Mr. Speaker, I have the great honour of supporting the motion before us today.
I am a Quebecer and it is as such that I associate myself with this motion. I do so because it is in the best interests of Quebec and because it opens the door to a renewed partnership for Canadian partners from coast to coast.
The ideal country does not exist, except in the imagination of certain persons. And we all agree that Canada is far from perfect. It needs to change. It must change to better reflect its own reality.
What is that reality? It is the reality of a vast country with a scattered, diverse population. It is the reality of a country in which regional identities are strongly expressed. It is also the reality of a country in which the francophones are concentrated in one province but a million others are distributed across the rest of Canada.
That is the Canadian reality. Not only must we take it into consideration and recognize it, but our institutions must also reflect this reality if we want this country to work and to achieve its full potential.
On October 30 Quebecers sent us a clear double message. While reaffirming their attachment to Canada, they indicated that they
wanted to see Canada change quickly to reflect their aspirations. We must know how to interpret this message. We must not only take note of it, but we must respond to it in a concrete way or this country will fail.
As the Prime Minister pointed out so well when the motion was tabled, the referendum results have taught us that we must not take Canada for granted. It was in this context that the Prime Minister made three firm commitments on behalf of the Canadian government during the referendum campaign. These three commitments were as follows: to recognize that Quebec is a distinct society within Canada; to refrain from making any constitutional change affecting Quebec without the consent of Quebecers; and to undertake changes to bring citizens closer to services and decision making.
[Translation]
The time has come to fulfil these commitments, to take action. Through the motion before this House, we are starting to give concrete expression to the commitments made by the Prime Minister. By putting it to the members of this House this quickly, the government is showing that it takes its commitments seriously. It is showing how important this issue is, not only for Quebec, but also for the rest of Canada.
Why do Quebecers want to be recognized as members of a distinct society? The reasons are obvious. Quebec is home to a French-speaking majority, a unique culture, and a civil law tradition. Quebec has been built around these essential elements for more than three centuries. Recognizing this is not only acknowledging reality, it is also agreeing that these characteristics of Quebec society must be preserved and nourished in a context where Quebec co-exists in North America with a population of about 300 million anglophones.
To adopt this motion is to recognize that the French character of Quebec must be protected. It is to assert that Quebec must enjoy cultural security. It is to recognize the linguistic duality that is in the very nature of Canada and contributes to its cultural and social richness.
By recognizing Quebec distinct nature and by admitting that the definition of distinct society contained in this resolution is by no means complete, this House is undertaking to let itself be guided by this reality. The legislative and executive branches of government will be encouraged to take this recognition into account in all their activities and all their decisions. This means that this resolution will have a positive impact on the way legislation is passed in this House and decisions are made in federal government departments and agencies.
There is more. The motion before us today is but one of a whole series of government actions. During the referendum campaign, the Prime Minister also pledged not to make any constitutional change without Quebec's consent. That commitment is reflected in the bill recently introduced by the Minister of Justice to provide a regional veto power. Under this bill, any constitutional amendment proposed by the federal government will require the consent of Quebec and the other regions of Canada.
The objective of the motion is clear: to protect Quebec from amendments that might reduce the powers of the Quebec National Assembly. By taking this action the Government of Canada is recognizing that the Government of Quebec, as the only government representing a francophone majority in North America, has a central role to play in the evolution of Canada.
This is a far cry from the so-called meaningless motion referred to by the separatists in recent days. Through this bill, the federal government strengthens the regions, particularly Quebec. We feel it is a first step toward a more flexible and more effective federalism.
It would be wrong to claim that the only purpose of the motion is to meet the aspirations of Quebec. Canada is not a melting pot, nor has it ever been. The issue here is proposals that reflect the deep nature of Canada. The issue here is ensuring not only our national unity but also its harmony and the effectiveness of its institutions.
I have followed the debate on the motion with interest. I have heard the criticisms of the official opposition, which were not really surprising. I have also heard the criticisms of others who claim to be defending Canada while at the same time opposing the motion. To them I would say that it is easy to criticize after the crisis is over. However, what will those who object today say when the separatists mount another attack? I invite them to answer right now, before it is too late.
Canada is a federation of partners. It is by preserving the spirit of partnership and co-operation and by recognizing both our differences and our shared objectives that this country will grow and prosper. The motion we are debating today deals exactly with this concept of partnership. The Canada we all want is a country in which each region has its own specific character and the freedom it needs to express it. That is the essence of what this motion contains.
The definition of a federation is not a grouping of equal partners. The purpose of a federation is to permit the differences of the various parts to be accommodated within one country. Otherwise it is a unitary state. We are not, because we have started as a group of people who were different and who founded a type of government able to accept the differences. It is really unfortunate that there is
now a party which does not agree that the differences the country has are part of its richness and of its wealth.
The motion before the House specifically relates to the concept of partnership. The Canada that we want is a country in which every region will have its own distinctive character and the means to develop it. This is the very essence of the motion.
Canadians want a united country. They are open to changes that will preserve its unity and promote its development, as evidenced by the resolutions recently passed by the legislatures of Ontario, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland, to recognize Quebec's distinct nature.
I am convinced that the majority of Quebecers and Canadians recognize themselves in this motion. I would humbly submit to the Official Opposition, moreover, as well as to the Government of Quebec, that they are wrong to reject it.
Of course the separatists cannot accept propositions with the object of making Canada work better. This is an undemocratic attitude, for it denies the results of the referendum. It also condemns Quebec to immobility and rejection of any improvement to the system. It is thus in contradiction to what most Quebecers want.
We have no illusions about it. Since the Government of Quebec is interested solely in its own option, we shall not engage in constitutional discussions which would be doomed to failure from the word go. But that does not prevent us from taking steps today in the direction Quebecers and all Canadians want us to go. Needless to say, however, if Quebec and the other regions of the country consent, the Government will be open to including the changes contained in this motion in the Constitution.
Every member sitting in the House has the opportunity by voting for this motion to acknowledge Canada for what it is, a diversified country, an open country, a country that has always based its development on accepting and preserving its differences.
For, beyond those differences, the shared values and objectives we have always had as Canadians, regardless of where we live, remain: freedom, tolerance, the creation and distribution of wealth for individuals and regions.
The months and years to come will surely afford us the opportunity for a concrete demonstration of the fact that we go far beyond principles and pious wishes.