Mr. Speaker, I ask the member to refer back to the private member's bill of the member for Saskatoon—Humboldt of the Canadian Alliance Party. I have a copy of it and it says that the bill would prevent fringe parties, such as the Progressive Conservative Party and the NDP, from having seats in the Commons.
I do not think of us as a fringe party, either the NDP or the Conservative Party. We perform a valuable service. We represent thousands of people.
When I read that my immediate thought was that we should refer to the Alliance Party as the fringe benefit party. Its members ran on promises. If they were elected their leader would not move into Stornoway, for example. They would turn it into a bingo hall. If we check who is living there now, we will find that the leader of the Alliance Party lives there.
They also said that they would not take a car for the leader. Their leader would not accept a car, and he has one now.
The ultimate flip-flop was the pension issue. I know candidates who ran in the 1993 election and lost their seats. They were hammered because righteous Alliance Party members said that they would never take a pension. Good candidates were defeated on that one issue.
Now they say they have families to look after. What about the families of the others that were misled, defeated and maligned? We should call it the fringe benefit party or the flip-flop party.
How does the hon. member think we could attract more people to vote? How could we re-establish credibility with the voters and the electorate? There was a very low turnout in the last election. It was shameful that so few people felt motivated to vote.
I would like the hon. member to address how we could present a better package, not as a party but as a group of politicians. How could we attract more voters?