Mr. Speaker, I have a difficult act to follow.
One thought that occurred to me is that perhaps the hon. member should consult with the minister of Indian affairs, who has an inside track to a bishop. He often quotes letters from the bishop. Maybe the hon. member could get clarification on some of the scriptures.
It is with some remorse that I stand to debate this issue today. That is because I represent the point of view of ordinary Canadians who are fed up with the type of thing that has been happening with the MPs' pension plan for the last number of years. I regret this, because I have a lot of respect for members of the House. I believe that all of us, when we decided to run for election, did so with high motivation and because we wanted to serve our country.
I have never been involved politically before. I was an ordinary Canadian who dutifully voted, but I had never belonged to a political party and I had never participated in an election process. It was all new to me. One of the reasons I joined the Reform Party, and there were many of them, was because of the fact that it was promising integrity in government. It was promising integrity, openness, and accountability.
That appealed to me. When I joined I sent a donation never contemplating I would ever run for this office; that came later. I was attracted to the party because it believes governments should live within their means just like all other businesses and all other Canadians. Reformers said back in 1988 in a brochure that they believe MPs should be representing their constituents,
not to be told here how to vote but to represent and to reflect the wishes and aspirations of those who elected them.
I was also attracted because they indicated a member of Parliament should represent and promote the well-being of the country and the constituents, not his or her own well-being. When I came here and found the pension plan available to members of Parliament-