Madam Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to speak in favour of this motion tonight, a motion that was brought forward by my hon. friend and colleague from Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca.
Members of this House will remember our debates on Bill C-11 and Bill C-32 when we warned the government of the serious health consequences and the human suffering this tax reduction on cigarettes would cost. This motion would correct the government's major mistake and would restore that tax on tobacco to the level existing as of January 1 of this year.
Our concerns about the government's tax reduction on cigarettes were confirmed when the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health appeared before the Standing Committee on Finance on June 7 and advised that the government's goal was "to reduce the demand for tobacco, the number one cause of preventable death in Canada". She went on to say: "The government fully recognized that the action plan to combat smuggling and the tax measures associated with it would pose health risks". That is from a government member, despite what I hear from across the floor today.
It is inconceivable to me and most Reformers how government can rationalize its goal of preventing death with its actions which will increase smoking and cause many hundreds of deaths.
This government does not seem to have the courage or the intestinal fortitude to do what is right. We were opposed to the tax reduction on cigarettes and tobacco products because it will increase smoking and that cannot be denied, particularly among young people. As a result it will increase health costs.
Reformers find it amazing that the government caved in to the criminal element of society so quickly. It sends the wrong signal to those who would break the law. In effect the Liberal government said: "If you defy the law we will change the law rather than enforce it".
Reformers find it hard to believe that the government did not take a more reasonable approach and impose an effective export tax and increase enforcement in the areas where the majority of smuggling was occurring.
Even the commissioner of the RCMP confirmed in February that 70 per cent of the contraband tobacco was coming through the three Mohawk reserves between Cornwall and Montreal. Therefore all this we hear about big borders is simply a smoke-screen. If that was where the problem was, why not have the courage to enforce the laws of Canada? What are we doing now when the criminal element redirects its smuggling activities to alcohol, drugs and guns? Are we going to simply change the law on that as well? One bad decision leads to more problems and not solutions. The government has not solved a thing by what it has done.
The main point I would like to make today is in regard to the government's disregard for the health of the Canadian people, particularly young people. When the government first introduced its national action campaign to combat smuggling in February, we asked the government to tell us what the increased health costs would be. How many people will start smoking as a result of the tax reduction? How many Canadians will become addicted? How many people will get lung cancer and emphysema, heart disease and strokes? How many people will suffer or
die as a result of the government's tax reduction? How much will it cost the Canadian taxpayer? The government implemented Bill C-32 despite not having the answers to these very important questions.
While the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health has made it clear that the tax reduction would pose increased health risks, these risks, the costs and the implications for government and the human suffering have not been quantified. Months have gone by with no action by the Liberals.
The Canadian Cancer Society asked the Standing Committee on Finance to complete a thorough evaluation of the health costs and implications of smoking in Canada because such an evaluation has not been done since 1986. Reformers find this appalling.
During debate on Bill C-32 the members of the finance committee listened politely to witness after witness warning them of the serious health consequences. The committee ignored the dozens of excellent recommendations and passed the clause by clause study of Bill C-32 in less than 15 seconds. The clause by clause review of a 62 page bill was done in less than 15 seconds. This is democracy? Is it any wonder that Reformers are pushing for a triple E Senate where we can give some serious and thoughtful sober second thought to the reasoned amendments that we proposed and debated very intelligently?
What will the increased health costs be? The Canadian Cancer Society provided the Standing Committee on Finance with some of the estimates prepared by Professor Robert Allen from the department of economics at Harvard University.
Using Professor Allen's most conservative estimates, he predicted that national cigarette consumption would rise by 14 per cent among adults and 35 per cent among young people. Now we find those estimates were very conservative. Actual increases have been 41 per cent, as has been mentioned by my colleague. The tax reduction implemented by the Liberals will increase the total number of tobacco users in Canada by 840,000. Of this number 175,000 would be teenagers. At this rate Professor Allen predicted health costs would rise in the long term by $1.33 billion per year. That was the most conservative estimate.
Every piece of literature that comes out on this shows there is an increase. How can the government close its eyes and be blind to what is happening? These are Professor Allen's most conservative estimates, as I have said. It could be even higher. It could be as high as 1.89 million new smokers and of these 245,000 would be young people. That would mean $3 billion in increased health care costs, $3 billion, three thousand millions.
Still the government fails to even tell Canadians what the impact will be. It refuses to even conduct its own evaluation of health costs and implications, ignoring the health of Canadians. Liberals love to do studies; they love to have commissions. They like to have all of these consultants tell them things, but when it comes to this issue they close their ears.
During our debate on Bill C-32 we asked the government for a timetable showing when tobacco taxes will start to go up again. None was given. The government acknowledged the dramatic effect that high taxes have on tobacco consumption. It acknowledged that the health promotion surtax will end in three years, but it still has not told Canadians what it plans to do at the end of three years.
During the previous debate we asked the government to make a commitment to raise prices to their level prior to February 8, 1994 at the end of the three years when the health promotion surtax is renewed. Reformers proposed such an amendment, but we were told that only the minister could make such an amendment. The minister chose to ignore this reasonable proposal.
If the government will not support my hon. friend's motion, Reformers respectfully request that the minister introduce a new bill clearly telling Canadians when tobacco taxes will be increased. For the sake of the health of all Canadians, for the sake of all those young people who will take up smoking as a direct result of government's actions, will the government tell Canadians today this is not a permanent tax reduction? Will the government tell Canadians that their health is of more concern to it than the interests of a few smugglers in the tobacco industry?
Government ministers are always accusing us of never telling them what to do. They yell and they shout at us like we do not have a plan, but our blue book has been around a lot longer than their red book.
