Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, I will be very brief because the hon. member has said nothing of substance. Yes, it is $100 billion over five years. I have said myself that it is $17 billion this year. We are not hiding that. It is a fact. By the way, $17 billion is a lot of money. It is the biggest tax cut of any G-7 country this year.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, let me say that I am new to this profession. In my previous life I was used to debating budgets and economic matters in the banking and university worlds. Generally we had debates of substance and we did not go back and forth telling each other that our statistics were wrong.

Committees of the House  Madam Speaker, the hon. member ought to know that the surplus forecasts do not come from the government but from economists, banks and other institutions. It is therefore difficult to understand why we should believe the Bloc's prediction of a $13 billion surplus. These predictions are totally lacking in credibility.

Committees of the House  These predictions are totally lacking in credibility. All of the economists are saying one thing, but the Bloc Quebecois is producing forecasts from another planet, predicting an enormous surplus. There is just one situation in which they could be believed, and that is the one in which her colleague, the hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe--Bagot—

Committees of the House  Madam Speaker, what I was trying to say was that all the economists are saying X, and only the Bloc is saying Y. That being the case, the only reason to believe the Bloc Quebecois would be if the member for Saint-Hyacinthe--Bagot were the most brilliant economist in the country.

The Budget  Mr. Speaker, first, I would like to compliment the hon. member opposite as being by far the most effective spokesperson for his party on economic affairs, which is not saying all that much, but it does make one wonder why he is sitting at the back rather than the front. In my very brief time, I would just like to point out three errors he has made.

The Budget  Mr. Speaker, with all due respect I believe the member is utterly confused with respect to taxation. The comment that there is no real tax relief is ridiculous, when in fact a year ago we had a $100 billion tax cut over five years. If it is limited to this year alone, it is a $17 billion tax cut this year.

The Budget  That is absolutely true. That is the largest tax cut of any of the G-7 countries. The contention is made that there is no real tax relief. Take the increase in CPP premiums. We do not agree that is a tax increase. Even if that were subtracted from the $17 billion, it would still be the largest tax cut among G-7 countries because we were way ahead.

The Budget  Thirty-eight.

The Budget  Madam Speaker, the hon. member talks with pride about the big steps taken by the previous Tory government. His own leader mentioned the big step yesterday when he boasted that he inherited a $36 billion deficit in 1984 and by--

The Budget  By 1993 he had left a $42 billion deficit to the Liberal government. That is his idea of a big step, from $38 billion to $42 billion. Some big step. Our big step under our finance minister and our Prime Minister was to take that $42 billion deficit, reduce it to zero and turn it into surpluses.

Question No. 83  As required by Bill C-8, the four recently demutualized insurers have a common transition period during which they must remain widely held. No mergers by, or acquisitions of, demutualized firms are permitted during that period. The transition period ends on December 31, 2001. After December 31, 2001, demutualized insurers with equity of under $5 billion will automatically be eligible to be closely held, however, transactions involving these companies will continue to require the approval of the Minister of Finance.

The Budget  Mr. Speaker, I was not going to rise until the hon. member kept giving us these factual errors. I think the best place to look is page 114 of the budget document, which shows a chart of the federal transfer payments to the provinces. It is today at an all time high. The error the hon. member makes is that like provincial premiers he fails to include in his transfer numbers the transfer of tax points, which the government made to the provinces some time ago.

The Budget  Mr. Speaker, let us suppose that, tomorrow, the federal government were to convert all cash transfers to Quebec into tax points—it will not do so, but let us suppose for a moment that it did—what would happen? The Quebec government would say that today the federal contribution to health and education is nil.

The Budget  Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to hear the suggestion from our hon. colleague from the Canadian Alliance that the Liberal government has been biased all these years in the direction of favouring growth in Alberta rather than in other parts of the country. I take that as a compliment.