I am glad to hear that. The Liberal member just said that my voice is being heard. I would like my people back in Saint John to know that.
As the motion points out, there is disturbing evidence of continued regional alienation. That is a sad thing. Today we see a five party system in the House of Commons. Before 1993 we did not see that. This has caused a great deal of problems in the House. A government that makes light of regional differences and whose Canada is the Canada of the sixties and seventies has created part of that problem.
Another problem is the abuse of the trust and authority vested in us as members of parliament and in the members yonder who have formed the government.
Last fall's election was totally unnecessary. It was called early, not out of conviction but out of convenience for the Liberal Party. Calling an election when the opposition was not yet prepared was about politics and not about principles.
Elections Canada has suggested that the federal election cost taxpayers over $200 million. Let us imagine what incredible benefits we could have received by using that $200 million in other ways.
Let us think of the ever present crisis in the health care system. If we assume an average of $150,000 for a doctor, we could have afforded 1,274 more family physicians. We could have had over 5,000 more nurses. We could have funded a four year medical program at Dalhousie University for over 6,000 students.
Let us imagine the appreciation of the Canadian people had the federal government invested in 80 MRI units at a cost of about $2.5 million each instead of wasting $200 million. St. Joseph's Hospital and the Saint John Regional Hospital in my riding would have been eternally grateful if the federal government had invested in new equipment for our hospitals.
The government could have chosen to give that money directly back to Canadian taxpayers. If it wanted to give a GST rebate on heating oil, it could have provided all Canadians with it, not just those who are in jail. This would have cost a total of $118 million.
The government could have provided a $500 tax credit for emergency service volunteers, such as our brave volunteer firefighters. The excise tax on diesel fuel could have been eliminated. This is a tax that is crippling our trucking industry for the same $200 million that the government instead chose to spend on an exercise in personal ambition.
Fifteen minutes ago I was passed a document which states that Canadian government officials suggest that the monetary funding of the Kosovo project for the RCMP and the police forces for budget years 2001-02 and 2002-03 will suffer significant budget cuts. This is once again because the money was wasted. This is not what the people of Canada want.
I do not have to tell members that there are many in our country who are far less fortunate than we are. A $200 million investment in our food banks could provide well over 36 million meals, 2 million food baskets for families in need or could fund 610 food banks for a full year. The possibilities are endless.
Three areas where that money could have been spent that are close to my heart include fully compensating the merchant navy veterans, putting that money directly into new equipment for our armed forces, or even the establishment once and for all of a national shipbuilding policy.
When Canadians see such government waste, when they see so many missed opportunities, is it any wonder why they have lost faith in parliament? It distresses me greatly that our people are so indifferent to who now forms the government of our country that they are unwilling to vote. In the process they elect officials by default.
The NDP motion suggests that one option might be some form of proportional representation but it also allows for other electoral reforms. The door is open to other potential avenues of change.
In the last election the PC Party platform recognized the importance of electoral reform and promised to examine a number of possible changes, including proportional representation in run off elections.
We also recognize that many people are happy with the status quo. We do agree that there needs to be a full and open debate before any change can be contemplated. We must gauge whether there is an appetite in the country for the kind of dramatic changes to our basic principles of government that might well be needed to set our system straight. The motion agrees with our position and calls on the House to begin a serious study of all the alternatives that are worthy of our support.
Reaching back through our PC heritage, I must caution members of the perils of opening what are really constitutional questions. There are always difficulties in the details.
Discussions of that kind have always brought with them a balanced share of both unity and division. I believe we all agree in the House that one thing our country does not need is further division.
My party has proposed that we restore the value of our parliament for Canadians to have faith in their system of government. The onus is on us to make the system worthy of their pride.
Part of the restoration involves our giving power back to the people and the elected representatives who they send to Ottawa, not only the Prime Minister or those he chooses for his cabinet.
Our American neighbours elect a president and I am thankful to the Fathers of Confederation that they resisted the temptation to forge our country in their image. Simple matters of compassion and common sense have become issues of competence in government.
We all know of examples when members of the governing party have wanted to vote against their party's stand but have been intimidated and threatened until they have literally broken down into tears or they have been forced to sit on the opposite side as an independent. This was the case with respect to child pornography, hepatitis C and the ethics counsellor.
It is important for us to praise those precious few members on the other side who have had the courage in the past, some even in the recent past, to challenge their government when they believe it to be wrong.
At the end of the day the challenges we must overcome as a parliament are varied and wide ranging, so too must be the options we examine.
I say again without hesitation that the New Democratic Party and the member for Halifax should be commended for bringing the issue to the House for debate. Whatever the solution to our problems may be, it is only through reasoned debate in this great House and in the homes of Canadian families that we will arrive at it.
