Madam Speaker, I heard the hon. member casting disparaging remarks about the Reform Party. He likens us to Ronald Reagan who was elected as President of the United States on the promise of reducing the deficit and trying to get the massive debt under control.
There is a different system of government in Canada from what the Americans have in the United States. In Canada the executive branch and the legislative branch sit together whereas Mr. Reagan had to contend with the Democrats who dominated the Congress. In this government and in this Parliament the executive and the legislative branches are one and the same. Therefore they have much more power and ability to deal with deficits and debt than Mr. Reagan did.
Does the member recognize and acknowledge that fact?
I listened to the hon. member's remarks on fighting redistribution and heard that there was an uproar in his constituency over this proposed redistribution. I do not hear that uproar in my riding nor do I hear it in Canada. I do not see it on the front pages of the newspapers; I do not hear it being discussed. I continue to believe mightily it is an issue for members of Parliament much more so than it is an issue for Canadians.
I agree that one issue which is important to Canadians is the expenditure of money. The almost $5 million which has been spent to date will be lost if this government motion succeeds.
Furthermore, if the government is serious about capping the number of seats then why is it not clearly stated in the bill that the number of seats will be capped? If that were stated, the bill would probably have the support of the Reform Party but it is not. There is just a vague acknowledgement that the steadily increasing number of MPs will be looked at, but there is no commitment to stop it.
I ask the member for his comments on that.