Madam Speaker, as you may have guessed, I proudly welcome this opportunity to take part in today's debate and to join my colleagues in deploring the fact that federal members who represent Quebec here in Ottawa have refused to take part in what is probably the most legitimate democratic process ever initiated by the National Assembly.
Quebec is a democracy. Quebec has one of the oldest parliament in the world, and the entire history of Quebec's nationalism is entwined with the history of democracy. Earlier, I was appalled to hear the hon. member for Hull, who is responsible for the federal government's referendum strategy, trying to discredit the initiative tabled by Mr. Parizeau's government a few days ago.
One thing is clear. History tells us that very few nations have had a chance to write their own constitution. Consider George Washington, Jefferson, Madison and all the great thinkers who helped to draft constitutional texts, and who did so because they were members of the elite. They did it because they were members of the educated class.
What we are saying is that in our quest for sovereignty, we want to have the broadest possible democratic base. This is an opportunity for all Quebecers, regardless of their social class, political allegiance or personal wealth, to come forward and say what kind of constitution they want and what kind of society they want to live in. Because that is what a constitution is all about. A constitution says what we are and what we want to be.
By giving all Quebecers a chance to take part in this democratic process, the Premier is saying to the National Assembly, to Ottawa and to the world: We see sovereignty as part of a quest for democracy. We cannot plan our future, we cannot make this wonderful plan for sovereignty a fact without the participation of all Quebecers.
As many journalists and opinion-makers have pointed out, the situation we have today is different from the situation in 1980. There is no federalist leader with any credibility, and we can hardly expect the present Prime Minister to be able to inspire the federal troops.
In a democracy, the best way to fight against something is to propose something better. There is no other way. Therefore, the best way to oppose sovereignty in 1994 is to show that federalism can be attractive. If the Quebec federalists, whether the hon. member for Saint-Léonard, the hon. member for Saint-Henri-Westmount or any other member from Quebec, believe in their option, they will come forward and address the 16 regional commissions in order to tell us why, in 1994, Quebecers should stick to federalism. They will be welcome to defend their option. But the truth is that federalism does not get anyone carried away.
When the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, with his big ego, suggests that we talk about flexible federalism, we all know that flexible federalism depends on the deficit. But right now, that deficit is so high that the Minister of Finance cannot even watch himself spend. That is the situation. That is why federalists cannot come and sit at a table in good faith and propose a plan for renewed federalism.
We spoke earlier about the economic accomplishments of Quebec, but what makes it special also stems from its deep respect for every component of democracy. I want to draw your attention to the fact that the draft bill tabled before us says something crucial, something all members representing English Canada should keep in mind. Section 3 of this draft bill says that we will draft a constitution which will include a charter of human rights and that-and I will quote section 3-"The constitution shall include a charter of human rights and freedoms. It shall guarantee the English-speaking community that its identity and institutions will be preserved. It shall also recognize the right of Aboriginal nations to self-government on lands over which they have full ownership."
The scope of a section such as this is not well understood. We are saying to the English-speaking people, at the beginning of this debate: Your community is essential to our future. It is with the 900,000 anglophones in Quebec today that we want to think about the future, and we are telling them: In our sovereignist project, we will give you all the place that is rightfully yours.
This is not new because you will recall that, as early as 1967, René Lévesque distanced himself from a segment of the nationalist movement that did not want to recognize the right of the English-speaking community to public schools funded by the government.
We are saying, at the beginning of this debate, to the English-speaking community as well as the aboriginal people, who are our two most important minorities: Not only will you have a place in a sovereign Quebec, not only will we recognize all the rights that are yours today, but we also want you to take part in this democratic process that is taking place.
In this regard, I think that Quebec is probably a better example of democracy than Ottawa. As for the eleven Aboriginal nations who live on the territory of Quebec and form a community of almost 55,000 people, let us not forget that René Lévesque, that great democrat-and I must say that very few members opposite have the courage to quote from the Referendum Act, a tool he left us to consult people-and his government, back in 1985, allowed the eleven Aboriginal nations to be
recognized all together for what they were. We want these rights to be entrenched in the next constitution of Quebec.
Remember that Quebec has experienced that constitution. There is a misunderstanding about the revolutionary nature of what is happening. We are about to recognize the right of our two major minorities to participate in the development of the constitution, while throughout our history, we were forced, as Quebecers, to accept a constitution about which we had never been consulted. It is absolutely outrageous to hear Quebecers and Canadians being told that the process is rather undemocratic because the people will be consulted.
From the Treaty of Paris to the Union Act and up until 1867, Quebecers were never consulted. We want to make up for that, we want as much people as possible to participate in the movement towards democracy that is getting under way. We repeat today, as Premier Parizeau said, that in the next constitution, we are going to recognize the right to self-government of Aboriginal nations, who were in fact the first people to occupy this territory. Such recognition shall be exercised in a manner consistent with the territorial integrity of Quebec. We say to aboriginal peoples that they will have the right-and this right will be entrenched if they so wish-to their traditions, their cultures, their lands and their language. We say to the English-speaking community that we want them to have a public school system, from preschool to university, which is giving them full participation in Quebec life.
In conclusion, I want to say that if federalists still have beliefs, if federalists still believe in intellectual integrity, their place is before the 16 regional commissions which will travel throughout Quebec, because if their option is good enough to convince Quebecers, as they argue, they have to put themselves through this consultation test. It is not by refusing to take part in a democratic process that these people will be able to revitalize an option that is stalling but still has the right to exist.
