As the month of June drags on, the issues of integrity and tax cuts are dominating political discussion.

First and foremost, we must look at the persistent questions surrounding the awarding of various forms of government largesse in the Prime Minister's (PM) riding.

From hotels to golf courses to CIDA contracts to Business Development Bank of Canada loans to missing Access to Information documents to contributions to the PM's campaign, questions continue to be raised as to the role of the PM and his staff in various funding matters. Add to this mix a cast of characters, some with criminal records, and the integrity of the PM and that of his office (PMO) is clearly under attack.

The Prime Minister, who claims he has done nothing wrong, must understand that he is held to a higher standard of ethical conduct by virtue of his position as Leader of the Government and by the fact that he invited this standard of measurement during the 1993 election campaign.

He should invoke Section 11 of the Auditor General's Act which allows for an Order in Council to facilitate an immediate and impartial investigation. This issue should not be left to the partisanship (on all sides) of question period.

Moving down East, the Nova Scotia government is suffering from an integrity deficit of its own. In its budget tabled this week, the governing Liberals claim a $1.6 million surplus for the fiscal year 1999/2000.

However, missing from the books is the first $250 million of debt commitments that the Nova Scotia government will make as part of $600 million, three-year program designed to prop-up the province's debt-ridden regional health boards and finance other health expenditures. Such "cooking of the books" amounts to fraudulent practice by elected officials.

Sadly, such flouting of generally accepted public sector accounting practices is becoming more commonplace, from B.C.'s "fudge-it budget" in 1996 to four successive budgets by Paul Martin where expenditures are front-end loaded points to a serious problem that elected officials of various stripes have with integrity when it comes to the presentation of public finances.

Staying in the Maritimes, we take great comfort with the battle brewing in the New Brunswick election. Both the Liberals and Progressive Conservatives have made tax cuts a hallmark of their respective platforms.

The Liberals propose to cut the provincial income tax rate from 60% to 56% while the Tories have pledged to cut the rate to 54% and have also proposed a Taxpayer Protection Act (TPA). This legislation, which has been promoted by the CTF for seven years, allows citizens to vote "yes" or "no" in binding referendums when governments propose to increase
taxes.

Regardless of the partisan identity of the victors in the June 7th provincial election, taxpayers in New Brunswick will win with some long overdue tax relief.

And finally back in the nation's capital, Quebec's high tax policies have hit home to several Bloc Quebecois parliamentary staffers. Since 1993, Bloc MPs and staffers have taken great "separatist pride" in living in the various cities (namely Hull, Aylmer and Gatineau) in Quebec just across from Ottawa.But this decision affects their pocketbooks and now some Bloc staffers are openly questioning the merit of their symbolic approach.

It seems that Mike Harris' low-tax policies could save some staffers up to $3,000/year in income taxes. And even the 1999/2000 Quebec budget notes that a Quebecker with an income of $25,000 pays almost $800 more in income taxes than his/her Ontario counterpart.

Add to this higher gas prices and other cost of living expenditures and one can see why Ontario's license plate slogan "Yours to Discover" is becoming quite appealing to our Bloc Quebecois friends.