Leon Benoit

[Budget Implementation Act, 2009, February 9th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, on a point of order, the member has been here long enough to know that it is improper to use something as a prop. The member is using a document. I grant that it is a very good document she is using as a prop and it is well worth showing, but it is against the rules and I think she should stop using it as a prop.

[Petitions, February 2nd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to present a petition on behalf of constituents wherein they note that during the October election Canadians gave the Conservative Party a clear and strengthened mandate to lead Canada through the global economic crisis. They note that the opposition parties are looking to impose an unstable, unelected Liberal-NDP-separatist coalition that would destabilize our country. The petitioners further note that Canadians have a democratic right to choose who will govern them and not have a surprise prime minister chosen through an unseemly undemocratic backroom deal.

They call on Parliament to oppose any political arrangement that would replace a democratically elected government without first consulting Canadians through an election.

[Interparliamentary Delegations, December 3rd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1) I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the report of the Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association respecting its participation to the visit of the Economic and Security Committee, a subcommittee on trans-Atlantic economic relations held in London, United Kingdom, April 23 to 25, 2008.

Pursuant to Standing Order 34(1) I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the report of the Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association respecting its participation to the political committee meeting held in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, March 31 to April 4, 2008.

[Economic and Fiscal Statement, December 2nd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is talking about getting rid of democracy and this is a financial statement that was delivered in the House. I do not know what she is talking about.

The opposition parties claim the reason they formed this coalition of socialists, separatists and Liberals is that this government is not managing the economy properly. Let us look at the tax reductions we are offering Canadians. In this year alone, the year we are in right now, there is a $12 billion tax reduction in the GST; a personal tax reduction of $10.5 billion for this year; and a $6 billion reduction in business tax. That is $28 billion in tax reductions.

The opposition complains about a surplus of roughly $12 billion being reduced. The fact is we are running balanced budgets. That they are saying that we are in a deficit position now is simply wrong.

[Economic and Fiscal Statement, December 1st, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, he is another opposition member who is desperately grasping at straws to justify what is an unjustifiable position.

In fact, what happened back then was the Prime Minister, after a budget had been presented, made a decision to try to topple the government and go to an election. That is totally different from what the opposition members are doing. There was never any talk of a coalition. If opposition parties choose now to topple the government and go to an election, let the people have a say on that. They may not be tolerated well in bringing on another election, but if they want to do that, they can do it. That is the democratic thing to do.

They do not care about democracy. They are grasping. They have such an untamed lust for power, they will do anything to get it. That is what they are doing.

[Economic and Fiscal Statement, December 1st, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I can tell from the question that the member has been in his constituency talking to his constituents about this instead of hatching up a deal in a backroom, as the three opposition parties have been doing.

Almost to a person my constituents are saying that this is the most ridiculous thing they have ever seen in Canadian politics. They cannot believe this third world measure of throwing aside a democratically elected government and putting an unelected government in place through a backroom deal is happening.

Unfortunately, the talk of separation in my constituency has risen in leaps and bounds. In fact, it was almost completely gone because people appreciate the government they are getting from the Prime Minister and the Conservative Party. The last thing they want is for a coup to actually take place, but if it does, I am extremely concerned that the separatist sentiments may be more than just talk this time.

[Economic and Fiscal Statement, December 1st, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, that is the type of straw of desperation the opposition members are grasping at to justify their position.

The reality is, if they wanted to vote this government down, they could have voted against our Speech from the Throne, which they did not. They supported it. If they want to vote against our economic statement and go to an election, which is what was being talked about, they are free to do that. Canadians are tired of elections. Six weeks ago they elected us to govern this country with a near majority, with a stronger level of support than last time. If the opposition members want to go to an election, they can choose to do that.

However, I want to say we never talked about a coalition. We would never get in bed with the separatists and we would certainly never get in bed with the socialists and have the leader of the socialists as finance minister of this country. That is absurd.

[Economic and Fiscal Statement, December 1st, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, a member said that it is our fiction. I read the list of the four well-respected groups.

[Economic and Fiscal Statement, December 1st, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the opposition members are clearly grasping at something so they can justify their talk of putting aside democracy and taking over the reins of power in an unelected fashion. Clearly, that is why the member would ask a question like that.

All of the numbers in the economic and fiscal update were provided by the finance department. The member is questioning the credibility of our well-respected, worldwide respected finance department. That is just absurd.

That is where the numbers came from, as well as from four private sector forecasters.

[Economic and Fiscal Statement, December 1st, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, this is a sad day for Canada. Over the past three days we have heard opposition members of Parliament declare that they will throw aside the results of an election held just six weeks ago and gang up and vote down this Conservative government in a raw and pure lust for power, nothing more. They would replace this government with a coalition of their own making rather than have a government of the people's making. That is what they are talking about, as unbelievable as that sounds to Canadians. The opposition members say that they know better than Canadian voters, who made their decision just six short weeks ago, and because the opposition members know better, they are going to grasp the reins of power and completely push aside the democratic process strictly out of a lust for power, and this in Canada.

There is so much more that could and should be said about this, but what great plan would the proposed unelected government they are talking about put in place to justify, at least in their own power crazed minds, this unprecedented action?

Today, in the little time I have, I will go through the eight points the Liberal finance critic presented as his economic plan once this coup has taken place. I will demonstrate that in fact this and so much more has already been done by the Conservative government. We are not just talking about it. It is not just a plan. Much more has been done. On top of that, other things have been promised. Of course, whatever action is necessary has been pledged by the Prime Minister and the finance minister.

The Liberal finance critic, in an interview on the weekend, put forth his eight point plan for the economy, his justification for overthrowing the elected government of this country.

The first point is that he said he would work co-operatively with all members of Parliament from all parties to seek their input as we move forward.

That unelected gang has certainly demonstrated that, have they not? They have demonstrated clearly that they will not work with Conservative members of Parliament. They have demonstrated, in fact, that the members of Parliament they will work with are the separatists, the very people they promised they would not form a coalition with, and the socialists. The leader of the official opposition also said during the election campaign just six weeks ago that he would never form a coalition with the socialists either. That is how they will work with other members of Parliament. That is the first point of the Liberal finance critic.

The second point is that he said he would “work with finance department officials to thoroughly evaluate the financial position of Canada”.

The finance minister has already done this and he presented it in last Thursday's economic and fiscal update. His highlights were presented on page 82 of the 132 page document that he presented to this House of Commons. Of course, the opposition did not want to see this document. They did not want to hear about this document, and I know they have not read this document. We know that, for example, the socialists, the New Democrats, got caught in a secret plot to get together with the Bloc to form a coalition with the Liberal official opposition. They did not care what was in the fiscal update. They did not read the 132 page document that lays out the situation.

I am going to highlight and quickly summarize some of the points in this economic and fiscal update.

Number one, the government is planning on balanced budgets for the current year and the next five years, although given the downside risk, balanced budgets cannot be guaranteed.

Number two, weaker economic growth has significantly reduced expected revenues.

The third point in this summary of the fiscal and economic update is that program expenses in 2008-09 are expected to be lower than projected in budget 2008, but in 2009-10 they are expected to be higher than projected in the budget, largely reflecting increased transfers to persons and other levels of government. Public debt charges are lower than projected in both years due to lower projected interest rates.

The fourth point in the summary, a document that the opposition did not bothered to read and did not listen to when presented by the finance minister, is after taking into account the actions proposed in this economic and fiscal statement, the projected surplus is $0.8 billion for 2008-09. We know, from the release of the third quarter results today, that they demonstrate a 0.3% surplus for the third quarter. We know we will not be in deficit for this fiscal year. What are opposition members talking about when they are talking about the danger of these deficits? We might be in deficit in future years, depending on the amount of stimulus required. The Minister of Finance and the Prime Minister made that abundantly clear.

The fifth point is the tax burden, as measured by total revenue as a share of gross domestic product, which is projected to decline from 15.8% in 2007-08 to 15.2% by 2013-14, its lowest ratio in nearly 50 years.

The sixth point in the summary of the government's fiscal and economic statement, which the members opposite did not bother to listen to or to read, is program expenses are projected to increase temporarily from 13% of GDP in 2007-08 to 13. 4% in 2009-10, reflecting weaker economic growth. Over the medium term, program spending is projected to grow in line with the economy.

The seventh point in the summary is public debt charges are projected to be relatively flat as a share of GDP over the forecast horizon at about 2% before falling to 1.8% in 2013-14.

This is only a summary of the 132 page document presented by the finance minister last Thursday, the plan that the opposition members apparently want to throw away and replace it with their eight points.

Furthermore, the details of each of these highlights start on page 84 of the document, if the members opposite care to finally have a look at the document, which is a good piece of work.

The third point that the finance critic for the official opposition said would be part of their eight point plan, is:

—would continue to work with the top economic thinkers and business and labour leaders in Canada and bring them together formally for an immediate summit to determine how far we can go.

The opposition members are talking about just now starting the planning, something our government has been working on for two years. This has already obviously been done. For example, the finance minister indicated in his speech, and it is laid out in detail in this 132 page document, which the opposition members do not want to read or hear about, the projections of four private sector organizations. They developed their own fiscal projections based on existing policy. These four organizations, which opposition members dismiss out of hand, are the Conference Board of Canada, the policy and economic analysis program of the University of Toronto, Global Insight and the Centre for Spatial Economics.

The opposition members have said again in speeches today that there are no experts who would agree with what we have put forth. That is clearly wrong, and I know all of us as members of Parliament go to our people, to our business leaders in our own communities and to labour leaders to get their opinions on what should happen in this very difficult time. Again, this third point is another bogus point.

I quote again from the finance critic for the official opposition when he states, “An increase and an acceleration of infrastructure measures”. This is his fourth point. Where has the critic been? Our government has already brought in unprecedented federal infrastructures investments in past budgets. It also promised to accelerate this spending to provide further stimulus.

We are truly ahead of the curve and, in fact, every other top economic power is envious of the actions we have taken and the position in which we are in our country. That is the reality.

For example, our government has put in place a long-term infrastructure plan, the building Canada plan, which provides an historic investment of $33 billion over seven years. That is a lot of stimulus. We have made the gas tax fund permanent, something the former government refused to do. That is ensuring about $2 billion more for infrastructure in 2009-10 and each year thereafter, not temporary spending.

We have established public-private partnership Canada, which is a crown corporation to manage and encourage public-private partnerships. In other words, further investment, government investment, will be leveraged with private investment as well, something, if the finance critic were being honest with himself, I would be very surprised if he would not admit we have done what he said he would do in that fourth point.

In the Speech from the Throne, the government said:

Public infrastructure is vital not only to create jobs for today, but also to create the links between communities and regions to help generate jobs for the future. Our Government is committed to expediting our Building Canada plan to ensure that projects are delivered as quickly as possible.

We had our vote on that after the finance minister presented his fiscal and economic update. What was the result of that? It passed in the House, so the members opposite know about this, but they ignore it. The opposition finance critic in his eight points completely ignores it.

I want to talk a little more about some of the things our government has done to deal with the fourth point the opposition finance critic has put in place.

The fact is other leading economies are copying action taken by this government over the past three years, and here is proof. The United Kingdom has just cut its value-added tax, its GST, something this government has done, starting in our very first year in office about three years ago. In the United States, president-elect Obama, who campaigned in his presidential victory for increasing taxes to the American people, now has reversed his position in line with the action taken by the Canadian government. He has decided he will lower taxes to the American people.

All the leading economies are promising more spending on necessary infrastructure and an accelerated spending on infrastructure, something we have been doing over the past three years. We clearly have been ahead of the curve on these things.

The fifth point by the official opposition critic is “an increase in support for Research and Development”. I cannot go through the long list of increases in research and development spending and support for research and development. I will mention only three key items.

As a result of the 2008 and previous two budgets, the government will invest an additional $850 million in 2009-10 alone in support of the objectives of the strategy, including improvements in the scientific research and experimental development tax incentive program. This includes specific investments of $250 million in the automotive sector.

The members opposite stand in the House and say we have done nothing for the automotive sector. This is one example which is critical and is certainly a very positive move, ignored by the opposition finance critic.

Budget 2008 provides $250 million over five years in support of strategic large-scale research and development projects in the automotive sector, which I mentioned earlier, to develop an initiative for greener and more fuel efficient vehicles. On top of this is the $1.5 billion to Genome Canada and various other spending on ongoing research projects.

I will quote number six of the eight point so-called plan laid out by the official opposition finance critic over the weekend:

—working with provinces to improve programs for Canadian workers to train and retrain as part of life-long learning to help them cope with current and future economic realities...

Those members have to know that the government is already, first, investing in education and training by providing long-term support for post-secondary education, introducing the new Canada student grant and modernizing the Canada student loans program. They have chosen to ignore this.

Second, the government is implementing the Canadian experience class and streamlining Canada's immigration system to better respond to the needs of the Canadian labour market.

Third, the government is making significant investments in labour market training so training and skills development opportunities are more widely available to Canadian workers.

The list of other actions we have taken in terms of research and development and training goes on: $1 billion for the community development trust; $3 billion over six years for the new labour market agreements to address the gap in labour market programming; and on and on. I do not have time to read them all.

Quoting his words again, number seven reads:

—working with manufacturing, forestry and auto sector leaders to develop measures that help strengthen their position during this crisis.

Once again, being a leader in the world's strongest economies and far ahead of opposition parties, our government has already done this and has promised to do more in the future.

In budget 2008 our government's actions to implement the “Advantage Canada” framework have delivered important benefits for manufacturers and processors by helping them to better invest and compete, specifically through over $9 billion per year in tax relief by 2012-13, including broad-based tax reductions as well as a temporary accelerated writeoff for investments in machinery and equipment used in manufacturing and processing.

We have provided $1.3 billion per year in additional funding to provinces in budget 2007 for post-secondary education and so on and another $1.5 billion over three years from budgets 2006 and 2007, clearly shooting down the seventh point by the opposition critic.

The eighth point is to “convene an immediate First Ministers conference to partner with provinces”. The Prime Minister has promised to do that and that will happen. Action has been taken already.

All eight points in the Liberal finance critic's statement that he made over the weekend have been acted upon and so much more has been done.

Those members talk about stimulus and this is what the Conservative government has done for stimulus.

Besides all the things I have mentioned, we are actively protecting the Canadian banking system and the Canadian credit market by injecting tens of billions of dollars in liquidity to ensure people in businesses can get the credit they need. This was announced shortly after the election. Up to $75 billion of credit could be made available by banks through CMHC if they so chose to take advantage of that. This provided credit that is much needed by the Canadian people.

I have a motion I would like to move, but before I do that I want to point out briefly the impact of what the irresponsible opposition wants to do.

I was in my constituency over the weekend and met with 300 people at one meeting and 400 at another. They all wanted to talk to me. They cannot believe the opposition would throw aside democracy and for a raw lust for power take over the reins of government.

One of the sad byproducts of this irresponsibility is that in my constituency and across the west, the ugly head of separation is being raised again. I have never seen it at this level before, in boardrooms, in kitchens, in schools, everywhere. That is the result of the opposition's irresponsibility. Those parties do not care.

I see my time is up. I therefore move:

That this question be now put.