Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise to speak on the motion before us today to move this bill one further step along the way.
The hon. government whip this morning called for the question to be put in order to move this bill on to committee. I think that is a wonderful idea. When this bill goes to committee, we will be calling witnesses to find out what they think of this bill. If we are to call in interested people regarding this bill, every taxpayer in the country deserves to be heard with their opinion on this bill. Bring them in, bring them all in.
The Reform Party would be quite willing in this particular situation to approve a travel budget for this committee to go right across the country to find out what taxpayers think of this bill. All taxpayers have an interest in this bill, not just the ones around here, not the special interest groups we normally hear from, but the taxpayers, each and every one of them, those who have to squeak by and eke out a meagre income and yet pay taxes for us, as well the rich and the famous who do not mind paying their taxes, but even the small individual Canadians who have to be squeezed by Revenue Canada to get that last nickel out of them.
We have heard how the Minister of National Revenue has said that they are going to be aggressive to ensure that tax collection policies collect the taxes owing. We expect these people to pay the taxes while we sit in the lap of luxury for the rest of lives. These are the people we should be hearing from. They want to be heard.
That is why I think this committee should travel right across the country and stop at every little town, village, and city along the way to find out if there is a consensus for the government's policies it has brought in on this particular bill, if there is a consensus in the country to support what it is trying to do. I very much doubt it. I do not think there is any consensus whatsoever. In fact if there is any consensus it is in total and absolute opposition to this bill introduced by the government.
I think the motion today is quite appropriate, that we move on to the committee stage. Let Canadians speak. Let them be heard. We have talked for days in this House on this particular subject. There has been acrimony and animosity. Let us find out what Canadians, the rank and file, really think about this subject. I am quite sure that they support the Reform Party's position, which is if you want a pension let it be reasonable.
According to the Deputy Prime Minister, we have made such great sacrifices. I said before, show me one person in the House who has been dragged in here kicking and screaming to serve. I do not think there is one, not one. Therefore there is no sacrifice. Everyone who sits in this House is here because they want to be in the House. That is the reality of it all. It is not the idea that we have served so much and we have given so much that we are entitled to live in the lap of luxury at the taxpayer's expense for the rest of our lives. That is not defensible in this day and age. The previous speaker talked about how he would not want this wonderful country to hit the wall. Neither would I. We all know that is a possibility.
We are standing here today debating a bill that will make legislators rich for the rest of their lives. A few weeks ago we debated a budget and looked at the very real consequences and possibilities of the country hitting the wall. Future generations will ask: "Where were they when we hit the wall?" I will tell the House where we are. We are debating how we can keep ourselves rich.