Mr. Speaker, first, my hon. colleague says he does not understand. I think this is evident. It is also evident that Quebecers have seen over the years that this central government does not understand, that maybe it is not even listening, that the budget includes some centralizing measures. I spoke about the human resources investment fund which is an extremely important centralization measure.
I will answer the question very precisely and would ask the member to refer to clause 48 of Bill C-76, a fundamental part of that bill, which says two things; it is a two faced budget and it is a two faced clause. On the one hand it says it will increase flexibility for the provinces and, on the other, it maintains national conditions established in the Canada Health Act and, where appropriate, national standards for the operation of other social programs. Those other social programs are explained later on, in clause 53; they are health, post-secondary education, social assistance and social services. So my answer is very precise, it comes directly from the bill.
If some of us here do not understand, it is the members from the other side. I think they have not read the bill or, if they have, they feel they must do like the Minister of Finance who thinks he has to announce some amendments before he can talk, before he can answer. He used an approach which, I repeat, is entirely unparliamentary. I wonder if my hon. colleague saw those amendments because we read directly from the bill here in the House. If we were to listen to what we hear, to what the
government says are its intentions, we would find the government has many intentions, which are often contradictory.
We are members of Parliament and we work with bills. This bill entitles, even forces the Bloc Quebecois to take the positions it is taking this morning, on this opposition day. We would not be doing our job if we neglected to take such positions. The best proof of that is again that the Minister of Finance, before speaking to us, felt he had to announce some amendments we have not even seen. We are eager to see them.
Something else also confirms that we are right and that is, I repeat, that the minister felt he had to use an unparliamentary approach and announce amendments. So I can easily understand that he does not understand.