Mr. Speaker, it is with great interest and a sense of conviction that I rise in the House today to speak to Bill C-110 introduced by the government, a bill that would add to our constitutional jargon one more formula to amend a Constitution that the Quebec nation rejected when it refused to sign in 1982.
I rise in the House today with a sense of conviction because since yesterday, when the Prime Minister was again heard to deny the very meaning of these meagre proposals for change, I feel I have an even better case for attacking this government's indecent show of irresponsibility on a subject as fundamental as an agreement concluded in the past by two founding peoples.
Yes, like millions of fellow Quebecers, I heard the Prime Minister yesterday renege on his referendum commitments and put on the back burner all good intentions he served up in a panic to Quebecers towards the end of the referendum campaign.
Those who believed the Prime Minister was sincere, when he promised sweeping changes after the referendum, realized yesterday how thoroughly and rudely they had been tricked.
In an interview on the CBC, I heard the Prime Minister explain the thinking behind the changes he is proposing. I heard the Prime Minister say that he had promised Quebec three little things, and those are his words.
So, if we are to believe the statement the Prime Minister made yesterday to the nation, the government is inviting us to debate one of the three little things-Bill C-110.
What of this little thing for Quebec? Really, it is not much at all. We knew as much, even though, until yesterday, the government members were doing their best to sell this provision to Quebecers like it was the find of the century. In a gesture of magnanimous imperialism, the federal government is trying to show its generosity towards Quebec in lending it a veto.
In fact, the federal government is dangling a veto in front of Quebec, which does not come under the province's jurisdiction, but rather that of the federal government. At any time, the government may circumvent the opinion and the jurisdiction of the National Assembly by imposing its own rules on the use of this bogus veto.
What the federal government claims to be giving with one hand, it is already preparing to take away with the other. In Quebec, we have got used to this sort of double cross in the course of the various attempts at constitutional reform. Never, however, has the affront reached the level of being written into a bill. Never throughout the fruitless constitutional negotiations of the past has anyone thought of serving up such insignificance to Quebec.
In this regard, federalist utterances are fairly paradoxical. To the Quebecers, the return of the veto is being heralded. To English Canada, with the Prime Minister having to justify his poor referendum performance, the bill is being touted as nothing at all. Just enough to cobble together a few sad promises that they already regret have made, while appearing to formally resolve the big issue of national unity.
This bill must be rejected because it became obvious as soon as it was introduced that it was thrown together hastily. Originally designed, according to the government, to meet one of Quebec's historical demands, it is now so watered down that every province would also get a veto at the same time, including those who have never demanded one.
Let us acknowledge right off the bat that the federal offer to give Quebec its veto back is based on false premises. The government accuses Quebec's sovereignist leaders, René Lévesque first of all, of losing Quebec's veto after giving up on it. That is a false premise, as federal mandarins and the Minister of Justice know full well. In 1982, the Supreme Court ruled that Quebec did not have a veto and never had one. In a second ruling following the irreparable patriation of the Constitution led by today's Prime Minister, the Supreme Court concluded that Quebec never had a veto.
It is clear that neither this government nor English Canada want a real veto for Quebec, as demonstrated by the fact that this bill provides for not one but four vetoes, with a fifth one that recently surfaced. Since they do not really have anything to give, they are generous: they are willing to give everything to everyone. Yet, when the time comes to give Quebec what it has rightfully demanded for decades, they only respond with pettiness, narrow-mindedness, and a total disregard for the hope for major changes expressed by Quebecers in the last referendum.
It only took a short 40 days for all the solemn promises and demonstrations of love and affection to boil down to three meaningless proposals. First, a distinct society motion of no legal significance, that has already been disavowed by the Prime Minister who denies the very existence of a Quebec culture. Second, a veto granted, or rather imposed on everyone, a veto no sooner granted than it is taken back, given that the federal government is the only one with fiduciary rights. And finally, a travesty of transfer of jurisdiction over manpower training, an area in which the government takes pleasure in shifting responsibility without the related financial authority.
Indeed, the interpretation the Prime Minister gave yesterday is accurate: these are three small things that he is giving the people of Quebec to fulfil his promises and meet the expectations of those who voted no in the referendum, confident that the change promised were coming.
But a great people makes great things. It refuses to let imperialism impose small things on it. That is what we call pride.
And I will proudly vote against this bill.