Debates of Oct. 27th, 2026

Opposition Motion—Appearance of the Prime Minister before the Standing Committee on Finance

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting to listen to the Conservatives talk about fiscal responsibility when Canada is tied with Germany in the G7 with a AAA credit rating.

Exactly what would the Conservatives cut? Do they support, for example, the $5 billion in additional money for the Canadian Forces? Do they support the tax cut that was given to Canadians? Do they support the programs that are providing support on affordability, like feeding children in our schools or the groceries benefit program? Do the Conservatives want to support the programs that are helping Canadians?

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague loves to talk about our amazing credit rating, but Canada is already spending more as a share of our economy than the G20 median, and the OECD tells us government spending has increased significantly since before the pandemic. Even Russia, which is in the middle of a war with Ukraine, is spending less than us.

Meanwhile, the Parliamentary Budget Officer is projecting continuing federal deficits and rising debt interest costs. Canadians deserve to hear whether the Prime Minister has a credible plan to bring federal borrowing under control.

[Marianne Dandurand, Liberal, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by saying that I will be sharing my time with the member for Québec Centre.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to rise today to speak to a subject that we all agree on, the importance of improving the cost of living for Canadians. We all hear about this. I think that members on both sides of the House agree that the cost of living is a very important issue for Canadians. It is an issue that I hear about in my riding, as do my colleagues. What we do not agree on is how to go about improving the cost of living. Our government is taking action to to improve the cost of living and to make life more affordable for people in our communities.

I want to talk about some of the measures that we have put in place to help people in my riding and across Canada. It must be said that we are going through a very difficult time because of the highly unstable global geopolitical climate. This has been going on for several years now. Yes, we need to take action, but all of these tensions have consequences. That is what we, in the government, are working on. In the long and medium terms, we need to improve our fiscal situation and our trade so that we are in a more comfortable position. In the short term, we are proposing measures that will provide immediate support for Canadians, measures that will give them some relief. We do not want to make these permanent expenditures. What we need to do is strengthen our economy. That is what we are working on.

The government's response to the current cost of living crisis is to expand opportunities for businesses through federal procurement and to help them take advantage of those opportunities. Major projects that will spur economic growth are a good example. We are going to buy Canadian and build Canadian. We want Canadian businesses to prosper here at home, and it is working. Many Canadian companies are winning contracts. At the same time, we need to diversify our markets. We are overly reliant on a single trading partner. As we often say, when our neighbour to the south sneezes, Canada catches a cold. We cannot continue like that. We need to diversify our markets.

A tremendous amount of work has already been done over the past year. More than 20 new agreements have been signed with new partners. That will create significant wealth here at home. When we create wealth, it means our businesses are thriving, paying taxes, and providing good-paying jobs for Canadians. As a result, we are creating the right conditions for a stronger, more resilient and more prosperous economy.

Another aspect I want to talk about is fiscal responsibility. One of the things our government is working on is creating additional fiscal room within government. This fiscal room allows us to invest in businesses and streamline certain government operations. Very recently, we announced that we are going to cut red tape in a wide range of areas within government. Our businesses welcome those changes because they make it easier to do business. They are also very cost-effective because they allow us to achieve the same results with fewer resources. That is one of the solutions we are putting in place.

The results we are achieving is a country where the net debt-to-GDP ratio is the lowest of any G7 nation. That bears repeating, because it is a game-changer. It inspires trust in people who want to invest in Canada. It reassures them that they can keep investing and that we are heading in the right direction. Our public finances are on a solid footing, and we are on a path to long-term sustainability.

Budget 2025, tabled almost a year ago to the day, set us on a very positive course. We have made other federal investments to stimulate private investment and strengthen the economy. That is what we have been able to achieve.

At the same time, we reduced operating costs. The money that we freed up is allowing us to invest even more.

Over the next five years, we expect to save $60 billion through operating cost reductions. Sixty billion dollars in operating expenditures saved over five years makes all the difference in the government's ability to direct its resources toward far more productive long-term priorities, including investments.

That has required a great deal of adjustment. Some of that work is still ongoing, but those adjustments had not been made since the COVID-19 pandemic.. The government had to hire a lot of people to support the wide range of programs that were rolled out at the time. We are continuing that streamlining effort and reviewing public service staffing levels. Middle management is allowing us to move more quickly in some cases while also creating additional fiscal room..

This budgetary approach ensures that we carry out horizontal, targeted and ongoing reviews. As a result, it is constantly being updated. We are reducing expenditures on external management and consulting services while strengthening in-house capacity. We aim to balance budgetary and operating expenditures by the 2028-29 fiscal year and keep the deficit-to-GDP ratio on a downward path. We are already on track to achieve this.

This balance in expenditures, originally projected for the 2027-28 fiscal year, will now be achieved a full year ahead of schedule. That progress confirms that we are on the right track. By clearly distinguishing between day-to-day operating expenses and long-term investments, we are able to stay on a positive trajectory.

I would also like to highlight a number of measures that are in place and that directly support the people of my riding. In Compton—Stanstead, 14,000 families benefit from child and family benefits, receiving assistance to help cover expenses such as education, sports and other things. As a result, approximately 25,000 children receive support, and nearly $100 million is distributed in my constituency through the Canada child benefit.

We also created the Canadian dental care plan. Nearly 33,000 people in my riding are benefiting from this dental care benefit. People can now go to the dentist, which has a long-term impact on overall health, and that is extremely important.

Those are two examples with figures from my riding. We also doubled the GST and HST credit last summer, which became the Canada groceries and essentials benefit. We also increased it by 25%. That money is going into the pockets of the people who need it most. It gives them a little more money for all the essential items they may need.

That is why I said at the beginning of my speech that we are taking action not only in the medium and long term, but also in the shorter term, with measures like this one, to put more money in families' pockets now. Our fiscal framework allows us to choose these kinds of solutions and deliver benefits in regions like mine.

We have taken other steps aimed at reducing fuel-related costs as well. We know this is a significant expense. In rural areas like mine, people travel a lot. They need a car. We are working on that. We have programs for energy-efficient home renovations. In fact, the Prime Minister visited the Eastern Townships to discuss a heat pump program. We continue to make progress on the issue of housing costs by building more homes.

I believe that our government is putting in place the tools we need to help keep the cost of living for Canadians in check. We will continue to work toward that goal in the short, medium, and long term.

[Jim Belanger, Conservative, Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we all know that we are facing a cost of living crisis, and we acknowledge that.

That said, it seems to me that the government is taking money out of people's pockets and then putting some of it back through subsidies and other programs, all while the debt continues to grow.

Does the government intend to examine and address the root causes of the rising cost of living, rather than simply treating the symptoms?

[Marianne Dandurand, Liberal, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his very relevant question, and I will address its premise.

What we are doing is redistributing wealth, ensuring that everyone has an equal opportunity. Through taxes, we are taking more money from the pockets of those who have more financial flexibility and redistributing it. For me, it is a question of fairness and ensuring that all children, regardless of their background, can access the same kind of service. I believe this rebalancing is very important, and we will continue along this path.

We truly believe that everyone should have an equal opportunity.

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec Centre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for giving such a clear and accurate account of everything the government is doing to help families, but I think she forgot one thing. Perhaps I just missed it. I am thinking of the record investments in child care services for families and children in Quebec. The Canadian government allocated nearly $2 billion to the Quebec government to create the equivalent of 150,000 child care spaces in Quebec alone.

As a mother, as a woman, but also as someone who believes in fairness and in the importance of children achieving their full potential, what does my colleague think of that investment in child care in Quebec?

[Marianne Dandurand, Liberal, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Québec Centre for setting the record straight. Indeed, I had not mentioned that.

In fact, a wonderful child care centre in my riding is nearly complete and will soon open its doors in Sainte-Catherine-de-Hatley, in a truly beautiful setting. Significant federal funding is flowing to Quebec to support affordable child care services, and we are continuing along that path.

My colleague also gives me an opportunity to speak about Canada's national school food program. He knows that I have close ties to agriculture, and that is another area where we are making a difference.

I believe that each child deserves to attend school on a full stomach. Our program truly supports what has already been put in place in Quebec, helping provide meals to even more children.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we have been talking about investments versus spending. My colleague, the member for Mirabel, spoke about the government's creative accounting. I know that members listened closely to his remarks earlier.

I would like to know what my colleague thinks of an approach that makes government spending appear lower than it actually is.

As my colleague pointed out, even experts were unable to shed light on this accounting when the matter was studied in committee. I think what we are talking about here today is the government's massive spending, which has resulted in debt servicing costs now exceeding health transfers to Quebec and the provinces.

[Marianne Dandurand, Liberal, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for bringing us back to the speech by our colleague from Mirabel.

I always find the member for Mirabel very creative in his speeches. His references always make me smile, but we certainly do not always agree on certain matters, including the way we do accounting.

Quite frankly, what we have managed to do is separate operating expenditures from capital expenditures to get a clear picture of our operating costs, reduce them as much as possible and free up those funds to invest in productive initiatives that will strengthen the Canadian economy.

If that is what some call creativity, then I would call it very constructive creativity, because the results are positive.

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec Centre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, thank you for giving me an opportunity to say a few words about the motion. I think that most members of the House, if not all, are aware that we are living in a world that is changing quickly and in unpredictable ways. In the face of economic uncertainty and international trade tensions, Canada must focus on what it can control. That means strengthening our economy here at home, diversifying our trade relationships abroad and making strategic investments to build an even stronger, more independent and fairer economy for everyone.

The cornerstone of this approach is having a sound financial position. Indeed, a sound financial position gives us the means to act. It allows us to protect Canadians when circumstances require it. It also gives us the tools to respond to economic shocks and, more importantly, to invest in the future.

Canada is well positioned to weather this period of uncertainty. I am not alone in saying so. According to the latest projections from the International Monetary Fund, or IMF, Canada is expected to have the second-lowest deficit in the G7 this year as a share of its economy. The IMF also forecasts a continued decline in that deficit over the coming years. It is expected to fall from 2.5% of GDP in 2026 to 2.4% in 2027, before falling to 1.7% by 2031.

We also have the lowest net debt-to-GDP ratio of any G7 country. Canada is one of only two G7 countries, alongside Germany, to hold a AAA credit rating from all major credit rating agencies. This top-tier rating reflects the confidence that global investors have in Canada's public finances. It is a significant strength, helping to keep borrowing costs as low as possible while ensuring that we have the capacity to act.

Furthermore, we are the world's most connected economy, with free trade agreements covering countries that represent 1.5 billion consumers. We also offer the most competitive tax system in the G7 for new business investment.

Last month, Canada hosted the very first Canada investment summit. The goal was clear: to bring together some of the world's largest investors and show them what Canada has to offer. The summit laid the groundwork for substantial new investments and strategic partnerships, with nearly $500 billion in new funding and investment commitments in Canada.

It is important to attract investors to Canada, but that is not enough. We also need to create the conditions that make them want to invest here. That is why our government announced the new productivity mega deduction. We made that announcement recently, at the investment summit in fact. The productivity mega deduction is a major tax investment. This measure makes Canada the most competitive G7 country for new business investment. It provides businesses with immediate expensing for a broad-based range of depreciable property on a permanent basis. It increases the proportion of assets eligible for immediate expensing from about 15% to over 65%. It will support Canadian businesses of all sizes, small, medium and large, by encouraging them to invest more in their workforce, thereby stimulating long-term growth in Canada.

Canada has a financial advantage, and we are determined to protect it. Budget 2025 also marked a shift in the government's strategy for managing public finances. As the Prime Minister announced recently, the government is on track to balance operating expenditures and revenues in 2027-28, one year earlier than expected.

By reducing the government's operating expenditures, we can invest more in the assets and infrastructure that strengthen our economy. In other words, we are devoting fewer resources to the day-to-day operations of government, but allocating more on building Canada's economic capacity for decades to come. We must protect that capacity, which is why the government has set clear objectives to guide its budget decisions.

First, we must balance operating expenditures with revenues. Second, we must keep the deficit on a downward track relative to the size of our economy. That is how we will preserve Canada's fiscal advantage in the years ahead.

In closing, we have one of the strongest fiscal positions in the G7, the lowest net debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7 and a AAA credit rating. Our responsibility is twofold: to preserve those strengths and put them to work in support of growth and prosperity for Canadians. That means investing in infrastructure and major projects that strengthen our economy. That means attracting more private capital to Canada and encouraging investment. That means giving our businesses the means to invest and grow. That means diversifying our international trade and helping our businesses access new markets. That means maintaining careful management of our public finances.

That is exactly what we are doing and what we will continue to do.

[Ned Kuruc, Conservative, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to my colleague's 10-minute speech on all the benefits the Liberals believe are going on. What would be the problem with the Prime Minister's coming to committee and explaining some of those himself?

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec Centre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to hear that the member listened to my attempt to briefly describe what we are doing for Canadians. He has had lots of opportunities, including with his leader, to ask questions to the Prime Minister and his ministers, who are always willing and able to come to committee.

What matters even more is that we work together to sustain and support those investments that I highlighted in my short speech.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there is indeed a significant deficit. We agree. At the same time, the government has forgone revenue by waiving the digital services tax for U.S. tech giants that threaten our culture and our media. They did that to appease Mr. Trump, but they gained absolutely nothing in the tariff war.

What are my colleague's thoughts on that?

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec Centre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I commend my colleague for his steadfast commitment to culture in Quebec and across Canada. He is absolutely right to underscore the importance of continued federal support for our artists, artisans and media organizations, including in my own constituency, which has a very rich cultural and artistic scene.

I would encourage him to take note of the record investments included in the 2025 budget and of the government's ongoing commitment to supporting our artists and artisans.

[Marianne Dandurand, Liberal, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the speech by my colleague from Québec Centre, who is always very eloquent. I really appreciate what he said about businesses.

I know my colleague works very hard for families. I would even go so far as to say that he was one of the architects of the Canadian dental care plan. He always talks about it with so much pride. I think we should be the ones thanking him on behalf of families. I would like to extend my heartfelt thanks to him on behalf of the families in my riding for putting this exceptional program in place.

I wonder if he could talk a little more about the importance of the Canadian dental care plan for families like the ones in Compton—Stanstead and Québec Centre.

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec Centre, QC]

I thank my colleague, whose generosity, kindness and insight are always on full display, for raising the Canadian dental care plan.

The reason it is not talked about that much is that it is doing so well. Contrary to the expectations of some members on the other side of the House, roughly 98% of dentists are now participating in the plan. When we meet with dentists, as my colleague does all the time, they tell us that they see the importance of oral health every day for the thousands of people who would not otherwise come to see them. These people could suffer from infections or other oral health problems that could spread throughout their body and send them to the emergency room or a family doctor who could do nothing for them.

Thousands of people, not just seniors, but also young people, do not have access to dental insurance and cannot afford oral health care either. They are people we must continue to support. We must also continue our efforts to reach them and ensure they are aware of the assistance available to them.

[Jim Belanger, Conservative, Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt, ON]

Mr. Speaker, government spending is driving up the cost of living, and the national debt continues to rise. That debt will cost families an extra $6,000 in interest alone.

How serious should the government be about tackling that debt?

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec Centre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I believe, as he suggests, that we do need to ensure sound management of public finances. I also believe that we need to take care of people.

I know the member across the way is relatively new here, so I would like to welcome him to the House, if somewhat belatedly.

He may have heard his leader describe the support provided by breakfast clubs in his own riding as “bureaucratic” or suggest that feeding children is bureaucracy. I would like to know whether the member agrees with him.

His leader also said that investing in child care is wasteful.

Why is it wasteful? I have never understood why, but I would like to know. I would also like to know whether the member agrees with his leader's position that investing in affordable, high-quality child care is a waste of money.

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the Leader of the Opposition.

I want to set the scene. It is Friday night in a kitchen somewhere in this country. The kids are asleep. A mother sits alone at a table, with a paycheque in one hand and a stack of bills in the other. She lays them out side by side, and she adds them up once. Then she adds them up again, and then a third time. On the third time, the paycheque wins. That kitchen table is in every single riding in this country. No matter who we are or where we come from, we have heard the stories from our own communities.

Every morning before the sun comes up, millions of Canadians lace up their boots, kiss their kids goodbye and head out the door to earn that paycheque. It is an overtime shift, a night course, years of training and a sore back at the end of the day. For generations, it meant something simple: If a Canadian worked hard, they could build a better life for their children. For too many families, that promise is very broken in this country. We come here every week with those stories that families tell in our communities. That is what I am going to talk about here today.

A recent C.D. Howe Institute report found that 60% of Canadian households now spend more than they bring in. The lowest-income families spend more than double their disposable income, the next group overspends by nearly a third, and the middle-class families in this country, the backbone of what creates our economy, are spending 12% more than they make every single month. For a family with $60,000 in take-home pay, that means it is $7,200 short every single year.

Behind those numbers are actual people and their stories. It is the mother at the grocery checkout putting raspberries back because the total came up to more than she expected. It is the dad picking up a second job and missing his son's games. It is the parent who tells their kids they are not hungry tonight, just so there is enough food on the table. It is the conversation no parent wants to have: “Not this year, sweetheart. Maybe next year.” It is the young couple that wanted to start a family but keeps pushing it back. It is a senior who has worked her whole life but now has to decide between prescriptions and filling the fridge. It is the parent lying awake at two o'clock in the morning doing the math over and over again in their head, hoping it comes out different.

These families are not irresponsible. Nobody puts groceries on a credit card for fun. Nobody takes a payday loan to keep the lights on because they like the interest rates. Nobody drains a retirement fund they have been saving for 20 years for the thrill of it. They do it because they have no choice. What does the government tell them? Well, the Prime Minister specifically says that affordability is the best it has been in a decade.

How did we get here? Part of the answer is across the aisle. It has been the same people sitting in the same chairs and saying the exact same thing over the last 11 years. The Liberal government has doubled the national debt in that time, adding more debt than all previous governments in Canadian history before it, all of them combined. When Ottawa borrows and spends without restraint, the families I spoke about are the ones paying the bill. They pay it again and again, because debt is not free. It comes with interest.

According to the PBO, who was hired by the Liberal government, Ottawa will pay $59 billion in interest on debt this year. That is more than $1 billion every single week. It is more than double what it was five years ago. It is now the fastest-growing expense line in the entire federal budget. Nobody can dispute those facts. Every Canadian has a share in that interest. It is $1,400 a year for every individual, and for a family of four, that is roughly $6,000. By 2030, the PBO projects that it will be $1,900 for every person, which is nearly $8,000 for that same family.

That money is enough for a hockey season that a kid did not get. It is a modest camping vacation they keep putting off till next summer. It is a birthday party that is scaled down to cake at the kitchen table because times are tough. Those are the real stories and those are the real impacts of $6,000 a year for a family going to $8,000 a year because of reckless spending.

What does the family get for that? The Liberals will stand up today in the House and ask them if they like this or that program, but the fact is they get nothing for the interest they pay on it. They do not get a single hospital bed. They do not get one classroom. They do not get a kilometre of highway. They do not get anything for their military with the interest on that debt. All of that money goes directly to bankers and bondholders, not to the families that are struggling, the mom who put the raspberries back on the shelf, the dad who took on a second shift and will miss his kid's hockey game, or the senior who just cannot decide what to do next. That money goes straight to bankers and bondholders.

The bills keep growing. Every Canadian share of that federal debt is now over $33,000. For a family of four, that is more than $130,000. It is a second mortgage they never asked for. It is a second mortgage they will one day hand to their children. Here is the cruellest part of it: Parents in this country are working themselves to the bone so their kids can have a better life, and the government is sending these same kids the bill.

Today, the question is very simple. How does the Prime Minister expect these families to pay that bill? How does he expect them to pay $6,000 more a year or $8,000 more a year? I know there are a lot of people, including him, who do not worry about $6,000 or $8,000, but there are a heck of a lot of families in this country who absolutely do, and they are asking questions. Canadian families are all doing their part. They get up, and they go to work. They stretch every dollar until it squeaks. They sacrifice every single day without complaint. When the money runs out, they sit down at the kitchen table and they face those numbers honestly. Then, they go over and over it again in their heads, trying to make the math work out differently. The Prime Minister should be willing to do the exact same thing.

This is why this motion calls on the Prime Minister to appear before the Standing Committee on Finance. It is very simple. It calls for him to not send a minister and not send a list of talking points, but to come himself to the table and answer the questions every single family in this country is asking: How is a mother with a stack of bills supposed to cover $60 billion in interest? How is a young couple supposed to start a family with a $130,000 share of debt hanging over them? How much more does he plan to put on the Liberal credit card before it all comes due?

Every family, every person and everybody in the House, at one point in their lives, had to explain their budget to someone, to a bank, to a landlord, sometimes their own kids. The Prime Minister should be able to explain that to every single Canadian taxpayer, and he should be able to do that at a table without getting up in the House and telling those same families that affordability is the best it has ever been and that they have never had it better.

I urge every single member of the government to vote for this motion, to vote for accountability. They have asked for the trust of the public, and they owe something in that trust relationship. The public is asking questions about how it is going to pay its fair share of that debt, and the Prime Minister ought to come to committee and answer those questions. It is not a difficult motion, and I hope members vote yes.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, back in 2010, I campaigned in a by-election. I can recall an instance in a German-Canadian Congress building, located on Mountain and Arlington, where a senior told me they did not even have the ability to purchase food because of the cost of medications.

There is absolutely no doubt that the government and the Prime Minister have been issued a mandate and are very much concerned about the issue of affordability. All one needs to do is take a look at what the government's actions have been, whether it is providing support for dental care, providing food for children in schools or introducing the Canada grocery program. These are programs dealing with affordability, both directly and indirectly, and the Conservative Party continues to vote against them. There is—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

The hon. member for Thornhill.

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the member just listed a grand list of failures. Everything the government has put forward in a program has failed Canadians because there are more Canadians eating food from a food bank than there were before the government started its food program.

Everything is getting worse under the government, and all of those programs are a drop in the bucket compared to what those families are paying for interest, which is $6,000 now and will be $8,000 in 2030. They have questions. Is it worth it?

The Prime Minister should answer those questions instead of colleagues just hearing talking points from his House leader.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, a great deal of money is going toward servicing the debt right now.

Does my colleague agree that we should take some of that money and send it to the provinces to increase health transfers?

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite can absolutely ask that question of the Prime Minister when he comes to committee.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie South—Innisfil, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this motion ultimately comes down to the fundamental principles of accountability, transparency and oversight. I am wondering what the member's comments would be about the fact that the government is introducing a budget on November 5, a Thursday afternoon.

Now, I have been here for 11 years, and I do not think I have ever seen a budget introduced on a Thursday afternoon. It leaves Friday for question period and then members will be, over the next week, in their ridings for the week of Remembrance Day. That really speaks to the issues of accountability, transparency and oversight. It proves that the government does not want any questions on this budget.

I would suggest that it is going to be a really bad budget and that is why the government does not want to do it. I wonder what her comments are on that.