Madam Speaker, I have been listening to the federalist members of the House and it is as if they were trying to win the championship for overstatement. They call the process proposed by the government of Quebec a fraud, immoral, illegitimate and illegal. They call it a farce. We are criticized for not asking a clear question. Yet, as my colleague from Portneuf said, the question seems perfectly clear to me: "Are you in favour of the Act passed by the
National Assembly declaring the sovereignty of Quebec?" I think that is crystal clear: "the sovereignty of Quebec".
In fact, they are criticizing us for referring to a bill in which Quebec's sovereignty is defined. If you recall, Madam Speaker, in 1980, we were criticized for not defining our project. Now that we define it, we are criticized for it. We even go further by asking Quebec's population to participate in defining the sovereignty project. We asked Quebecers to help define the project. But still, we are told: How can you ask federalists to participate in writing a declaration of independence?
I would say that our federalist colleagues are afflicted by two diseases: schizophrenia and amnesia. Schizophrenia because they have not yet realized that there is no federalist government in Quebec City any more, but a sovereignist government, and that the majority of members representing Quebec ridings in this House are also sovereignists. They are hit by amnesia because they refuse to acknowledge that when the Parti Quebecois formed the Official Opposition in the National Assembly, in spite of its political option, it recognized that a federalist party was in power and took part in the various initiatives introduced by that government.
Members will remember that the Parti Quebecois spent hundreds of hours studying the Meech Lake Accord in the National Assembly and in committee, that it took part in the parliamentary committee which studied the federal government's offers that led to the Charlottetown Accord. Members will also remember that sovereignists participated in the Bélanger-Campeau Commission which proposed two alternatives, not ten but two: sovereignty and a last chance for renewed federalism. That last chance failed; it was the Charlottetown Accord. It failed miserably.
So, in keeping with the conclusions contained in the Bélanger-Campeau Commission report, which was signed by the Liberal Party in Quebec and the present Minister of Foreign Affairs, we are now moving toward the second alternative, which is sovereignty, since the first one failed.
It is now our turn to ask our federalist colleagues to take part in the process. Why are we doing this? For two simple reasons: first, because the question will be submitted to Quebecers for approval very shortly and, if the answer is yes, federalists should help define what a sovereign Quebec should be.
Second, the draft bill refers to an economic association with Canada; our federalist colleagues claim it is not possible. We want to keep the same currency; our colleagues claim it is not possible. We want to keep our citizenship; our colleagues claim it is not possible. We want to conclude international agreements; our colleagues claim it is not possible. We want them to explain to us why it is not possible, and that is exactly why we are asking them to take part in the work of these commissions.
In conclusion, I would invite the people of my riding of Verchères to attend the hearings of these commissions and also the people of the beautiful region where I live when I come to work here, the Outaouais region, who are particularly concerned about the consequences of the debate that will take place.