Paul Martin

[Banks, February 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, we have made it clear on I do not know how many occasions that the task force has been asked to look at all these questions. When the task force reports, we will debate it.

The real issue is why is the NDP joining with the banks in attempting to jump the queue? Why is the NDP attempting to hijack the process? Why does the NDP refuse to let Canadians deal with the broad issues?

Mr. Speaker, I will tell you. We are not kowtowed by the banks and we are not kowtowed by this merger. We are going to do our job. We are going to set policy for all Canadians.

[Banks, February 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, there will be no fait accompli.

We asked a task force to look at the future of the financial institutions and it intends to do so. Only after the task force has made its recommendations and a debate is held here in the House, a public debate with Canadians, will the government be prepared to consider the merger.

[Banking, February 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, what in heaven's name does the member think the purpose was in setting up the task force on financial institutions? What does he think the purpose was in having a great public debate? What does he think the purpose was in negotiating at the WTO all the changes in financial services?

Very clearly if there are going to be any changes in the financial structure of this country, they are going to be ones which will ensure that there are adequate services, low charges and full competition available to Canadians. That is what it is all about.

[Banking, February 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, we have already opened up Canadian borders to foreign banking. We have done more in the last couple of years on this issue than any government. We will continue to do that, precisely because what we want is a great deal more competition. In rural Canada we want competition for small and medium size business. We have already made that very clear.

[Banking, February 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the government began to deal with this issue in the beginning of the last mandate. We have set up a task force. We have task forces within our party.

The only thing that the NDP has been able to do is engage in excessive rhetoric. What it is unable to do is to deal with the fundamental issues. We will match the action of the government against the verbal diarrhoea of the leader of the NDP any time.

[Banking, February 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the government has set out a process involving a task force and ultimately public debate. We will not allow anybody to jump the queue.

The real issue is why the NDP is playing the banks' game? Why is it trying to hijack the process? Why will it not let Canadians look at the total future of financial institutions? Why does it want to focus on this merger and nothing else?

The NDP may be prepared to dance to the banks' music, but we are going to let Canadians call the tune.

[The Economy, February 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, in previous budgets we already began to reduce taxes. Let me say let us not engage ourselves in the kind of shell game the Reform would play.

The Reform Party at the federal level says “Let us cut taxes”. How would it do that? It would be by cutting equalization payments.

What is the answer? The member for Selkirk said “Let the province of Manitoba increase its taxes to compensate”. That is a shell game. It is dishonest and we will not do it.

[The Economy, February 3rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the study the hon. member refers to is a study that found its antecedence in the policies of the previous government.

What the hon. member wants to take a look at is pretty clear. Four years ago the country had its back against the wall. Now we are talking about paying down debt.

Four years ago the country was talking about how high the taxes were going to go, and now we are talking about how low they are going to go.

Four years ago the country was in a state of despair, and now there is optimism throughout the land. That is because of this government.

[Banking, February 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the industry committee has taken this matter up for quite some time. In fact the member from Spadina has made this a particular cause of his.

Over the course of the last two to three years, there has been a substantial improvement as a result of the monitoring that has been brought forth by members of this House. I can assure the House that will continue. In fact this is one of the issues which the task force will be looking at. We suggested that the task force look at it. It will certainly form part of the great public debate in this House and across the country.

[Canada Pension Plan, February 2nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, throughout a good portion of the September to December debate in this House, Reform Party members, including the hon. member, kept pointing out that the provinces would not support the Canada pension plan. They kept pointing out that the Canadian people would not support the Canada pension plan. The fact is that the provinces overwhelmingly support the Canada pension plan. Canadians overwhelmingly support the Canada pension plan. In fact the only Canadians who do not are the members of the Reform Party and they are out of it again.