Yvan Loubier

[Youth Criminal Justice Act, September 25th, 2000]

moved:

Motion No. 53

That Bill C-3, in Clause 2, be amended by replacing lines 2 and 3 on page 5 with the following:

“than eighteen years old and includes any person who is”

[Youth Criminal Justice Act, September 25th, 2000]

moved:

Motion No. 40

That Bill C-3, in Clause 2, be amended by deleting lines 21 to 26 on page 4.

[Youth Criminal Justice Act, September 25th, 2000]

moved:

Motion No. 33

That Bill C-3, in Clause 2, be amended by deleting lines 19 to 26 on page 3.

[Youth Criminal Justice Act, September 25th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, regarding the remarks made by my colleague from Berthier—Montcalm and in response to what you told him, I went to get the seven copies of the bill that were at the center of the table, I distributed them, and we are still missing three copies. Would it be possible to get at least three more copies and maybe more if other members of the House want some?

[Youth Criminal Justice Act, September 25th, 2000]

moved:

Motion No. 17

That Bill C-3, in Clause 2, be amended by deleting lines 7 to 11 on page 2.

[Budget Surpluses, September 21st, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, in four years. What he did not say is that he has not made the people earning $250,000 and up wait; they have had a $2,000 tax saving for the past two years.

What answer does the Minister of Finance have to give a family that is having trouble making ends meet, one that is becoming poorer because of the federal tax and the minister's sneaky little tricks aimed at winning votes? Is he saying they have to wait four years? Is he asking this family to tell their grocery store to wait four years before it will see any money, to just put it on their tab? Is that what he means?

[Budget Surpluses, September 21st, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Minister of Finance made the following statement:

Following our last budget, a family with two children and an income of $30,000 will not pay any net federal income tax.

The minister just happened to neglect to point out that this was forgoing to be four years down the road.

With $12 billion in surplus last year, and $11 billion the first four months of this year, will the minister not agree that, if one's heart were in the right place, the time to act is right away, not in four years? Why does the Minister of Finance not reduce taxes immediately for those with low and middle incomes? They have been waiting for this for seven years.

[Budget Surplus, September 20th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, all the figures given here are from the minister's own department.

Does the minister realize that, because of his incompetence, because of his crass electioneering strategy, about five million taxpayers who should not have paid taxes last year did pay taxes, namely those earning less than $30,000? Does the minister realize that?

[Budget Surplus, September 20th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance is telling us today that, a few months ago, he miscalculated budget surpluses by 300% and that he had an additional surplus of $9 billion last year, money that comes from excess taxes paid by taxpayers.

Does the minister know that a family with two children starts paying federal tax at $14,948 and that with these surpluses, which the minister knew about, he could have alleviated, as early as last year, the burden of low income families and all those earning less than $30,000? Does the minister know that?

[Budget Surpluses, September 19th, 2000]

Will the minister admit that this deliberate error in his forecasts has had major social consequences and that it is the sick and the unemployed who always end up paying for his incompetence?