Madam Speaker, what is shocking is that there is no argument against it. Saving $4 billion a year is a good idea. That money would go back into the pockets of Canadians, and it is money that right now is going into the pockets of big drug companies. Those are not the people we are here to defend. I do not know why the Liberals see it as being their role to defend those guys through inaction, if not in words, and I want to speak briefly to the comments my colleague made about what we are hearing from the other side.
If we had no sense of history in this place, we might say we should give the Liberals the benefit of the doubt. They say they are working on it. Okay, let us give them time to work on it. Even the motion does give them time to work on it, so nobody is being unreasonable on this side of the House.
However, when we look at the Liberals historically in terms of their commitments in 1993 for a national pharmacare program, we see that they had 13 years to do it and did not even try, and then on other commitments, such as electoral reform, the current government members strung the House along until ultimately they said they were never committed to it in the first place, so there is no reason to take them at their word when they say this is something that they are going to get around to.