Madam Speaker, the federal government's intervention is clear: “the Attorney General of Canada takes no position, on any basis whatsoever, on the constitutional validity of the provisions of the Act respecting the laicity of the State.” This is the position that the government took before the Supreme Court to avoid addressing the real issues affecting Canadians. It wants to create a constitutional crisis to prevent us from talking about the opioid crisis, the inflation crisis and the debt crisis.
To return to the matter of the budget, how much of our money will this Prime Minister have spent by the time he finally presents us with a budget? No one can say. However, the interim parliamentary budget officer has been quite clear, and I want to emphasize the word “interim” for reasons that will become apparent later on.
The interim parliamentary budget officer said last week in committee that he does not know whether the government currently has fiscal anchors. He told us straight out that the government does not know where it is heading. He said that, at this point, it is impossible for him and for us as parliamentarians to assess the likelihood or probability of the government hitting any fiscal target. He also said that we can bet our boots that we are going to be paying more for debt pretty quickly.
The only thing we knew for certain after the interim parliamentary budget officer's committee appearance is that we are going to be paying more for debt. The worst part is that the Liberal members of this committee are keeping him in a constant state of crisis by appointing him on an interim basis rather than confirming his appointment. Why? It could be because he has been highly critical of the government.