Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to make a few comments, for the record, about this particular bill because I have some concerns. As you know, I am a Member of the Standing Committee on Finance, to which I was appointed recently. I wasn't a participant right from the beginning on this particular bill; it was recommended by the Standing Committee on Finance to the government when I was a Cabinet Member.
The problem I have with it concerns the area of the bill where the Cabinet is the only body that will be accountable should we have a deficit by 1997-98. Mr. Chairman, from my understanding of consensus government, which our government is -- a one-party system -- it is important to me that this be recorded. I think it would be fair that all 24 Members should be accountable, should we have a deficit by the year 1997-98. I say this because in our system we have standing committees that fully participate in government operations and make recommendations to the government that might result in incurring additional expenditures of this particular government. With the practice we have been carrying out, all 24 Members have selected the Cabinet. To hold only eight out of 24 accountable is not responsible, in my eyes.
As I stated previously, the standing committees of Finance or Legislation recommendations can result in additional expenditures of the government. For these reasons, I wanted to make this comment on the record, Mr. Chairman. Although I do support the principle of the bill, I have some concerns, especially in the area where only Cabinet Members will be held accountable should we have a deficit situation by the year 1997-98. I think it should be all 24 Members. Rightly so, it should be 24, Mr. Chairman, because here we are, we're still sitting at the end of April. We were supposed to finish by April 13th. We're still incurring additional costs. The longer we sit here the more money we're spending. These are the concerns I have that I wanted to say to this House. Thank you.
