Mr. Speaker, very simply the issue of RRSPs is a very good example of the difference between the thinking of the Reform Party and the thinking of the Liberal Party.
The hon. member talked about increases in taxes as a result of changes such as reducing the age at which one can make a contribution from 71 to 69. At that point we are not talking about providing retirement income; we are talking about sheltering wealth for those who have the means to shelter wealth.
She was concerned about massive management fees no longer being deductible for tax purposes. However she did not mention that they would be payable out of the RRSP itself and would not impact the taxpayer.
She lamented that we did not increase the $13,500 limit. Those people who can afford to put away $13,500 would have to make $75,000 a year.
The hon. member has been critical of changes which affect the most wealthy Canadians, but she failed to recognize that one of the important changes included in the budget was the elimination of the seven-year limitation on the carry forward of unused balances of RRSPs. This means ordinary young Canadians who are struggling from paycheque to paycheque will have an opportunity in the future to make up those years in which they could not make a contribution.
The difference between the Reform Party and the Liberal Party is that the Reform Party is advocating on behalf of the most wealthy Canadians and the Liberal Party is advocating on behalf of ordinary Canadians who are living from paycheque to paycheque.