the member is referring to a December report that was issued by the ministry of finance, which outlined a Liberal deficit. Subsequently, a report was issued last week outlining that there was a surplus in November. The question is not which report we accept. We accept both reports. We agree that the Liberals have turned a Conservative surplus into a Liberal deficit. There is no question about it.

Second, in terms of squandering a $13 billion surplus that was left, I do not believe giving Canadians their hard-earned money back would be considered squandering. It would be putting money back where it belongs. We introduced the TFSA. We lowered the GST. We increased the personal exemption, which most affects those who earn the least. We are proud of these things.

We believe money belongs in people's pockets. Could the member stand in the House and explain why he does not believe that?

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Mr. Speaker, once again the hon. member is picking and choosing his answers to the Conservatives' advantage.

My colleague mentioned that the previous Conservative government put money back into the pockets of Canadians where it belongs, but he failed to mention that the previous Conservative government racked up our national debt by $150 billion on the backs of our children and grandchildren.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to put the Conservative motion into a broader context. We cannot forget the seven straight deficits that the Conservatives ran. We cannot forget that they sold off public assets. We cannot forget that they made massive cuts to departmental budgets. They made those cuts on the backs of hard-working Canadians.

I am wondering if the hon. member could comment about the broader context of what the motion we are debating here includes in terms of the purported Conservative surplus, the deficit spending in the past, and the Conservatives' broader record.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I agree with the statement made by the hon. member. The Conservative government made major cuts to the public service, and many high-quality, well-paying jobs were lost across the economy.

Whatever jobs were created during the last 10 years were low-paying, minimum wage jobs. Youth unemployment has now risen to 15.5%, which is double the national average of unemployment.

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my hon. colleague about his explanation of infrastructure development and how this would stimulate the economy and create jobs. If possible, could he explain that to this esteemed chamber?

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we have made it very clear that we are in for sustained economic growth, and that growth will be achieved through massive investment in infrastructure. We made a commitment in our platform to invest close to $125 billion in infrastructure. About $20 million of that will go to social infrastructure and about $20 million toward green infrastructure.

It is important to create high-quality jobs in the process. Investment in infrastructure is one of the most proven ways to achieve this.

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will share my time with my colleague, the member for Battle River—Crowfoot. I thank all the members who are in the House today to debate the motion before us, which is on an important subject.

I am disappointed to see that my government colleagues and my New Democrat colleagues are planning on voting against this simple motion, which thanks public servants for their independence and expertise in conducting a financial analysis of government data.

We commend their expertise, because last November, they confirmed that for the period from April 1 to November 30, we left a $1-billion surplus to the current government.

I was disappointed to hear the Minister of Finance say earlier that it was, in fact, a deficit. Facts are facts and truth is truth: at the beginning of November 2015, the government inherited a $1-billion surplus from the previous government.

What did the Minister of Finance do with that surplus? He claims to have done an economic update, and with some economic growth projections, he will end up with a deficit at the end of this fiscal year.

What we are telling the Minister of Finance is that he has the power and all the freedom he needs to balance the budget by March 31 because the government does not have a revenue problem—it has a spending problem.

The minister is in charge of spending. When the economic update came out in November, the government could have made decisions to ensure that the surplus it inherited from the previous government would still be a surplus on March 31. It could have made the tough decisions that needed to be made instead of putting future generations in debt.

During the election campaign four years ago, we told Canadians that we would balance the books by 2015. We had to make tough choices and major decisions to do that. We also told Canadians that we would not balance the books on the backs of the provinces by cutting transfers. We also told Canadians that we would not balance the books by raising their taxes. We did not raise Canadians' taxes; we actually reduced them.

We also told Canadians that we would look in our own backyard and continue to control our spending in order to balance the budget. As the former minister of small business and tourism, I had to make some tough decisions and, yes, make cuts in my department. All of my cabinet colleagues had to do the same thing, in order to ensure that we would not leave structural deficits for future generations.

We did our job, and I am proud to have reduced the small business and tourism budget by 20%. On a percentage basis, that was the largest cut made by the government of the day, although, certainly, that department's budget is quite small. Nevertheless, it was still 20%. That was money that the Canadian Tourism Commission used to promote Canada abroad and bring visitors to Canada. Despite that 20% cut, the commission was efficient. It maintained its promotion programs abroad and changed its way of doing things. It did as we asked; it was very thrifty and found ways to save money.

The people at the Canadian Tourism Commission, now known as Destination Canada, did a good job, and the statistics are there to prove it. The numbers for 2015 show that there was a 10% increase in international visitors as compared to 2014. The commission continued to hold targeted advertising campaigns in various countries, including the United States, India, and European countries. Tourism increased even though the commission's budget was smaller. The commission was able to make that happen within its budget. There was also an 8.4% increase in international visitors as a result of the investment that the commission made. I trusted the managers at the Canadian Tourism Commission to make the right cuts and to use the money they had to promote Canada in order to continue to attract international visitors. That is what they did.

All my colleagues from other departments did the same thing. We kept our promise to Canadians and we can be proud of the $1-billion surplus that we delivered last November.

I am very disappointed to see that this government plans to stimulate the economy by spending money that we do not have. Canadian families know that, when they are strapped for cash, they should not start spending more and living beyond their means. They know that, in times like that, they have to make tough choices, cut back on their spending, and save for a rainy day. They are responsible people.

What does the government do when times are tough and economic growth is at only 2%, 3%, or 4%? It says that it is going to spend to stimulate the economy, when its credit card is already maxed out.

A maxed-out credit card means that it is time to start repaying debts. That is what the government should be doing. It should be leaving money in the pockets of Canadians to stimulate the economy. That will help them spend more and allow entrepreneurs to invest. Instead, the government is taxing Canadians, and future generations will have to pay off that debt.

Today, while the interest rate is quite low, 10¢ out of every dollar that Canadians pay in taxes to the Government of Canada is used to pay the interest on the debt. However, everyone knows that the interest rate will go up in a few years because it is at a historic low. It cannot remain artificially low. When it increases, the cost of the interest on the debt will be even greater to the government. The cost could increase to 12¢ or 15¢ out of every tax dollar.

Today, the interest the government pays annually on the debt represents the entire budget for the Department of National Defence. That is a lot of money. That is why the government needs to manage this responsibly, continue to have a balanced budget, avoid burdening future generations with debt, and certainly lower taxes. Parliamentarians are not the ones who create wealth. Canadian business people create wealth.

Let us help entrepreneurs to be productive by lowering their taxes, signing free trade deals to help them export their products to other countries without tariffs and quotas, and by cutting red tape. There is still quite a bit of inefficient federal red tape. Entrepreneurs end up spending more time filling out government forms than doing what they do best, and that is working for themselves and creating wealth and jobs.

Let us not forget that since people who create wealth have to pay taxes, this also helps the Government of Canada. Government spending is not going to stimulate the economy, but fiscal responsibility and lower taxes will.

As I only have two minutes remaining, I will close by saying that the current Minister of Finance's approach has failed around the world. Consider Greece, which failed to stimulate the economy by spending. Today it is bankrupt. We do not want structural deficits, but that is where the government is headed. This year's deficit will exceed the estimated $10 billion, and a deficit will be posted next year and the year after that. We will have to live with structural deficits, which will hurt the Canadian economy.

I encourage the minister and the government to vote in favour of the motion and to adopt a responsible economic policy.

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague.

He continues to criticize our Minister of Finance, who is very competent and values transparency. He will ensure that we balance the budget for Canadians by the end of this government's term. The Minister of Finance criss-crossed Canada with his parliamentary secretary in order to consult Canadians, businesses, and chambers of commerce to identify their needs and prepare a budget that meets the needs of all sectors. As the Minister of Finance said in response to my colleague, the only people who believe that the previous government left a surplus are the members opposite.

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague, the former parliamentary secretary to the minister of finance, just confirmed to me that this is one of the first times in Canadian history that the Standing Committee on Finance is not conducting public consultations across Canada. It is now conducting consultations over the Internet. That is all well and good, but it is also important for parliamentarians to question people who appear before the committee. It is very disappointing to learn that the Standing Committee on Finance did not come together to hold consultations. There was no committee meeting, no report. Parliamentarians did not get a chance to talk to stakeholders, which is very disappointing.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I find it quite interesting. We delivered a $1 billion surplus to the current government. The theme through the campaign was transparency and accountability. The concern of the member for Beauce, who I thank for his commitment to his constituents and Canada over a number of years, is that the Liberals need something to cover up the tracks of their irresponsible spending. That is their responsibility as a government. They were given a surplus, but even though in the election a modest $10 billion deficit was projected, they have absolutely no idea now what that number will be. They know how much revenue will come in but have absolutely no idea what the deficit will be.

Is that not the responsibility of the Minister of Finance to know, who in his former position in the private sector believed the total opposite of what he is now preaching to Canadians? Does he not have the responsibility as a minister to listen to his department and understand that when it says there is a surplus there is one? Second, is it not his responsibility to know what the deficit will be, and when is he going to talk about being able to bring back a balanced budget?

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the member is absolutely right that the Minister of Finance has the responsibility of being transparent to the House and also to tell us the truth. We asked him what the deficit would be, and he said that the end of the fiscal year would be in a couple of weeks from now and that he could not answer that simple question.

As a member of Parliament, usually in the past when we were asked that question and the former minister received a question like that, we were very transparent with Canadians and the numbers were there.

However, what is amazing right now is that the minister does not want to look at the facts. The facts are the facts: the Liberals received a surplus of $1.1 billion from the former government, and now they are trying to say no, no, it is not a surplus. It is a surplus and maybe we will have a deficit because the minister does not want to act and the Liberals cannot control spending, which is the most important thing.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I remind members that if they want to speak to the House, they must be in their own seat. This is something that members often forget, but it is important.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Battle River—Crowfoot.

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, for 15 years in this House, I represented Crowfoot, and now with the boundary changes it is a pleasure to stand here and represent Battle River—Crowfoot.

It is a pleasure to stand in this House on this topic. The motion we are debating is this:

That the House: (a) thank the independent non-partisan officials from the Department of Finance for their hard work and evidence based analysis; (b) acknowledge their most recent Fiscal Monitor which informed Members and Canadians that, for the period from April to November 2015 of the 2015-2016 fiscal year, the previous government posted a budgetary surplus of $1.0 billion; and (c) concur in its conclusions and express its confidence in the Deputy Minister and his team.

As the former minister of state for finance, I am pleased to advise the House that in my experience working with the finance department and the deputy minister of finance, past and present, the current and the former deputy minister, and all their officials, they provide a remarkable service to Canadians. I think most of us would acknowledge that the public service, and certainly the finance department, does that. They help keep Canada's government of the day implementing the policies that are brought forward in budgets, and in other initiatives at different times, or the different implementations of different measures as they are brought forward. The finance department officials are experts. The officials at Finance Canada worked to help ensure that the Government of Canada achieved a $1 billion surplus for the period of April to November 2015.

As the Liberals go forward, amassing huge budgetary deficits, Canadians will understand that these deficits are of the Liberals own making. The report from the “Fiscal Monitor” produced by Finance Canada proves that the Liberals inherited a surplus from our Conservative government. The Parliamentary Budget Officer has also substantiated this fact.

If the Liberal Party engages in deficit spending, it will be 100% as a result of its own actions. It did not take long. The Liberals began down the track of deficit spending very quickly. Only a few days after the election it became apparent what its agenda was. Balanced budgets were made possible for Canada because of our Conservative government's responsible approach and commitment to putting in place initiatives to foster job creation, to help build economic growth in Canada's economy.

We knew that we could not move the Government of Canada into a position of ongoing structural deficits. That would appear as a lack of discipline to investors and certainly to Canadians. Our economic action plan was put in place to move the government to a position of budgetary surpluses in 2015.

We accomplished that one year earlier than what was originally anticipated because of extra growth in the economy. That is one point that has been missed here today. The Liberals and the NDP's position is that we came from a deficit and left with a deficit. That is not what happened.

In 2014, a year ahead of schedule, we had a $1.9 billion surplus, and building on that surplus, from April to November, we had another $1 billion surplus.

The heated rhetoric by the Liberal government demonstrates that it is already feeling the pressure of its broken promises and its growing debt. The Canadian economy is not a game. Choices have consequences. The stakes are high. Budgets do not magically balance themselves. Jobs, families, and housing are all affected by the management or mismanagement of Canada's economy.

By voting against today's motion, the government would signal that it has little confidence in the employees at the highest levels of Finance Canada. These employees are experts who do not play the same political game as the Liberal Party. They are non-partisan. The Liberals are trying to deny the voice of those officials at Finance Canada when they come here and misrepresent those officials' findings in the “Fiscal Monitor”.

The Liberal government would be adopting what I call the Sergey Lavrov type of politics. We read about him today in the National Post. He is the foreign minister of Russia who basically made an announcement about Ukraine that was completely wrong. I will quote what it says about him:

He has not been foreign minister for 12 years because he is an idiot. He was lying. He knew he was lying, and he knew everyone knew he was lying and he did not care.

I would never use those words in Parliament about anyone, but let me say that we do not want the government to take the Sergey Lavrov position on how to deal with whether we had a surplus or deficit. Canadian officials at Finance Canada are not lying. The publishers of the “Fiscal Monitor” have no political axe to grind. They have no hidden agenda. They have no political agenda. They are not concerned with what other economists may say about the numbers, facts, and figures they publish. They publish the facts and the figures.

If the Liberals command that Canada be plunged into budgetary deficits, then the department will chronicle that and will help the Liberal government facilitate its measures. The department monitors closely how much the deficit will be. They know how vast and how large it is and how it is growing. They can tell the Minister of Finance anytime he asks how slow the economy is or how fast it is growing. That is what they will do. They have spoken about last year and it is very clear.

Our Conservative government asked the department to help balance the budget, to help us with the federal budget. They helped us keep tabs on our progress in our program. They always knew how close or how far we were from balancing the books. They say that before the Liberals formed government, Canada was in a $1 billion surplus. We were in the black. Canada actually had a budgetary operating surplus of little over $1 billion.

They will not say this is a good thing. They will not tell the Liberals that the massive budgetary deficits they will amass are bad. They will only tell the Liberals how fast they are spending Canadians' money, and more and more it is becoming taxpayers' money that taxpayers do not have.

They will keep accurate specifics on how much spending the Liberals are doing. They will help the Liberals understand many things that it would seem they do not understand today, including monetary policy, fiscal policy, the debt-to-GDP ratio, etc., etc.

The government's top priority should not be about changing history and bringing forward false facts. The government's top priority should be job creation. It should be focusing on economic growth. It should be focused on long-term prosperity for Canadians. The Liberals should take action on cutting taxes for job-creating businesses, investing in research and development, expanding markets for Canadian businesses abroad so that as an exporting country we can deliver our products around the world. They should deliver on support for job-creating infrastructure and establishing the framework for responsible development of our natural resources.

Canadians know that our previous government did those things. It steered Canada throughout the great recession and created over 1.2 million net new jobs from the downturn in 2009. These were overwhelmingly private sector jobs, full-time, well-paying jobs. According to KPMG, total business tax costs in Canada were the lowest among the G7 countries. We wanted people investing here in their country, in Canada. These costs were 46% lower than our chief trading partner and actual competitor at the time, the United States.

As I mentioned earlier today, Bloomberg ranked Canada as the second best place in the world to do business. Why was this? Did this success just happen? Do budgets balance themselves? It does not occur overnight. It requires tough decisions, sound judgment, and a focus on priority.

Our government had that focus. I wish the Liberals well as they move forward with our economy. I want to see people working. I come from a province where right now there is a massive challenge in the oil and gas sector, with hundreds of thousands of jobs at risk.

We want job creation. We want balanced budgets. We want lower taxes because we know our record is a good record.