Madam Speaker, the member opposite must be having some kind of out of body experience. He is in here railing about how bad it was in the prior government but he has joined a government that is embodying a scandal 10 times worse. What has gone on in the Liberal government makes Watergate look like a shoplifting charge.
He stands up now and tries this sleight of hand to suggest that somehow there is something that the opposition is doing in terms of their travel budgets. He makes this bizarre analogy that members out west are abusing their budget.
Guess what, Mr. Speaker? They have to travel to get back to their constituencies. I have been to the member's riding. It is a big, beautiful riding. They have the same problems in his riding that we are experiencing in the large riding I represent in Nova Scotia.
My question for the member is the following. Is the principle of this scandal now the priority of the government with respect to the inquiry? Are the people in his riding satisfied with the priorities of this government? Will priorities for health, security and education be overshadowed by this scandal involving the unspeakable waste of public funds? Do the people in his riding have a big problem with unemployment, for instance?
Why is the member disagreeing with the opposition? He needs to take a look at the government he is supporting right now.
He should turn that finger around and point it directly at himself. If he has a problem with how the government has been operating, why does he not say something to the front bench of his own party?
I know he likes to jump back and forth, and he has done so in the past, but he now has an opportunity as a member of the governing party to do something. Trying to go back 10 years and distract members' attention away from what is going on in the Liberal ranks right now will not work.