Opposition Liberals adopted a bizarre line of attack on the Conservative government's plan to chop spending by $1-billion over the next two years and find another $1-billion in efficiency savings over the same period. They question the necessity of trimming fat when the government is sitting on bags of surplus dollars. What the opposition is telling Canadians is that using tax dollars responsibly is not a priority when Ottawa is swimming in excess money. To them, the surplus means Ottawa can afford to fund everything and anything, regardless of necessity.

It is an absurd belief, but it explains why the previous Liberal government was a better steward of tax dollars when faced with annual deficits than when handling surpluses. When in the red, they had to make choices and spend more prudently.

When the Liberals assumed office in 1993, program spending stood at $122-billion. In 1999, program spending was $119-billion or three per cent lower. Holding down the size of government was an impressive accomplishment requiring fiscal discipline. It resulted in a more resourceful government.

Moderate budget surpluses were recorded beginning in 1997, but the cash really started to tumble in when the surplus hit $14-billion in 1999. Spending soared with this turnabout. In 2004, program spending hit an all-time high of $176-billion - an eye-popping 48 per cent increase in only five years! Such irresponsible spending underscores why collecting massive multi-year, multi-billion dollar surpluses is terrible public policy: Budgets are busted as politicians cannot control themselves from "spending down" the excess money collected from taxpayers.

Excess tax revenues do not give lawmakers license to start wasting money. Canadians understand that saving diligently and living frugally underpin wise financial planning.

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty and Treasury Board President John Baird are thus to be congratulated for trimming program spending, albeit by a tiny amount. (A $1-billion cut represents approximately half of one per cent of Ottawa's program spending.) Similarly, it was pleasing that the Conservative government reported program spending fell to $175-billion last year, a drop of $1.1-billion versus the 2004 fiscal year. This reduction marked Canada's first year-over-year decline in 9 years - government shrunk and the sky did not fall.

One good day of announcements, however, is not a harbinger of fiscal reformation. Ottawa's spending is at risk of jumping dramatically. The Conservative's first budget pegged program expenditures in 2006 at $189-billion. Based on original estimates, Ottawa was set to boost spending this year by 5.3 per cent - hardly an insubstantial increase. Based on new figures, if this year's budget expenditures are not scaled back, spending will jump by $13.6-billion or almost eight per cent. This is the same yearly increases posted by the old Liberal government in its last five years in office. Is the Conservative government's period of restraint already over

It is obviously time for an economic update so Mr. Flaherty can set the record straight. The Conservative government must ensure program spending is kept down instead of galloping ahead. As well, the federal government should collect in taxes only what is needed to fund spending priorities.

Large annual surpluses represent over-taxation by government and the money should go back to taxpayers in the form of lower income taxes. Reducing the amount of tax dollars will force lawmakers to make choices and prioritize spending requirements. And one of those priorities must be debt-repayment. In place of the current policy of reducing debt only when a surplus is realized, Ottawa should instead set yearly debt reduction targets - as was done with the deficit - and make those targets the law. Such a change will ensure debt repayment is a budgeted priority, not an afterthought.

Mr. Flaherty recently said he will end the practice of announcing surprise surpluses. If he does, it will bring greater transparency to budget making. Taxpayers remember when the last Liberal finance minister pegged the 2003 surplus at $1.9-billion. It ended up at $9.1-billion. Canadians are fed-up with Ottawa's budget shell game.

The 2006 Budget reduced some taxes, the one-point GST cut for example, but the tax relief was not nearly as dramatic as the Conservative government would like voters to believe. Last year Ottawa collected $104-billion in personal income taxes, which accounts for nearly half of all revenues. An additional $33-billion in GST revenues flowed to the federal government from taxpaying consumers. Individuals and families are carrying the lion share of Canada's tax burden and deserve a break. Taxpayers will consider Minister Flaherty's 2007 Budget a failure if it does not offer Canadians broad-based personal income tax cuts.

The Conservative government did the right thing this year by resisting opposition calls to spend the surplus and for putting the balance of $13.2-billion towards reducing Canada's half-a-trillion dollar debt. However, future surpluses should not be generated on the backs of Canadians as was the case under the Liberal government. Instead a surplus - and therefore debt reduction - will exist if the new government resists the urge to overspend.

Asking politicians to restrain themselves with our tax dollars is like asking children not to gorge themselves on Halloween candy. Sometimes it's best to just take the bag away.