![]() ![]() ![]()
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Ottawa, November 30, 1995 Government Responds to Quebec's Allegations Concerning Stabilisation PaymentsFinance Minister Paul Martin today rejected comments made by Quebec's Finance Minister as an attempt to score political points. Quebec insists that it is not getting its fair share of transfer payments. This is incorrect. The federal stabilisation program is designed to compensate provincial governments in the event of an absolute reduction in revenues as a result of economic circumstances. The terms of this compensation are set out in federal legislation and related regulations. Mr. Martin noted that, "This program constitutes an insurance system for which Canadian taxpayers pay the premiums." Like any insurance program, the compensation is proportional to damages incurred. "Quebec was compensated for its revenue losses, no more, no less." "Quebec's argument that it has not received its fair share is tantamount to wishing it had been more severely affected, so that it may have secured greater compensation. Everyone knows that such is not the principle underlying insurance." If we want to talk about "fair share", let us take a look at the overall federal transfers Quebec has benefited from in 1995-96: $11.6 billion, or 31 per cent of the Canadian total, which is more than Quebec's population share. Mr. Martin also rejected the allegation that the stabilisation program favours the have provinces. "Quebec has received over $3.6 billion in Equalization payments in 1992-93; the province's revenues - contrary to that of wealthier provinces which receive no Equalization - have already been stabilized through this broader program. That is why Quebec needs less in the form of stabilization payments. Total transfers to Quebec in 1995-96 amount to $1,600 per capita, or 60 per cent more than that received by the three wealthier provinces (B.C., Alberta and Ontario)." ___________________ Diane Lafleur |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|