Michel Gauthier

[The Deficit, March 12th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I must say it is not easy to take aim at the government in this situation. In fact, they pulled a fast one on me.

Nevertheless, I will have to attack the Minister of Finance again today. Three weeks ago, the Minister of Finance made a budget speech in which his estimate of a $19 billion deficit seemed rather high, considering the real figures he had at the time, figures which we now have and which will probably put the deficit at around $10 or $12 million at the most. In fact, he was quite content to give us a forecast that was twice as high, a forecast that was off by 40 or50 per cent.

My question is for the Prime Minister. In the private sector, and we often refer to the private sector, what would they do with an accountant who, three weeks before the end of the financial year, was out 50 per cent in his forecast? He would be fired. I want to ask the Prime Minister what he intends to do with his Minister of Finance who is incapable of forecasting a deficit more or less accurately?

[The Deficit, March 11th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, with a miscalculation of about $12 billion in his estimates, the Minister of Finance should not have cut $4.5 billion from the provinces and $5 billion from the unemployed.

Are we to understand that what the Minister of Finance is about to do, with this incredible security of some $12 billion, is sprinkle a few billion dollars here and a few billion there across Canada during the next election campaign, to curry favour with the electorate?

[The Deficit, March 11th, 1997]

I want to ask him, why, with this kind of flexibility, did he do nothing for the poor and the unemployed who are legion in Canada, instead of the measly measures listed in his latest budget?

[The Deficit, March 11th, 1997]

-being a reasonable man. And I know his answer does not hold water.

[The Deficit, March 11th, 1997]

He knows this does not make sense-

[The Deficit, March 11th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the government would have to produce a deficit of $12 billion in two months to get the extraordinary figures the Minister of Finance gave us three weeks ago.

[The Deficit, March 11th, 1997]

Today, after ten months, the cumulative deficit is reported to be $7.3 billion, which could mean a real deficit of 10 or 12 billion in 1996-97 instead of the $19 billion he announced three weeks ago.

My question is directed to the Minister of Finance. Either the minister was aware that he had this kind of flexibility and hid this from the public, or he did not know because he had no way of telling this would happen. Is the Minister of Finance sneaky or incompetent?

[The Deficit, March 11th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance forecast a deficit of $24 billion for 1996-97. Three weeks ago, in his latest budget, his forecast were adjusted downward to $19 billion.

[Job Creation, March 10th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance made a number of appalling statements that deserve some comments at the very least.

He said that I could always find figures to suit my purposes. We know he specializes in finding figures to suit him over the short term, to try and justify the government's poor performance. He also said that figures were volatile. Well, I would say it is not the figures but the jobs that are volatile.

What justification does he have for the fact that, always according to Statistics Canada, between February 1996 and February 1997, young Canadians lost 64,000 jobs?

[Job Creation, March 10th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, 14 per cent unemployment based on the 1989 participation rate is hardly something for the Minister of Finance to be proud of. The government has certainly nothing to be proud of. And if it does not mean a thing to the Minister of Finance, it has a particularly cruel meaning for the families of those who are looking for work.

The Minister of Finance bragged about creating full-time jobs. How can he brag about full-time jobs when, according to Statistics Canada, 40 per cent of the new jobs created in the last 12 months are part-time jobs?