Last week the House of Commons Finance Committee released its pre-budget report entitled: Facing the Future: Challenges & Choices for a New Era. The report is an attempt to precis almost six months of hearings and submissions from over 300 individuals and groups representing millions of Canadians.

For the most part, the committee's 28 recommendations are taxpayer friendly and represent a significant downsizing of expectations from the incredulous wish list of 60 recommendations that were forwarded in 1997.

But if you read past the headlines and Liberal spin surrounding this report, it's not a pretty picture. Indeed it is downright depressing. Eighteen of the committee's recommendations are almost identical to recommendations made in 1997. Some say this is a mark of consistency, but it really means that the recommendations were pointless or even worse, ignored. And this is exactly the case.

Ten of the 18 recommendations are nothing but motherhood statements including advice to make prudent assumptions on economic growth and interest rate projections. The committee also reiterated its call for reducing the debt-to-GDP ratio. This bravado is pointless and doesn't commit the feds to one single action.

How about a binding schedule of legislated debt reduction with severe financial penalties for government ministers if the reduction targets aren't met Flimsy non-binding targets do nothing to instill confidence in Canadians. They do nothing to soothe the money markets. And they don't reduce a penny of our $580 billion national debt!

Don't look for any action on the other eight retread recommendations from 1997 either. Topping the list is the recommendation to re-index the income tax system to inflation. Over 3.5 million Canadians have been pulled onto the tax rolls or pushed into higher tax brackets because of this non-indexation of tax brackets, more commonly referred to as bracket creep.

The real "creeps" are Paul Martin and his provincial counterparts who continue to raise taxes through the bracket creep back door without taking any political heat. All the while they crow about their so-called targeted tax relief measures. We pointed this out to the Finance Committee during our appearance in November - but they must have forgotten (read: wouldn't dare) to put this fact in their report.

Another holdover from 1997 is the recommendation to raise the foreign content restriction on RRSPs from 20% to 30%. Given the fact that our pyramid pension scheme (aka: the CPP) is still going broke, allowing Canadians more freedom to secure their financial futures through more foreign market investments seems sound. The shredder in Martin's office anxiously awaits this one.

Even worse than the committee's play it again Sam recommendations, is their out-of-left-field demands for a productivity covenant and a return to program review. During our appearance, committee chairman Maurizio Bevilacqua floated his idea of a productivity covenant.

In theory, establishing benchmarks against which new government initiatives should be measured is a positive step. But the government must get the tax mix right (read: significantly reduced) and get our debt under control before we consider a productivity covenant.

Finally, Bevilacqua and friends propose to use the program review process to vet new initiatives. Program review was supposed to redefine government and weed out unproductive programs and spin off (read: privatize) those departments that no longer served a public policy purpose. Instead, it became political show to cover the fact that program spending wasn't really reduced.

Facing the Future does no such thing. It's déjà vu all over again.