Stephen Harper

[The Constitution, October 26th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. I remind the minister that the Prime Minister has said this week it is part of his efforts to persuade Quebecers to vote no and that he would be open to change, including in some cases constitutional change.

My question is the one I asked yesterday which I did not get a response to. Is it still the policy of the Liberal Party, as it is the policy of the Reform Party, that any general constitutional change would have to be submitted to and approved by the people of Canada in a national referendum?

[Referendum Campaign, October 25th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I think that is a wise commitment and I hope the Prime Minister is prepared to make it to all Canadians.

After the last referendum in 1980 we entered into constitutional discussions with a PQ government in Quebec. That proved to be very problematic for the country as a whole and particularly problematic for Quebec.

Does the government believe that the PQ government would be a willing, open and constructive participant in constitutional negotiations?

[Referendum Campaign, October 25th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, my question relates to the Prime Minister's speech last night and other discussion of possible constitutional changes.

Before the Charlottetown accord the Reform Party and the Liberal Party had made commitments that all major constitutional amendments should be done only through national referendum. Is it still the commitment of the Liberal Party that any constitutional changes being planned must be submitted and approved by the people in a national referendum?

[Referendum Campaign, October 24th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, during the referendum campaign, I had the opportunity to travel to Quebec, where sovereignist posters showing possibilities through symbols are everywhere.

I do not understand these ads.

One poster, for example, seems to convey the message that, if Quebecers vote Yes, peace becomes possible. But we already have peace. Vote No and it becomes a certainty.

The posters say that a Yes vote would make the Canadian dollar a possibility. Vote No and it becomes a certainty.

Vote Yes and the economic union becomes a possibility. Vote No and it becomes a certainty.

Vote Yes and NAFTA becomes a possibility. Vote No and it becomes a certainty.

Why trade certainties for possibilities? It will be up to Quebecers to decide, and to live with the consequences.

[Canadian Economy, October 23rd, 1995]

Thank you for that reminder, Mr. Speaker.

The Leader of the Opposition has indicated during this campaign that Quebec might renege on its share of Canada's debt obligations. Of course a statement like that is not at all consistent with the stated desire of the Government of Quebec to use the Canadian dollar.

Has the Minister of Finance sought to reassure international financial markets that the Leader of the Opposition is not a member of either the Government of Canada or the Government of Quebec and may not speak for either in this regard?

[Canadian Economy, October 23rd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, speaking of the rupture the minister refers to, he will know that during this campaign Mr. Lucien Bouchard, the Leader of the Opposition, has indicated that-

[Canadian Economy, October 23rd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, according to a recent article in the Vancouver Sun the Minister of Finance made reference to the fact that the premier of Quebec, Mr. Parizeau, acknowledged Quebec's liability for one-quarter of Canada's debt in a 1990 speech. This would be consistent with the stated desire of the separatist government to use the Canadian dollar.

Has the minister sought any public reassurance at this time from the Government of Quebec to the international financial community that it would maintain its full share of Canada's financial obligations regardless of the outcome of the Quebec referendum?

[Canadian Economy, October 23rd, 1995]

I know the Bloc does not take this matter seriously but I would like to ask the question anyway.

International investors know that the prospects of a yes vote do not mean a new and better economic union between Quebec and the other provinces but the end of the economic union we have today.

What measures has the minister taken to assure the international financial community that Canada will fulfil all the financial obligations it has contracted on behalf of all Canadians including Quebecers and that it will fulfil these obligations regardless of the outcome of the Quebec referendum?

[Canadian Economy, October 23rd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to change the subject from constitutional ills to the over-riding economic interests of all Canadians, including Quebecers.

My question is for the Minister of Finance. The minister will know that the Canadian dollar is continuing to fall today in international markets.

[Department Of National Defence, October 6th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, all Canadians know it is not the army that is terrible, it is the Minister of National Defence's running of that portfolio.

We have been pursuing this inquiry. The opposition Liberals, as he knows, called for this two years ago. We had to call for it for nearly two years before we got it.

My question to the Prime Minister is the Minister of National Defence has been sitting on this material, which has been under his nose for two years. Was there complicity in this? Did he know this was happening, or was he simply incompetent and did not provide this material in the first two years of this administration?