Paul Martin

[Social Programs, December 8th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, it is personally indecent that this is coming from the leader of the Conservative Party who during the election campaign said that his party was going to cut environmental spending. It was going to cut spending in agriculture. It was going to cut spending in every one of our social programs.

Having stood up all through that election campaign saying that it was going to gut our social programs, along with the Reform Party, now the leader of the Conservative Party has the gall to stand up here and complain when we are in the process of reinvesting in the future of Canadians. He ought to get his facts straight.

[Social Programs, December 8th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, what the hon. leader of the Conservative Party should consider is that not only will we be announcing that $1.5 billion will be reinvested every year following a successful deficit reduction program, but the Minister of Human Resources Development has already announced not only a first phase of $850 million but a further $850 million in support will be provided for children. We have lowered employment insurance premiums and reinvested funds in research and development.

Thanks to this government's efforts to clean up the nation's finances, Canada is now in a position to invest in the future.

[Kyoto, December 8th, 1997]

Mr Speaker, the Reform Party has so far failed to put forward its position. The basic question is whether the Reform Party has calculated the cost of not doing it. Has the Reform Party calculated the cost of global warming? Has the Reform Party calculated the cost of this country's not going along with the United States? Has the Reform Party calculated the cost of not upgrading our technology? Has the Reform Party calculated the cost of isolating ourselves from the rest of the world?

[Social Programs, December 8th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health has just announced the irony in the Reform Party's talking about these cuts to transfers on the very day when he and I will be rising in this House to announce that in fact we are increasing them by $1.5 billion a year.

What is particularly obscene about the Reform suggestion on the day we are about to increase those transfers is that the Reform party says, and I am quoting from the taxpayers budget, a Reform government contributes—

[Taxation, December 5th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the prime minister, cabinet, caucus, the Liberal Party, we listen to Canadians?

[Trade, December 5th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, a very substantial restructuring will be taking place in Korea following the IMF negotiations with that country.

Canada is very much a part of the trading world. We are very much a part of Asia. We are also an important member of the G-7. When the G-7 puts its money on the line and at the same time when the countries in that part of the world with which we trade substantially do the same thing, it is incumbent upon Canada to support the world's trading system and countries that are having difficulty.

[Taxation, December 5th, 1997]

Those are the numbers. Hon. members may have some trouble understanding them. They are Statistics Canada numbers and the hon. member should look to them.

I am asking a question. Have Reformers flip flopped on their position? Does it now believe there should be income tax reduction prior to the deficit being eliminated? If so, why do they not have the courage to stand and tell the world that once again they have swallowed themselves whole?

[Taxation, December 5th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the wealth of Canadian households is up. It is up substantially since we have taken office.

[Taxation, December 5th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I have already demonstrated how the government, prior to the deficit being eliminated, began the process of income tax reduction.

The Reform Party's official position is that there should be no income tax cuts until the deficit is eliminated. Is the hon. member now standing in the House and telling the country that they have flip flopped and that prior to the deficit being eliminated they agree with us that we should begin the process of income tax reduction?

[Taxation, December 5th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the member talks about $10 billion. We had better understand where the $10 billion came from. The $10 billion is out of the Reform Party program. It is a $3 billion cut in equalization payments imposed on the citizens of Manitoba and Saskatchewan. It is a $3 billion cut in old age pensions. That comes directly out of the taxpayers' budget. It is a $3.5 billion cut in equalization payments for health care and education.

That is the Reform Party program. That is where the $10 billion comes from.

Why do they not stand up and defend the fact that they would—