“The budget gives foreign companies a big discount to take our natural resources and process them in other countries. I want the government to explain how it will protect our resources and make sure they are processed here.”

“Mr. Speaker, people seem to have a lot to say this morning, but you will not have to interrupt me. In his introduction, the member said that Canada has what the world wants. That is what worries me the most, because what they are trying to do with the 6% under the superdeduction is offer a massive discount to foreign investors who want to come here to extract our natural resources and very likely, or rather certainly, process them elsewhere. That is what we call selling our natural resources at a discount. I would like the member to explain to me how the government plans to implement measures to protect this and ensure that processing takes place here. We are all in favour of economic development, but there are limits.”

“This budget is not green at all. It gives billions of dollars to fossil fuels, puts $43 billion toward an oil sands pipeline, and funds fracking. I want the member to answer me in French. Is he fine with continuing oil and gas subsidies and tearing down our climate plan?”

“Mr. Speaker, it is rather unbelievable that the government is sending out its green warriors this morning to try to make this budget seem green, when it is not green at all. What we are seeing this morning is greenwashing, and it is shameful to see the government members trying to make us believe that this is a green budget. I would like the member for Honoré-Mercier to answer me in French, because he mentioned the importance of the francophonie, but he only spoke French for about 20 seconds of his 10-minute speech. That is really something else. Let us talk about the environment. This budget includes billions of dollars in subsidies for fossil fuels. That money will be used to produce oil. It earmarks $43 billion for an oil sands pipeline. It includes funding to produce gas via hydraulic fracturing, which is banned in Quebec. Is the member for Honoré-Mercier comfortable with the government’s decision to continue with oil and gas subsidies? Is he comfortable with dismantling the climate change action plan, including industrial carbon pricing and the clean electricity strategy? Is he—”

“I agree with my colleague. As an accountant, I cannot make sense of the government's budget numbers. Ottawa uses tricks to hide the real size of the deficit. The only thing they cannot hide is that the debt keeps going up. I want to ask my colleague what will happen if our debt keeps rising. The government says our credit rating is good, but can this continue forever?”

“Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his speech. One thing that drew my attention as he spoke—probably because of my own academic training as an accountant—is everything he pointed out about deficit accounting, and what constitutes an expense, an investment or a debt. In the end, none of it makes any sense anymore. My colleague and I are not the only ones who cannot make heads nor tails of it. It would leave anyone with training in accounting, economics or finance completely in the dark. The system has become totally insane: Ottawa is using every trick in the book to hide the real status of the deficit. I agree with that. I also greatly appreciated it when he mentioned that the only indication we have now about the actual state of things is when we see the debt increasing, because it has become so hard to hide. In any case, the right approach still eludes them. My question for my colleague is this: What are the consequences of rising debt? The government keeps telling us that Canada has a AAA credit rating, but it seems to me that it has been repeating that line for a long time while deficits continue to grow. Can that really go on forever?”