Stockwell Day

[Supplementary Estimates (A), 2010-11, June 17th, 2010]

moved that the supplementary estimates (A) for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2011 be concurred in.

[Main Estimates, 2010-11, June 17th, 2010]

Mr. Chair, I am more than happy to say that, indeed, it is in its usual form.

[Main Estimates, 2010-11, June 17th, 2010]

moved:

That the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2011, less the amounts voted in Interim Supply, be concurred in.

[MAIN ESTIMATES, 2010-11, June 17th, 2010]

moved:

That the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2011, less the amounts voted in interim supply, be concurred in.

Mr. Speaker, I thank members on this side of the House and on the other side. This is an important issue that we need to deal with regarding the appropriation of moneys so that the government can do the things it has committed to do.

As the House is aware, we are on track with our budget this year to see our deficit eliminated. We are moving toward a balanced budget in the year 2014 and, obviously, to carry out the plans we have in place right now, these appropriations have to come forward.

We are doing a number of things this year. We have announced that about a third of all government departments and agencies will undergo each year what is called a strategic review, and, in that review, we will look for savings of 5% from each of those departments and agencies. Our estimation is that savings will yield this year about $1.7 billion. We can say that with some confidence because last year, when we went through a similar exercise with departments and agencies, we actually wound up with savings of about $287 million. This year the group of departments and agencies that will go through this exercise are considerably larger and, therefore, we will see a larger return on that 5%.

We also want to continue with our economic action plan, but we have indicated that this being the second year of the plan, this would be the last year of the plan for the stimulus spending.

We said at the beginning of the global downturn that the stimulus spending that we would introduce would help our economy through this time of global downturn, and we knew we would take on a deficit to do that, but we were also very clear in saying that this would be temporary. Members will see the $19 billion that will go into the stimulus spending for this year, 2010-11, but that will end at the end of this fiscal year, which will help us because that will be $19 billion coming out of the deficit right there that will help us move toward a balanced budget.

We also announced, although it does not often get talked about, that we have gone into an operational freeze of all government operational spending, not just this year but for the next two years. That is three years in a row where there will not be an increase in government spending on the operational side. That also means that the salaries of members of Parliament on both sides of the House, of cabinet ministers and the salary of the Prime Minister will be frozen.

We are taking a number of steps to move us toward a balanced budget. We are also freezing all hospitality and travel at 2009 levels. So we are taking a number of steps to ensure we hit that target of a balanced budget.

We need the moneys in this appropriation, specifically in terms of dollars under these votes, one of approximately $1 billion, to address programs for vulnerable people; another of approximately $1 billion for a knowledge infrastructure program because we want to ensure that continues; and the $3 billion are to go on with issues related to our infrastructure that is still in need. We will continue infrastructure spending in a planned way over the time ahead, even though we plan to eliminate the $19 billion at the end of this year. The approximately $5.4 billion that we are asking for today in appropriations will be for the EI payments.

When we really look at it, about 45% of what we will be doing is related to these programs and spending on social programs, spending on programs for people.

One of the very distinct differences between our method of getting to a balanced budget as opposed to the former Liberal government, which achieved a balanced budget in the mid-nineties, its main reductions and cuts per se were in transfers to provinces and the virtually overnight slashing in health care spending by 30%. We are not doing that. We are looking at our own government spending. We think that is the responsible way to do this, which is why we are taking that particular approach.

About $259 billion is the actual expenditure that we are looking at in these appropriations. The full amount will be $261.2 billion but there will be a decrease of $2.2 billion in non-budgetary expenses that are related to certain loans and investments.

We want to see this achieved because we need this money to continue to run the affairs of government and take care of programs for people.

The finance committee of the Senate has also looked at these expenditures. Officials have reported there on that particular part of the program.

Some people might ask what the purpose is of bringing in restraint measures and having a balanced budget. We are still on a program to reduce our taxes right through to the year 2012 on the corporate side. We laid out a long term plan for that over two years ago.

We have sent a signal, not just to Canadians but to those around the world that we are reducing debt. We have the lowest debt to GDP ratio of all the developed nations. We are reducing deficit. We have the lowest deficit to GDP ratio of all developed nations. We have the lowest and most competitive tax on the business side, small, medium and large businesses, among the G8 countries. We sent the message out that we are holding the line on spending.

What is the result of that? The result is that around the world, where we know there are large pools of capital twitching, looking to where they should be investing, they are looking for places of confidence, places of fiscal predictability and places where the government has things under control.

We can talk about that here and we know that here but when we say it, it gets very little response, especially from across the way, even when it is good news. However, where it gives credibility is when we get the evaluations from agencies, organizations and individuals outside of the country.

The Economist Intelligence Unit says that we are an economic star among other countries. The OECD says that Canada's economy shines among all other countries. The International Monetary Fund says that Canada is best positioned coming out of this particular downturn.

We have seen close to 310,000 new jobs since last July. Even as I say this, some in the opposition are shaking their head, in contempt I guess because we are in such good shape. However, I want to add a couple of warnings. This is a fragile global recovery. Canada is doing well but it is fragile and we must continue to take care. That is why we are resisting so many of the requests for wild increases in spending that come from the opposition and why we are resisting the Liberals and the NDP when they say that we should move to a 45-day work year, that we should allow Canadians to work for 45 days and then get EI benefits for the rest of the year.

We have to resist that kind of thinking that got countries, like Greece, into the difficulties they are in today. We are proud of the record that we have established. We are attracting attention and we are seeing the investment from other countries come to Canada.

Last year's investment from China alone, foreign direct investment into Canada, was $8.8 billion. That is almost a 70% increase from the year before. The head of the largest investment bond fund in the world just recently said that he was advising his institutional investors and clients to look to Canada as the place of stability to invest.

It was only a few weeks ago that Russia announced that to shore up its own currency it would be buying Canadian dollars.

One after another, the endorsements from outside of our country continue to come in that we are on the right track, that Canadians can have some sense of security about that and that Canada is the place to be, which is what these appropriations are all about tonight.

[Government Expenditures, June 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, along with the means that have just been described to us which will get us to a balanced budget by the year 2014, we also want to give our public servants, especially those who work on the front lines, the opportunity to provide proposals. They have often communicated to me that they have ideas on how programs on which they are working could be delivered in a more efficient way and at a reduced cost.

We are going to make that available to them, to bring forward a business plan to propose how they can do that. Then that working plan would be audited and 10% of the savings would go to the workers and 90% to the taxpayers.

[G8 and G20 Summits, June 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, in our 2010 budget, the Minister of Finance has already laid out the road map to a balanced budget for 2014.

What we are putting in place is an opportunity for our hard-working public servants, and mainly those in the rank and file who communicate with me regularly. They have indicated that many of them have ideas on how to actually reduce spending and improve service.

We want to encourage that. We are not afraid to say that our public servants have great ideas that need to be put in place. We want to award them for that and save the taxpayers a whole lot of money.

[Government Expenditures, June 14th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted that my friend has made a pre-announcement of an announcement I am going to make in about two hours, to indicate to all of our public servants that if they come up with a business plan that shows how a certain service can be delivered and money will be saved over a six-month period, they will receive a cash award. We think our public servants are up to this task.

I had not anticipated providing it to MPs, but the hon. member has offered a suggestion. I guess I could put that forward to the Auditor General to see if MPs could be part of this too, but it is mainly directed toward our good public servants.

[Jobs and Economic Growth Act, June 3rd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, it is important to have a debate in the House. That is why we have been debating this bill for over 70 days already. However, it is important to present the facts, because the truth is so very important.

First of all, I agree with my friend. I was against the Liberals taking money from the employment insurance fund. But my colleague is ignoring the fact that we have improved employment insurance for workers who have lost their jobs. We passed a bill and created regulations to help workers and to provide training. There is a plan and a program for older workers, a plan for workers who want to work together during the recession. We have improved things. This is worth mentioning, and the member should consider his position.

[Jobs and Economic Growth Act, June 3rd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I cannot accept what the member said about fair debate. We have had 70 days of debate here. I will not go through the list of all the items already talked about, but I refer him to that.

I am really glad he talked about Canada Post, because finally, he is showing the NDP's position on Canada Post. Those members have used this as their partisan punching bag with respect to the provisions that allow competition in the ongoing international marketplace. What are they doing? They are putting Canadian jobs at risk.

Barry Sikora, a small businessman from British Columbia, had a simple and clear message for the finance committee. He asked us to please pass this bill. He said:

My company employed 31 people. We're not a huge corporation; we're an average business in the printing industry. Now, because of this situation, we're down to 17 employees. Many of our customers have left us.... [T]hey have taken their business to another country. They have forced our industry to lay off long-time employees, and that's not a pleasant thing to do.... Already we've lost a significant amount of business. We're hoping that it will come back....If this doesn't pass, I'm out of business.

The NDP do not care about these jobs being lost.

These are important issues. These are economic issues. These are jobs for Canadians that literally are being lost, because the NDP is trying to delay this, and it is going to put people out of work.

[Jobs and Economic Growth Act, June 3rd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank my Quebec colleague and the other Quebec Conservative member because they have mentioned many issues that are important to the people of Quebec. Our Quebec MPs were the ones to raise the safety of men and women in aircraft throughout Canada, for example. They worked on softwood lumber and its related issues.

They are very concerned about transfer payments to the provinces. It is our Conservative MPs who constantly mentioned that such a bill was absolutely necessary. They were the ones to raise the issues of crime, Canada Post and the National Energy Board. They raised these issues.

They want improvements, but the Bloc wants to prevent any improvements for the province of Quebec.