Madam Speaker, this question has been asked so many times in the House. I will attempt to answer it differently because it seems that Reform members do not understand.
There is a balance to be offered when there is such a huge problem as we have in this country. We inherited the problem.
I like to compare it with a program I saw on TV. In New York City the underground infrastructure of the water system is so old and rusty that they cannot check to see if a valve is working. There is so much rust that the valve will break if they turn it. I like to make that comparison.
The people I share this with, the people of my riding and other ridings and the people from my party and other parties, except for the Reform Party, seem to relate that there is a danger in overkill.
Definitely, Canadians and the Liberal government would like to say let us slash and burn and there is no more debt. The only serious difficulty is it would affect human beings. That is the part the Reform Party cannot associate with. We include it in our answers and try to explain to them that they have to have some compassion. That word is used often by a good many members in this House but it is never used by members of the Reform Party.
A society with compassion is often judged by the way it treat its seniors. Taking $3 billion out of the seniors' pockets is not my idea of compassion. I have answered the question for the people who understand. I feel like the minister or the priest who preaches to the people who do not practise. They sit there having heard the answer so many times and still they do not understand.