Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, I have to tell you that I am always shocked to see that everything boils down to a very partisan game. My colleagues opposite are looking elsewhere and are busy with their cellphones instead of listening to what the opposition has to say.
The study Mr. Saxton proposed is important, but I will turn the question back to him. Why are all opposition proposals dismissed out of hand by the Conservatives? That's particularly absurd. We negotiate in good faith, but we are refused requests that are perfectly reasonable and, most importantly, entirely in the public interest. That's the substance of the problem, be it in the Standing Committee on Finance, in other committees, or as part of House business.
I have no problem with supporting this motion, quite the contrary. However, will our work always be a one-way street? Will the government representatives be open to considering the NDP's proposals during that study? Will we always have the will of the government imposed upon us, with its choice of study topics that don't reflect the problems business owners, families, workers and retirees deal with on a daily basis?
Canadians are aging. Fluctuations in oil prices and currency are leading to changes in the price of a number of daily necessities that have nothing to do with the higher income of retirees.
I don't understand why we are still working in a potential climate of free-for-all, when we could reach a consensus and come up with negotiated solutions much more easily.
I am asking Mr. Saxton to tell me when he will stop spitting in our face when we put forward perfectly reasonable and fundamental proposals for all Canadians, as is potentially the case with the notice in question. I hope that the study will be conducted under proper conditions and that we won't end up on a one-way street where the government's election platform would be imposed on us.