Madam Speaker, I think the House has always had some leeway with regard to arguments behind our government policies in every debate which takes place in the House. I have been here since the beginning of the week to debate this bill and I have listened to speeches from my colleague's friends as well as from other hon. members which were far from relevant to this debate. As far as I am concerned I think I have kept my remarks well within the scope of the debate on Bill C-93.
What I am trying to explain is the filibustering the liberal opposition has been doing on Bill C-93. What I am trying to show here is that every bill like Bill C-93 has systematically been opposed to by the New Democratic Party and the Liberal Party.
What I was trying to say before I was interrupted by my colleague was that it was not surprising to see constant opposition against bills which are aimed at reducing spending while, in 12 years, the Liberal government kept increasing expenditures at the rate of 14 per cent. I was referring to an example which is really rather interesting. In 1974-75, Mr. Jean Chretien stated on page 7138 of Hansard of July 2, 1975 the following: "We have decided that restraint is necessary. In order to exercise restraint we had to cut back on planned expenditures". That year, expenditures went up by 28 per cent.
Systematic opposition by the Liberals to Bill C-93 is part of a tradition that has lasted for more than 25 years, and I can understand that.
In conclusion, I want to state once more the importance, for the Canadian people, that governments do everything that is needed and take fair measures to reduce government spending, streamline administrative costs and increase the efficiency of services for the Canadian people.
As I said, a recent survey in Terrebonne clearly indicated that this is the way we should go. Throughout this country, Canadians who work 40 hours a week or more and strive to make ends meet tell us that the tax burden is unbearable. They are fed up with taxes and they are sick and tired because we do not make appropriate decisions to streamline our costs and expenses and save money whenever it is possible.
We should never forget that public funds do not come from another planet, or from the opposition members' pockets but from all Canadian taxpayers. I think there is a constant lack of good faith on the part of the opposition. If only the opposition had supported the government in its spending cuts, even once, if the Liberal and NDP opposition had only once made suggestions about spending cuts. Instead, for nine years now-you have been here all that time, Madam Speaker, you know what has been going on-all we have seen in this place is filibustering without any consideration for the Canadian taxpayers' ability to pay.
Bill C-93 is in keeping with the approach set out in the 1992 budget where we announced that 40 organizations would be eliminated as the services delivered by these organizations are already provided by the private sector and that others would be consolidated. Tliis Bill C-93 responds to the 1992 budget. It will rationalize the delivery of several services to Canadians, contribute to more efficient government and reduce the burden of government on Canadians. That is something that we all want in this House and that all Canadians want as well.
Therefore, I urge all members of this House, on either side, to pass this bill so that it can be sent quickly to the other place and that we can finally achieve these savings.
Subtopic: BUDGET IMPLEMENTATION (GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS) ACT, 1992 MEASURE TO ENACT