Mr. Speaker, I can hardly believe what I have just heard. My colleague opposite was lamenting the fate of sick people waiting on stretchers. He has the gall to do that after his government has made deep cuts in transfer payments to the provinces, which had no choice but to cut services. He dares to cry over their fate. That takes the cake.
But that is not what I want to talk about. Let me get back to the issue at hand. We are being presented with a motion requesting three things. Here is the first one:
That this House urges the government to respect provincial jurisdiction over health care management—
In other words, we want the government to uphold the Constitution, which is its sworn duty. Here is the second request:
—to increase transfers to the provinces for health care unconditionally—
This means the government should restore the level of transfer payments to the provinces. With this second point, we are asking the federal government to be honest. Here is the third point:
—to avoid using budget surpluses to encroach upon the health care field.
With that third point, we are urging the federal government to abide by the Constitution.
I am flabbergasted that we should even need to move such a motion, as if it were not just natural for a government to be honest and uphold the Constitution, which is its sworn duty. I am surprised that any political party in the House should have to move a motion urging the government to be honest and uphold the Constitution.
This really takes the cake. I am really anxious to see how our motion will fare with members opposite. If they oppose a motion urging the government to be honest and uphold the Constitution, our system is even more rotten than I thought.