Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if I understood well. The member said the minister will still be accountable for tax legislation to his peers in the House, that he will still be required to answer any questions parliamentarians will want to ask.
If the minister is still responsible and has to answer the questions, what is the use of changing the law?
Is it to harmonize federal and provincial tax laws? There is no need to estaablish a superagency to do that. It can be done with the provinces, as shown by the harmonization of the GST and the PST in Quebec.
I do not know if that is what they want to do. But what is behind all this—and I would like the member to confirm this if he can—is that the minister will no longer be the employer of the tax collectors who now work for Revenue Canada and collection agencies. The bill says that the agency will be their employer. Will the minister end up with his chauffeur as his sole employee? Is that what it means? Do we still need to have a minister in that case?
Is the government looking to save money at the expense of public servants? It seems to me that this is an anti-union bill. The government is cutting the federal public service by 20%.
Is that the purpose of this bill? If the member has not understood, he can tell us and then again ask the minister the question.