Madam Speaker, the famous and long-awaited federal budget was tabled Monday.
This budget is characterized by two things: timing and electoral opportunism. As a consequence, there is nothing for the unemployed. The municipalities will have to wait for the election goodies. There is almost nothing for social housing, and Quebec will have a $4.3 billion shortfall in transfers for social programs.
And the list goes on and on: nothing for regional development; next to nothing for rural communities, and my friend Jacques Proulx of Solidarité rurale was profoundly disappointed by this; and agriculture was, once again, completely forgotten.
Indeed, the president of the UPA, Laurent Pellerin, did not hide his disappointment. His remarks reflected perfectly well the opinion of farmers in my riding and throughout Quebec when he said “With its surpluses, the federal government could have reinvested in our farming industry, support for which has dropped by half over the last eight years. The UPA is asking that the federal government take long term restructuring measures to ensure that Quebec's farming industry can remain competitive globally”.
I would like to draw attention to the following statistics: OECD figures show that the EU and the United States are supporting their industry to the tune of $381 and $363 per capita, respectively, as compared to only $140 in Canada.
Let us talk about EI now. With the current surpluses, the federal government could have helped the unemployed. There is nothing in the budget on that. The government wants to reduce the premiums by the year 2004, again trying to misappropriate funds at the expense of the middle class and to exclude 60% of the unemployed from the plan.
In my riding of Lotbinière, there are still two regional rates. The gap between the RCM of L'Érable and that of Lotbinière is continuing to grow by 5%. And the workers living the RCM of Lotbinière are hard hit. As usual, the federal government is doing nothing while the people are getting poorer because of this unfair system.
Let us now have a look at the regional development that was supposed to result from the restoration of the Infrastructure Works Program for municipalities. Guess what? We are going to have to wait until the year 2001. Wait for what? For a meagre $100 million, $25 million of which will go to Quebec. As for the rest, the amounts budgeted will increase only in the years 2002 and 2003. This opportunistic decision essentially motivated by electoral considerations will penalize our regions.
My colleague just spoke at length about the health care issue. I will mention other statistics which, I hope, will help the Liberal MPs see the light.
Only $2.5 billion in additional funding will be given over four years. Consequently, with the reform announced in 1999, which now bases the transfers to the provinces on geographical considerations rather than on real costs, in 1994, the federal per capita contribution for health care and education amounted to $1,100. It will be $1,026 for this year, and $1,038 for the next two years. What an increase! And the MPs from Quebec have the nerve to say that the government is increasing the transfers.
They are laughing at the sick, the young and the poor. They are showing lack of respect for the people of Quebec.
I would now like to tell you about what I call the “greening” of the finance minister. Listen to the political and partisan announcements made this week: a sustainable development technological support fund, a Canadian foundation for climatic and atmospheric sciences, a green municipal investment fund and so on, $15 million for the decontamination of the Great Lakes, but not a single penny for the St. Lawrence River. Again, Ontario is favoured over Quebec.
Let us talk about tax relief. Tuesday morning, the daily Le Soleil ran the headline “Taxpayers, be Patient”.
I have here numbers that show how ridiculously small the federal tax relief is. A single person earning $30,000 will get a big relief of $64 in 2000 and a tidy $128 in 2001. A family of four earning $40,000 will get $291 in 2000 and $582 in 2001.
The needs are a lot bigger than that and the government had the leeway to make a real budget that would have given taxpayers a break and given more time to boost the economy.
Here are more numbers. Two adults and two children with two incomes totalling $50,000 will be entitled to a reduction of $172 in 2000 and $343 in 2001; where the two incomes total $60,000, the reduction will be $251 in 2000, and $501 in 2001.
How can you expect us to take this government seriously when the majority of newspapers announced on their front pages big news items like lower taxes, family benefits and so on? This is the trademark of federal Liberals. The day after the budget, we read the press releases; journalists publish what they have heard, but when we take a closer look at the budget, it is over. We do not hear anything about it any more.
This budget is so interesting that opposition members do not even rise in the House to ask questions. As far as we are concerned, the Minister of Finance missed the boat. He tried once again, through all sorts of schemes, to show that he is a good finance minister. But, when you think of it, there is nothing for the 1999 tax return. There is hardly anything for 2000, and we know what to expect for 2001. We know that an election campaign is looming on the horizon.
These people are very partisan and they often take advantage of elections. I do not have to remind my colleagues of all we have been hearing recently about the Department of Human Resources Development. There are many reasons to condemn this government.
I will conclude by discussing the situation of social housing. This is an issue that upsets me even more. We are lagging behind. We were expecting $1.7 billion from the federal government this year. This would have meant about $380 million for Quebec. Imagine, we got a measly $58 million. This morning, newspapers all over Quebec were denouncing this lack of funding, because it does not meet current needs in any real way.
As the critic for regional development, I have to say this is a very important issue. We need social housing. There is a lot of catching up to do.
As I said at the beginning of my speech, the federal government is waiting. While it is waiting, it is engaged in political and electoral opportunism. In the meantime, who is suffering? The unemployed, the students, and the sick are.
I conclude by repeating that this budget is a typical pre-election budget, which means there is nothing for the unemployed, no significant tax relief this year, a pittance for social housing and, finally, a categorical refusal by this government to make the necessary payments to ensure adequate health care in Quebec.
