Mr. Speaker, today is important for me personally, as a Quebec nationalist and as a member of the Bloc Quebecois in this 35th Parliament, as I have an opportunity to participate in this debate on the recognition of Quebec as a distinct society, even if all that was tabled before this House was a motion.
Before starting my remarks, I must say that it is rather late, in 1995, almost 1996, to realize that Quebec is different from Ontario, from the west and from the maritimes.
I remember, of course, the great statement of love tens of thousands of Canadians outside Quebec made on October 30. I clearly remember New Brunswick Premier Frank McKenna coming and telling us, on the one hand, that he loved us. On the other hand, he toured industries on the periphery of his province, saying: "Come and do business with us; we love our Quebec friends". He was trying to steal our industries away from us. Love, yes, but as long as it is profitable. The Canadian federation has been extremely profitable to Ontario in particular for several centuries now.
By putting forward these proposals for change, including the one dealing with recognizing Quebec as a distinct society, the Prime Minister of Canada acts on the promise he made himself to trick the leader of the Bloc Quebecois before he leaves. The Prime Minister said: "I dream of the day when I will rise in this House to vote for Quebec's recognition as a distinct society and smile as I watch the Leader of the Opposition vote against it".
This is the Prime Minister speaking, a member from Quebec, the hon. member for Saint-Maurice, who, unfortunately, does not travel to Quebec often enough and, as a result, is literally out of touch with the francophone public opinion in Quebec. Twenty days before the referendum, like Claude Garcia, he was telling everybody: "We are going to crush the Quebecers and have a 65 per cent victory". Can you see how out of touch from his home province this man is?
That was a petty thing to say, a much too petty strategy, but it is true to form for the Prime Minister and member for Saint-Maurice.
This motion recognizing Quebec as a distinct society is not the result of a sensible reflection with the interest of the country or the betterment of the Canadian and Quebec society in mind, let alone a major change to save the country.
No, the Prime Minister's reflection was not based on these noble intentions, but rather on the desire to get back at the Leader of the Opposition and to discredit him.
Revenge and discredit are inappropriate guides at a time when the survival of two nations is at stake. But neither the people of Canada nor the people of Quebec are fooled by the Prime Minister's scheme or by the Deputy Prime Minister's crocodile tears.
The people understand that this distinct society proposal that was cobbled together even before the committee made its recommendations and that has been revealed as phoney, this motion that recognizes Quebec's distinct society in such a superficial way is outdated and is no longer an issue in Quebec for both sovereignists and federalists who want serious changes.
Again, this shows how the Prime Minister is totally out of touch with Quebec reality. His fanaticism prevents him from understanding the message sent to him on October 30 by the people of Quebec.
In this regard, even partisan federalist newspapers are criticizing the Prime Minister. In the November 29 edition of La Presse , for example, Alain Dubuc writes, and I quote: ``The Chrétien government's first timid effort mostly shows that it has great difficulty in understanding what is happening in Quebec and Canada and, above all, in accepting changes that we see as inevitable''.
They all agree that recognizing Quebec as a distinct society only through a declaration in the House of Commons does not resolve the underlying problem. Even entrenching this later in the Constitution no longer satisfies the aspirations of Quebecers.
The Liberal government has missed the boat and neither the Leader of the Opposition nor the members of the Bloc Quebecois will be embarrassed to vote against this motion. On the contrary, adopting this motion would be a major setback in Quebec's path to its recognition as a people.
As Gérald Larose used to say, we do not want to be bothered with distinct society any more. What we want now is to be a normal, quiet people.
Quebec is sick of these meaningless slogans, of being a society at the mercy of Ottawa's and English Canada's whims, of a Prime Minister who denies ever having said what he said, both before and after he says it.
If the official opposition accepted this motion, Quebec would be seriously weakened since, as everyone acknowledges, Ottawa's distinct society proposal does not go as far as the Meech Lake accord and the Charlottetown accord, which both Quebec and the rest of Canada rejected.
The Prime Minister's motion through which the House would recognize Quebec's distinctiveness cannot in any way be considered a response to the demand for change expressed by Quebecers in the October 30 referendum. We must keep in mind that, a little over a month ago, 50 per cent of Quebecers voted in favour of Quebec's sovereignty, while the other 50 per cent voted for a major renewal of Canadian federalism.
The motion before us falls short of Quebecers' aspirations. It is unacceptable, for both sovereignists and federalists.
Once again, the Prime Minister of Canada has made the wrong decision, as all Quebecers and Canadians know. That is why I think that the Prime Minister will not find it so funny on election day.
In closing, one can laugh at a people some of the time, but not all of the time.