Madam Speaker, I would like to make a few comments and then ask the hon. member some questions.
First, I would like to make a correction. When my hon. colleague refers to English Canada, he refers at the same time to the protection of minorities in Quebec. I am a francophone member of Parliament and a Canadian and I come from New Brunswick which is not part of English Canada or French Canada, but of Canada.
The hon. members across the floor emphasize the importance of being honest and open and say it is all a matter of choice, but I could show you here that the first page of the draft bill is entitled: An Act respecting the sovereignty of Quebec. They do not even have the courage of their convictions. Once again, they talk about sovereignty when in fact, the objective is the separation of Quebec. We are asked to get involved in what is proposed on the first page of the draft bill.
Allow me to turn to the second page. This draft bill sets out the political objective. As a member from the Bloc pointed out a moment ago: Come on, we have elected a PQ government in Quebec. I hope you were not expecting us to offer a clear choice between federalism or separation to the people of Quebec. This is what she said and it is obviously what they have in mind here.
They say that this bill suggests that Quebec will become a sovereign country democratically. How can they talk about democracy when they have already made up their minds about all the issues to be debated, how they are going to proceed, how to use the currency, share the assets and divide the debt? This is not a clear choice. They are not showing the people of Quebec what the real situation is now and what it could be tomorrow. We are invited, in my case as a so-called member for English Canada, a federalist-