Mr. Speaker, it is very interesting to note that virtually the only people speaking to the issue are the people from the Reform Party. It is particularly interesting to note because a debate implies there are two sides: the good side and the bad side or the up side and the down side. In this case it is interesting that virtually none of the Liberal members of Parliament are prepared to stand in an attempt to defend this pension plan.
It is also instructive to take a look at what else is happening in the country in legislatures. I think of the B.C. Liberal leader. I will quickly read a news release that was put out under his name on April 22:
B.C. Liberal Leader Gordon Campbell announced today that pensions for Members of the Legislature will be eliminated under a B.C. Liberal government.
Campbell said it's time to put an end to the special pension and tax privileges that have traditionally been given to MLAs in British Columbia. "Elected officials should be treated no differently than any other British Columbian when it comes to receiving pension benefits from taxpayers. The MLA pension is not appropriate for a job that is based on an elected term of five years".
"Most people believe MLAs deserve fair and appropriate compensation. To ensure that happens an independent commission should be established", said Campbell. "There should be a single standard for all people of this province with MLAs paying the same taxes and having the same choices as other British Columbians".
Under the current system an MLA can receive a monthly pension if the member has served for seven years or more or has served in more than two Legislative Assemblies. "We don't want to penalize people for running for public office but we also do not believe there should be special perks".
This is interesting because Mr. Campbell is a Liberal. I have always felt that a Liberal is a Liberal is a Liberal. He spoke of the old style Liberal politicians that seem to inhabit this place.
Campbell said that old style politicians set up systems that have isolated them from the realities that British Columbians face on a daily basis. "That's why B.C. Liberals say no special pensions and no special tax benefits for MLAs".
I wonder what happens when members like the member for Vancouver Quadra or the member for Vancouver Centre or the member for Victoria, a cabinet minister, manage to get across the mountains from British Columbia. Is there a change in the water in Ottawa? Is there a change in the smog in Ottawa? What is it that makes the difference for members who come from Vancouver and Victoria, British Columbia? What happens when they arrive in Ottawa that suddenly they seem to be in absolute total contradiction to the leader of the B.C. Liberal Party or the Leader of the Opposition.
It is not just British Columbians who seem to have this gross failure of understanding, some kind of a short circuit somewhere. It would seem as though the Ontario Liberals, currently seeking a mandate for their members of the provincial Parliament, have seen the light. For some reason it seems to completely elude the comprehension of the people who bear the Liberal stripe and come to the House.
There is a major difference between the federal and Ontario Liberal proposals. The difference is a defined contribution plan versus a defined benefit plan. These people are calling for a defined benefit plan so that the Canadian taxpayer will be on the hook and continue to pay and pay and pay for members no matter what happens. That is a defined benefit plan.
The Ontario Liberals are calling for a defined contribution plan, which is precisely what the federal Reform Party is asking for. We are simply saying that we should be going to a growing industry standard, which is matching dollar for dollar. In a defined benefit plan, if the employer and employee contributions plus plan investment performance do not match the promise made by the employer, the employer has an unfunded pension liability.
That leads me to members who were in the House in a previous Parliament. Some of them are currently in the House. Politicians were telling Canadians that there was no problem, that their porky pension plan was taken care of. Lo and behold, a few years ago Canadians were suddenly told: "Oops, we made a small $110 million mistake. Isn't that too bad? We will make sure we are properly funded. We will just take $110 million for ourselves from general revenues".
Although that was supposed to have resolved the situation, the following year they had to take another number in the tens of millions of dollars from the poor, hard working, overburdened, much shackled taxpayer. This is absolutely unconscionable.
I ask again as I did at the start of my address why it is, if federal Liberals are right and we are wrong, that we have virtually zero participation by Liberal members of the House in
the issue. Why is it that we have put up tens and tens of speakers out of our 52, whereas they have only put up a handful on the issue?