Preston Manning

[Taxation, September 20th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, it is not only westerners who will be unsatisfied by the Prime Minister's answer. There are other Canadians who are uneasy with respect to the federal government's tax intentions.

Mismanagement by successive governments of the Canada Pension Plan and OAS have undermined many Canadians' confidence in the government's ability to provide pension income. In response, millions of Canadians have endeavoured to provide for their own retirement through private RRSPs. Now these Canadians fear that their only reward for making this provision will be to attract a tax raid by the federal government on their RRSP contributions.

Yesterday the finance minister was unwilling to allay fears in this regard. Will the Prime Minister state categorically that his government is not planning to launch a federal tax raid on RRSP contributions?

[Taxation, September 20th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would not worry about being around many, many years. My question is just asking for the term of the government's administration.

Let me be more specific. The economies of Alberta and British Columbia are growing faster than the Canadian economy as a whole and the provincial government in Alberta is making a more strenuous effort to restrain its spending than any other provincial government. There is now growing concern in the west that the only reward for economic growth or spending restraint at the provincial level is going to be to attract a federal tax raid similar to the one that occurred in the 1980s.

Will the Prime Minister today assure western Canadians that his government will not try to solve the federal fiscal mess by launching a tax raid on their region?

[Taxation, September 20th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that his first responsibility is to ensure the unity of this country. Surely that means refraining from actions that undermine people's confidence in the federal government. I have one particular action in mind.

Canadians are now among the most highly taxed people in the world. If the federal government wants to make federalism more attractive to all Canadians, it simply must refrain from increasing the burden of federal taxation.

I ask the Prime Minister to pledge today, for the sake of Canadian unity, to refrain from increasing the burden of federal taxation during the term of his mandate. Would he make such a pledge today?

[The Economy, September 19th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I have a fear that history is repeating itself. Members that have been around the House and have observed it for a long time know governments that get elected, have a mandate and do not use it to make fundamental changes in the first year, ones that squander their political mandate on half measures, never end up getting the job done.

Why does the Prime Minister not use his political capital to make major fiscal and social reforms now instead of frittering it away on political half measures?

[The Economy, September 19th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's reply will not strengthen support for the federal system because the standards of his government are too low and his timetable is too long.

Producing a social program discussion paper is not good enough when the public wants action. Fixing our deficit target at 3 per cent of GDP is not good enough when our national debt is at 71 per cent of GDP. National unity will not be achieved unless the Prime Minister sets higher standards for his ministers and a shorter timetable.

Will the Prime Minister commit to raising his government's standards with respect to social reform and fiscal reform and accelerating his timetable for bringing in those reforms?

[The Economy, September 19th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister responded to the first question by the Leader of the Opposition which affects the national unity issue by saying things he has said 100 times before.

Given the circumstances, surely a better and more vigorous response would have been for the Prime Minister to declare his intention to make Canada as attractive as possible to all Canadians by balancing the budget, by offering tax relief, and by changing social programs to make them both affordable and more decentralized. These are the hallmarks of good government, not the half measures that are being introduced in the House.

What new and bolder steps is the Prime Minister going to take in the cause of national unity to balance the budget, cut taxes and fix our social safety net?

[The Economy, June 22nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, these kinds of statements and the earlier statement just add to the mixed signals and the uncertainty to which the market is reacting.

This is the government's last chance before the summer recess, the last chance to stop dancing around on spending cuts and deficit reduction. It is the last chance to come down hard on the side of deeper spending cuts in order to cope with the deficit.

Is there anyone on the government side, the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, the finance minister, who is willing and prepared to commit the government to announcing deeper spending cuts in September?

[The Economy, June 22nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Secretary of State for International Financial Institutions.

It is being reported today that the secretary of state has said that the government will release an economic statement in September which will include spending cut announcements. Reformers have been demanding such action for months and wish to be assured that this statement accurately reflects the position of the government.

Do the remarks of the secretary of state mean that today the government is prepared to tell investors, taxpayers and lenders in clear language, yes, we will announce deeper spending cuts in September?

[The Economy, June 21st, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, defending the status quo, whether it is federalism or the fiscal situation, will not reduce the deficit. If the government intends to meet its deficit targets it has one of two choices. Either it cuts spending more deeply or it increases revenue through tax increases.

I ask the Prime Minister if he is clearly prepared to make additional spending reductions to control the deficit and does this mean that the government is considering additional tax increases as the only other way of meeting those targets?

[The Economy, June 21st, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the money markets say there are two sources of uncertainty with respect to Canada. One is of course the constitutional question, but the other is the overspending and deficit of the government, the one that the government can do something about.

An interest rate on government bonds of 2 per cent above the rate assumed in the budget implies a deficit increase of $3.4 billion in the first year and $5 billion in the second year according to the government's own projections. There is nothing wrong with changing a battle plan that is not working. Will the Prime Minister now order a mini budget containing deeper spending cuts and that it be brought down before the fiscal situation gets worse?