Jim Peterson

[The Economy, June 9th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I am really pleased that the hon. member has given me a chance to talk about their flat tax.

Let us hear from others: “The Liberals will tear this flat tax apart, telling everyone it is just a tax break for the rich, and it is”. That was Jim Silye, former Reform MP.

“In principle the single tax rate is a bad idea. It is a wise and long established principle that someone lucky enough to reach the $100,000 mark of income should pay a few more pennies of that dollar in tax than the person who only manages to reach $35,000”. That is from the Edmonton Journal .

[Gasoline Prices, June 9th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, the provinces now have the power to regulate the price of gasoline. That is within provincial jurisdiction. We believe that is where the legislative competence lies.

[Health, June 9th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, let us just look at the numbers.

The CHST is $31 billion. If we go back to the old formula of 54% of that going for health, that is about $17 billion. In addition the federal government spends another $3 billion itself on health care, which brings our expenditure up to $20 billion out of the $64 billion which is spent every year by governments on health care in Canada.

That is—

[Health, June 9th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, let us look at the breakdown of how our transfers apply. When we include the tax points, which the provinces have not said they want to give back to us, we are funding fully 31% of all publicly provided health care in Canada.

[Health, June 9th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, let us look at our transfers to the provinces: over $30 billion in terms of the CHST and the tax points that go with it; and ,in addition, we have about $10 billion in equalization payments that go to the provinces and that can be dedicated to health care.

Our transfers for health care to the provinces are at an all time high. We have said that we will increase them when we can get an agreement to protect the Canada Health Act. That is our commitment to health care.

[Health, June 9th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, the fact is that the transfers to the provinces today are at an all time high. That means we have put our money where our mouth is.

We believe that health care is a priority. We have also said that we want to sit down with the provinces and work out an agreement on the fundamental nature of how to protect the Canada Health Act. Our money will be there in addition to what we have already done.

[Income Tax Conventions Implementation Act, 1999, June 8th, 2000]

moved that the bill be read the third time and passed.

[National Defence Act, June 8th, 2000]

moved that the bill be read a third time and passed.

[Supply, June 8th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the hon. member for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, who has done so much for her electors, within the Liberal caucus or in parliament, and who has great visions for all Canadians, including Quebecers.

Could the hon. member tell us more about the programs we have created for all Canadians and make a comparison between the efforts of the Canadian government, those of the Quebec government and of Ontario government, which has spent so much money to promote very partisan issues which are not beneficial to all Canadians?

[Ways And Means, June 5th, 2000]

Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 83(1), I wish to table a notice of ways and means motion respecting amendments to the Income Tax Act, the income tax application rules, and certain acts relating to the Income Tax Act.

These measures implement the brilliant budget policies of our finance minister and the government. I ask that an order of the day be designated for the consideration of this motion.