-dentists, $108,400; judges, $112,100; and doctors, self-employed, $121,100. That is the cash compensation. If we include other benefits such as pension contributions they vary and bring some of these salaries I have just listed as high as $139,000 and $144,000 in some of the executive positions.
I thank the member for Beaver River for heckling that particular one. I would not have thought of bringing the total compensation to public attention.
I would like to read from two editorials, Madam Speaker. The member opposite said that every editorial writer was against the members of Parliament retirement plan. I submit to you that it is not the case. Let me share the following with you.
This editorial from the February 27, 1992 Hill Times says: ``The Canadian legislator has long since given way to the professional politician. Without an adequate salary and pension plan the only people who would apply for the job today would be the wealthy, the well networked corporate union types, the weak-willed who would use the position to line their own pockets''. That is what one editorial said.
I would like to read this other commentary, which is dated November 21, 1994. It was signed by Dr. Clinton Archibald, political scientist and professor at the University of Ottawa. In a piece entitled "Nos riches politiciens" (Our Rich Politicians), he states that the problem with the charges made by the coalition is that they rest on the premise that it would be to the advantage of the public not to pay its elected representatives well; if that were the case, we would have only one class of members in Parliament: already well-off individuals representing money interests only or aspiring to do so to compensate for their slender income.
Not all editorial writers, not all Canadians are against paying a decent salary to their elected representatives. Yes to pension reform. The Prime Minister announced that it was forthcoming. Yes to all of that, but no to holding the position that all parliamentarians should be entitled to is a paltry salary, paltry compensation, thereby allowing only the rich to be represented in Parliament.
Are amendments necessary? Yes. Are we going to make changes? Yes. Should MPs be paid less? No. MPs should be paid a decent salary to do the work that is necessary to be done. I do not apologize for working hard for my constituents. They pay me well for it. I work hard for them.
We announced in the book "Creating Opportunity" that we were going to change the plan and we will. Therefore, I move:
That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word "reflects" and by substituting therefor the words:
"the commitment made in the document entitled "Creating Opportunity, the Liberal plan for Canada"".