And let me immediately assure the member that nothing will convince my government to recognize the legitimacy of the process initiated by the PQ government.
The member will agree that many of us have serious problems with the process announced by the PQ government. Let me begin with the leader of the Official Opposition in Quebec City, who aptly labelled it a "misuse of democracy". And for good reason. The Quebec government is asking its citizens to help draw up a constitution for a separate Quebec before they have even had their say on the issue of separation.
I understand why the Premier of Quebec is taking this route. If he asked his fellow citizens the real question, in fact the only legitimate question, "do you want to separate from Canada, yes or no?"the answer would be no. From where he sits, the best approach is to use cunning, and if in the process he flouts democratic principles, so what.
As stated by the member from Sherbrooke, the Premier of Quebec knows his French well. According to the Petit Robert , being cunning means acting slyly to deceive someone for the purpose of doing him harm.
The Quebec media have been no kinder in their assessment of the PQ strategy. An editorial in Le Soleil was headlined The anesthetization of a people'' and spoke of themisuse of our parliamentary institutions and the misappropriation of public funds for partisan purposes''.
According to La Presse , what is unacceptable is that this bill will be passed by the National Assembly before being put to the people via a referendum. Things are being done in the wrong order''. The journalist concluded that we are witnessing amockery of democracy''.
In today's Le Journal de Montréal , Michel Auger pointed out: Although the majority of Quebecers still wonder why they should become independent, their government says the only thing left to decide is how it should be done''. He went on to say:In fact, it is quite clear that according to their terms of reference, these commissions would be able to consider one option only: the one chosen by the government''.
And in concluding: "Before asking Quebecers to draft the declaration of sovereignty, the government should consider those who have yet to be convinced of the need for sovereignty".
And again in today's Le Soleil , Gilbert Lavoie commented: Although the strategy may seem clever to those who devised it, its weakness is that it underestimates the political savvy of Quebecers which has been borne out on several occasions''. He went on to say:The government's initiative will disappoint Quebecers, because the Pequistes have preferred strategy over substance''. And in concluding: ``The trap is so obvious that one would have to be very myopic indeed not to see it''.
Even in Le Devoir, under the headline "The stratagem is too obvious", Pierre O'Neill started his article by pointing out that: "Through academic eyes, the consultation process started by Premier Parizeau is viewed with some scepticism. Political scientist Vincent Lemieux feels that the Pequiste initiative lacks legitimacy. `I think the stratagem is too obvious', commented the Laval University professor yesterday, the man to whom Jean-François Lisée, political adviser to the Premier, referred in 1993 as the Galileo of Quebec politics".
In Wednesday's La Presse , Alain Dubuc comments: ``This pretence of democracy is disturbing. It excludes, for all practical purposes, those who are opposed to sovereignty and turns these commissions into clubs for friends of the PQ, which may attract the attention of the media for a while, at public expense, and maintain temporary the illusion of almost unanimous support for the yes side. This whole strategy, which the Premier himself referred to as cunning, has its own limitations. Manipulation can backfire. Referendums, both here and elsewhere, have shown that if there is anything citizens cannot abide, it is manipulation by politicians''.
Michel David, also in Wednesday's Le Soleil , pointed out: When Mr. Parizeau used the word stratagem two weeks ago, Daniel Johnson immediately concluded it was a scam to fool Quebecers''. Mr. David went on to say:In fact, they pulled a fast one: members of the Premier's staff confided yesterday that the text of the draft bill on sovereignty had been ready since last March. Within the PQ, members had been polled on each section. Each individual section was supported by the majority. In other words, Mr. Parizeau knew well before the election campaign what question he would ask, once he was elected, but he said nothing to the voters. Why, if the case is as clear as he says it is? What about the relationship of trust?''
I could go on for several minutes, quoting people from coast to coast. No one is being taken in by the Quebec Premier's chicanery. Not the media, not the other provincial premiers, not those of us here in Ottawa, not the Quebec Liberal Party and, unfortunately, to the great dismay of our friends opposite, not the citizens of Quebec.