Madam Speaker, our Reform Party colleague scornfully tells us that the debate is irrelevant.
He would like speedy tax reform to increase productivity, but there are always two ways of attaining one's goals in life: get there directly through tax reform, and he knows very well that the present government does not seem to want to move quickly in that direction; or get there indirectly.
If one wants to establish a balance of power during negotiations, this debate about striking a committee to consider the matter will certainly put us in the position of having to carry out a tax reform.
I think the debate is badly aligned. If the motion is well drafted, and I believe that it is, it contains no mention of a common currency. It talks about a pan-American monetary union. This in no way excludes national currencies.
I would like to ask the member if he in fact makes a distinction between a common currency and a pan-American monetary union that retains national currencies as is, with a strict variation in the rate of exchange.
I think the motion has been well drafted but very badly understood by all members of the House, and I would ask him to provide some clarification.