Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to this speech. There were a couple of anomalies within it which we should think about.
She indicated this was an old thinking, knee-jerk reaction. To me that is an oxymoron. Knee-jerk is something not thought of before.
The principles we are espousing are based on both experience and thinking. We have found the country did best when there was the least amount of government, when there was less intrusion. To now say we should once again use those principles of self-sufficiency and encourage people to look after themselves and making it possible for them to do that is not knee-jerk. That is good, solid thinking.
The member said Canadians reject this. She said that several times. That is not my experience. I have shared this concept with a number of people for over a year. I am pleased the ideas we had are now coming forward in the House. I have yet to hear a single person indicate anything but enthusiasm for this concept.
With respect to the reduction of old age security benefits, the member made mention that Reform is saying we are going to cut back. I want to make it very clear, I want everyone to know we are forced into this, not by what Reform is doing but what governments over the last 30 years have done. We have run out of money and the Reform policy is to target the remaining money, as little as there is, to those who have true need.
When we are talking about reducing old age security, we are talking about reducing to those who do not need it because they have an income over the national average.
We would be most honest with Canadians if we were to say the Canada pension plan is at risk because we will not have the money. That is the result of Liberal and Conservatives governments. That has to come to an end.