Jim Flaherty

[Business of Supply, May 28th, 2008]

Mr. Chair, I have no doubt that the Liberals opposite will run a deficit if they ever return to power in this country given their intention to spend some $70 billion. That will clearly put this country into deficit. It is the kind of reckless spending that they did in their three budgets in 2004, 2005, and their third budget with the NDP where they put up spending in one year alone for this country by 14.8%.

We now have taxes down to where they were in 1963-64 on the basis of revenue to GDP. That will be the tax burden in 2009-10, the lowest taxes in 50 years.

[Business of Supply, May 28th, 2008]

Mr. Chair, that would be the current Prime Minister.

[Business of Supply, May 28th, 2008]

Mr. Chair, if the member is criticizing the fact that we have reduced taxes in this country, she can go ahead and criticize.

If she wants to talk about Liberal premiers, I became a member of the provincial legislature in Ontario in 1995. Our government took over from the government of the member for Toronto Centre, who now says he is a Liberal, but he was a member of the NDP then. There was a massive deficit in the province of Ontario and we had to work many years to recover from that deficit just as we would have to here in the future with this new massive carbon tax and the big deficit that the Liberals intend to run.

[Business of Supply, May 28th, 2008]

Mr. Chair, that would have been in the 1990s. Without looking it up, I would think it would have to have been in the early 1990s when there was a change in government.

[Business of Supply, May 28th, 2008]

Mr. Chair, as the member opposite knows, the income trust situation was one in which we had large Canadian corporations and the directors of those corporations looking at a situation where they felt that their duty to their shareholders to maximize value put them in a position where they would have to decide to change the corporate entity to income trusts. That was going to happen with a number of our--

[Business of Supply, May 28th, 2008]

Mr. Chair, the member for Halton supported the decision of the government with respect to income trusts which was made in the autumn of 2006. In case he has forgotten why he supported it, perhaps I can help him by going back to that time and repeating the reasons it was important to move ahead with that decision.

Sometimes in government difficult decisions need to be taken. In fact, the previous Liberal government had addressed this issue and was going to move ahead with it, but the Liberals changed their minds at the last minute, despite the fact that they knew it was the right public policy to pursue.

Why was it the right public policy? Because we should not have entities in Canada being treated differently for tax purposes and decisions being made for tax purposes rather than business purposes in Canada. We needed to level that playing field.

[Business of Supply, May 28th, 2008]

Mr. Chair, I know that the member speaks of non-partisanship. I thought he would speak in his own case of multi-partisanship since he has belonged to several parties in this place.

As I recall, and I may be wrong and I am sure the hon. member will correct me, he actually voted in favour of the change with respect to income trusts. I think he also supported the GST reduction. In fact, he said that families who make less benefit more than wealthier ones from the GST cut. The member for Markham—Unionville should get that in a heartbeat. There he was lecturing his colleague, the finance critic for the Liberals.

Of course, I cannot disclose any matters that go on in terms of cabinet discussions.

[Business of Supply, May 28th, 2008]

Mr. Chair, I knew the tax free savings account had to be a good idea because when he was a Conservative, the hon. member for Halton said that this is a good idea, something he had long advocated for. So I know it is a good idea as do the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, the CD Howe Institute, the Winnipeg Free Press and the economists at BMO.

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation said:

This is an excellent policy proposal. Canada needs to reward people that save because their investments fuel economic growth and job creation.

The Canadian Federation of Independent Business said, “--the savings account, for one, that is an inspired measure”.

It is the most significant tax change with respect to savings and sheltering savings since the RRSP was brought in, in 1957. So it has been many years since then, but members opposite will observe in the next couple of years what an important tax measure this is for Canadians from coast to coast to coast, those 18 years of age or over. I sure hope they will support it when it comes to the House for a vote with Bill C-50 later this week or next week.

[Business of Supply, May 28th, 2008]

Mr. Chair, speaking about skating to where the puck is going to be compared to where it has been, I am told it is 1:0 for Pittsburgh. Sydney Crosby scored with two minutes left in the first period. That is for the eight or nine Canadians who are not watching the game, but who are actually watching us do this in this place. That is a great Canadian taking action there.

We have reduced taxes of all kinds. We have also done something else and that is create the tax free savings account. This was something that needed to be done. In Canada we did not have a savings vehicle outside of the retirement savings vehicle and the RESP, not to mention the registered disability savings plan which this government created.

This tax free savings account is terrific. It has been called by various commentators a jewel and a gem. If Bill C-50 were to pass when it comes back to the House within the next day or two, what it means is as of January 1, 2009, Canadians 18 years of age or over would be able to contribute $5,000 a year tax paid into a fund and have any kind of gains, dividends, or accumulated interest within the fund, and have it paid out whenever they want. This is a tremendous advantage.

Over time this is going to mean something like 90% of the savings of Canadians would be sheltered from taxation through one plan or another, especially for young people, but also for people of moderate means. During the first five years there will be no clawback. It is a terrific idea for Canadians to save money. I look forward to Canadians starting to save money through tax free savings accounts starting January 1, 2009.

[Business of Supply, May 28th, 2008]

Mr. Chair, certainly, we are going to continue on with the “Advantage Canada” plan and our plan to implement that plan. In each budget, in each economic statement, as we go forward, we have made terrific progress on implementing “Advantage Canada” on the tax side, on the fiscal side, on the knowledge side, and with infrastructure and advantaging entrepreneurs in Canada. So, that is our plan, and we will continue to do that.

We know that the plan of members opposite in the Liberal Party is to go back to what they like to do; that is, increase taxes and increase spending. By now it looks like something like $70 billion because they voted for a $10 billion per annum bill here this afternoon.

Where are they going to get this $70 billion? They are going to get it, they are telling us, through something called a carbon tax. They are going to increase taxes on gasoline and home heating fuel. They are going to drive up the cost of manufacturing in Canada. They are going to hurt some of the most vulnerable people in this country who live on fixed incomes. It will also lead to higher shipping costs. As I say, it will be more difficult for many.

However, do not take my word for it. Let us see what some Liberals say about it. Liberal strategist Warren Kinsella, we know about him, says:

Forget about the fact that it is unfair to people on fixed incomes (like the elderly) and the poor (who have to heat their homes and buy food, too), and is therefore profoundly un-Liberal.

What does the Liberal member for Vaughan say? He says:

It [carbon tax] is certainly not an option for me.

What do we hear from Gerard Kennedy? He is a Liberal, I think, now. He says:

I think a carbon tax is the clumsiest of the options that we've got so far,--

What does Bill Graham say? He is a long time member of the Liberal Party. He says:

Certainly when we were in government we clearly did not advocate that as a way to deal with global warming.

That is what Liberals say about this idea: this meanspirited, punitive idea where the Liberals want to impose on Canadians higher gasoline taxes and higher taxes on home heating fuel.

We go exactly in the other direction. We reduce taxes of all kinds in Canada. We let the economy breathe. We reduce business taxes. We reduce excise taxes, which apply to many goods in this country. And of course, we kept our pledge to reduce the GST by two full percentage points. We keep our promises. We are getting the job done.