House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2006, with 48% of the vote.
The Economy November 1st, 1999
As I have said there is no such plan. but I can certainly tell the hon. member what the government has done. It has eliminated the deficit. It was $42 billion. We have now had two consecutive years of surplus. We have cut income taxes by $16.5 billion over the next three years.
We have brought in $2 billion worth of additional credits for the national child tax benefit. We have increased the benefit for small businesses—
The Economy November 1st, 1999
Mr. Speaker, I tend to agree with you that talking about brains and the Reform Party is a bit of an oxymoron.
The Economy November 1st, 1999
Mr. Speaker, I have made it very clear. There is no such plan. All that has happened is that the public service from the three central agencies has costed a series of propositions, a number of which will never see the light of day.
Costing proposals is a basic responsibility of the public service. If Reformers would occasionally cost some of theirs they would not come up with some of the lamebrained ideas they have.
The Economy November 1st, 1999
Mr. Speaker, for almost a decade up until two years ago, the after tax disposable income of Canadians declined.
Last year for the first time the after tax disposable income of Canadians was on the increase. We have reversed the declining trend, which is something the Reform tax plan would not have done.
The Economy November 1st, 1999
Mr. Speaker, we have provided tax relief. We did it in the 1997 budget. We did in the 1998 budget. We have provided over $16.5 billion in the 1999 budget, the three combined, over the next three years.
What is most interesting of all is that in Fresh Start, the Reform Party's election program, they said they would not provide any personal income tax relief before the year 2000. They are behind the curve.
The Economy November 1st, 1999
Mr. Speaker, there is no such plan. It is perfectly natural that departmental officials of all the central agencies will cost proposals whether or not they in fact take place. That is an ongoing process.
If the hon. member would like, as opposed to debating myths, to debate reality, I would suggest that he come tomorrow to London, Ontario, to the finance committee.
Aboriginal Affairs October 28th, 1999
Mr. Speaker, the member's question is nonsensical. As he ought to know, that is simply a listing of all of the claims that have been made. If one is going to be open and transparent, one owes it to the Canadian people to let them know what other claims have been made. No liability has been established.
Aboriginal Affairs October 28th, 1999
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member ought to know that is not an amount that is owed. It is simply an amalgam of all of the claims that have been made. It is not a liability owed. It is simply an estimate of all of the claims that have been submitted.
Employment Insurance October 28th, 1999
Mr. Speaker, it is very clear why we will not listen to the Reform Party. The fact is that while the hon. member talks about blood, the Reform Party would bleed Canadian families dry; not one penny of EI cuts for Canadian families. The only people who would benefit from the Reform Party tax plan would be corporations and rich Canadians. We will simply not adopt that agenda.
Employment Insurance October 28th, 1999
Mr. Speaker, first of all, to put the record straight, we have cut EI premiums by over $4 billion in the last four years and the vast majority of that went to Canadians.
Let us take a look at what the hon. member's party has actually said. In “Fresh Start” the Reform Party recommended decreases in EI or UI premiums, but only for corporations. Its recommendation meant not one cent for Canadians. Families would not have received a penny from the Reform Party.