Mr. Speaker, I am going to use just a few minutes to give a few of my thoughts because I want to give my colleague from North Vancouver ample time to sum up.
A couple of observations have come to my mind as I have been listening to the debate. I find it rather ironic, and if I can dare use the term hypocritical, among members here. I use hypocrisy here in the good sense where members are trying to portray something where really it is not an accurate representation.
All the members who have spoken after my hon. colleague in the Reform Party on his private member's motion have spoken against this motion. They claim that it is because of a diminishment of democracy.
If pairing does not diminish democracy, where you agree not to vote, how can one then argue that by giving your actual vote and simply asking someone else to deliver your actual vote is a diminishment of democracy compared to what we have now? To me that is not a valid argument. I respect these other members for their point of view but I also respectfully say that is not accurate.
I would also like to point out that in a sense our standing here this afternoon and debating this is a diminishment of democracy. We are trying to persuade each other of a point of view but there will not be a decision on this.
Just before Christmas I had a motion in the House that all private members' business should be votable. It is ludicrous that we should stand here and persuade each other but that the members themselves voted I think almost unanimously and said they do not want to vote. They want to put forward a private member's bill but they do not want to vote on it.
I would call it a total lack of democracy. Freedom of speech is an important factor, which is diminished by the eight pages of words we cannot use, so I am very restricted now in being able to express myself.
It is one thing to be able to speak, but is it not the essence of democracy that we actually get to vote and make decisions? That is a very important missing link.
I hope that we sincerely go about changing this Chamber. I hope we change this place of democracy, this place of debate and votes so that it truly works on behalf of Canadians.
I am in my second term as a member of Parliament. I discovered very quickly that it is a full time job twice. One should be here 100% of the time to look at the bills and the motions, analyse them, work together with staff and communications people. At the same time there is a full time job in the riding. People want to be heard. They want to have access to their member of Parliament.
Whenever I go home I go to meetings. People are eager to give me their ideas on the issues facing our country.
We are not being realistic when we pretend that everyone is going to be here all the time. The House sits five days a week. Maybe we ought to look at that and make a provision so we can all do our jobs better by having more time to be in our ridings.
We cannot be here debating issues in the House and at the same time be in our ridings doing that work which is so very important.
It appears to me that the way it works right now is that the members, by pairing, are really abdicating their democratic ability because they are agreeing not to vote. It is just like they said in the private member's motion I presented before Christmas, that they agree they do not want to vote on private members' business.
We need to really think hard about these things.