Mr. Chairman, my congratulations to you for your remarkable ability to remember everyone when we are sitting in different seats.
I want to return to what the government House leader was saying earlier. He expressed concern about the fact that he now earns less than his assistant deputy minister. Obviously Canadians' hearts will bleed at the thought that the minister would be earning less than one of the highest paid civil servants in the country.
I want to point out that it is not a unique situation. We find junior officers in the Canadian military who earn less than chief warrant officers, based on the fact that the non-commissioned officer has some form of superior expertise.
I would like to ask the government House leader some questions which relate to opting out. First, am I to understand that the extra stipends paid to MPs who serve in some post or capacity other than as members of parliament, for example as chair or vice chair of a committee or as a party leader or a House leader, can opt out of one of those or are they mandatory without an opting out clause?
The second question relates to opting out permanently. I gather it would mean that in the next election should someone on this side opt out, the voters would know that the Liberal candidate opposing him or her, for example, would be paid more following the election than that incumbent MP, and that in future elections that difference would grow over time.
Does the inflation rate clause mentioned in his previous comments apply in perpetuity as well for those who opt out? Can we assume that over time the differential will grow and grow?