Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague is absolutely correct. There is great disappointment in this budget because in many ways it divides Canadians but does not unite them.
I would also like to give the member the opportunity to explain to Canadians, especially people in his riding, what democracy means. Democracy means when the Prime Minister, who was then in opposition, said that when a motion passes the House this is what government should adhere to.
A motion did pass this House last November. It was called the veterans first motion. In that motion, we asked that the SISIP program be redone. Two DND ombudsmen also said the same thing. It is unfair to disabled soldiers when their insurance money gets clawed back. It is a sin. We have the fiscal capacity to fix it. We waited for the budget; it was not there.
Then there is the VIP extension for widows and widowers. That was in the motion passed by the House. It was a promise by the Prime Minister, but it was not in the budget.
Then there was the elimination of the gold-digger clause when soldiers and RCMP officers married after the age of 60. That was in the motion passed by the House. Two Conservatives had private members' bill on it. Yet the Conservatives voted against it.
There are many other things that we would like to see done. In the brevity of time, those are the three main elements.
Why does this member think the government so callously in opposition supported these endeavours but once in government voted against them even when it has the fiscal capacity to help the widows, and our injured soldiers and veterans?