House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2015, with 67% of the vote.
Minister Of Finance May 30th, 2001
That is a good one, Mr. Speaker. We all know what the finance minister was doing in Hamilton: schmoozing with future Liberal delegates.
What is the Prime Minister doing to get under control not just the finance minister but his leadership rivals who are criss-crossing the country at departmental taxpayer expense for partisan activities? Will he put an end to this practice and ask the finance minister to pay for his leadership campaign out of his leadership funds?
Minister Of Finance May 30th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance, who is a Quebec member of parliament, attended a partisan meeting of the Ontario wing of the Liberal Party, with two assistants.
We learned that the cost of this trip done for partisan purposes was paid by the Department of Finance, and therefore by Canadian taxpayers.
Since the Minister of Finance is the one who manages public funds, will he do the honourable thing and pay back his department for his own partisan expenses?
Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth Ii May 28th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, a man charged with diplomacy, has recently been anything but diplomatic. He has made offensive remarks about Canada's head of state. I refer to his recent remark that “the Queen does not represent Canada; she represents Great Britain”. That is wrong. Queen Elizabeth is the Queen of Canada and as a minister of her crown he ought to know that.
The monarchy is a fundamental aspect of our distinctiveness as a nation. The crown defines a distinct Canadian identity contrary to that of the republic to the south. An elected president, and perhaps that is what the minister aspires to be, would owe his or her election to a political faction.
The minister seems to prefer republican partisanship over our longstanding historic institutions. Perhaps he ought to listen to the Prime Minister who said “The monarchy is not a problem in Canada. It is not an issue at all”.
It is insulting for the minister to suggest that the Queen cannot truly represent us. Fifty years of public service given freely sets a standard of service that all Canadians should attempt to emulate and not attack.
The Economy May 17th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, the finance minister does not understand that it is possible to control spending instead of going back to the levels of spending set by the Prime Minister when he was finance minister which drove the country into deficit.
Many senior economists have said that we are headed for a planning deficit within four years. The finance minister has not given us an adequate response. Will he guarantee to the House today that we will not end up with a planning deficit that eats into our emergency surpluses, our emergency reserves? Will he give us a commitment now that we will not go back into deficit at any point by eating into the emergency reserves?
The Economy May 17th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, this is the finance minister who has presided over the incredible shrinking surplus from $20 billion to $15 billion because of $5 billion in over budget spending. This finance minister has overspent by $15 billion in the past four years and will continue overspending if he does not take control of the demands around the cabinet table.
Will he not admit that every additional dollar in new spending is a dollar taken away from working families for tax relief and from our economic future in terms of debt repayment? Why will he not get his priorities right?
Taxation May 16th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, I am getting it from Canadian taxpayers who have not noticed a dime in tax relief.
Today one of the leading private sector economists in the country, Dale Orr of WEFA, said that that small tax cuts promised by the government “would probably be too late to help the current weak economy”.
Surely the finance minister recognizes that given the current economic downturn we need some serious fiscal stimulus right now to protect Canadian jobs. Why will he not listen to these economists? Why is the government delaying tax relief? Why does it not provide it immediately in the economic statement tomorrow?
Taxation May 16th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, what we would do differently is less wasteful spending for more tax relief.
Speaking of tax relief, we released a poll today which shows that 76% of Canadians say that they have not noticed any federal tax relief. The government continues to hype its much promised tax cuts. How come three-quarters of Canadians have not seen a dime of tax relief in their own pockets and how can the Prime Minister persuade them otherwise?
The Economy May 15th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, his own member for Markham said last October “the Liberal proposal does eat into the prudence reserve”. The Prime Minister has just told us that reserve is there for emergencies and emergencies only.
His former ADM of finance commented in the Economist . His own members are admitting that he is going to use the emergency reserve, which we may need for an economic downturn, to finance increases in Liberal spending.
Will he clearly commit that will not happen and that we will not have a planning deficit in the fiscal year 2004?
The Economy May 15th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, that is in fact wrong. All economists are telling us that we are looking at a planning deficit that will lead into the contingency reserve by the fourth year of this fiscal plan. We are also told that the finance minister will only give us a two year projection. Last October before the election he gave us a five year projection.
Why is he changing it? What will happen in those three ensuing years, like the planning deficit which he is afraid to admit to this House and to Canadians.
The Economy May 14th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, there is a growing consensus that the government is headed for a planning deficit within four fiscal years. Even the member for Markham and the former ADM of finance have said that a planning deficit could occur in the year 2004-05. That would eat into the so-called contingency reserves which are supposed to be there to handle unexpected emergencies.
Will the finance minister commit to the House here and now that he will not delve into the contingency reserves except for emergencies? Will he commit that he will not finance regular government spending out of the prudence reserve?