Mr. Speaker, I do hope these needless interruptions will not be taken off my time. I am pressed to finish what I think is an accurate speech and I am looking forward to the hon. member making his own instead of interrupting by arguing.
Again, I express my shock that the hon. member for Mission-Coquitlam would come forward with proposals very similar to what was in the Charlottetown accord after that accord was rejected out of hand by the electors of her riding, and even more shockingly was rejected by her party and opposed vigorously by her party while some of us had the good sense to support it.
Despite the fact that the accord contained provisions for major Senate reform, including measures to provide for representation of aboriginal peoples and new powers to veto any House of Commons legislation that changed taxation policy in key areas of natural resources, this accord failed. I stress that.
The Charlottetown negotiations demonstrated that agreement among first ministers, territorial and aboriginal leaders was possible, but it was not arrived at easily. Although the Reform Party leader referred to the accord negotiated by 17 parties as the
Mulroney deal, it was in fact the result of a very complex process that required extensive accommodation and compromises.
Writing in the Edmonton Journal , former Alberta Premier Don Getty said: ``The package was so difficult to get, I would say it was almost a miracle that we were able to put it together''. Yet here the Reform Party, having worked against it and having striven for its defeat, now is pulling chunks out of it and saying it supports this and that, let us do this and let us do that. It shows what a lack of sound policy thinking it has. It keeps going back to things that are really dead. The Reform Party should rethink this resolution.
I urge the hon. member for Mission-Coquitlam to consult with her leader again, refer him to the quote I have read from the little green book, and ask him what he really thinks of this motion to see if he does not think that perhaps it is pie in the sky, unnecessary, and not a reasonable thing to put forward in Canada as we know it today, having gone through these two recent constitutional discussions at great length and at great pain to our country.