Madam Speaker, members have been speaking about the 1982 patriation of the Constitution for the last few minutes.
I have been listening to what has been said. The Leader of the Opposition, among others, mentioned that, because an amending process is involved, thought should perhaps be given to a referendum to validate the democratic basis.
I would like to point out that in 1982 there was not all this nitpicking about a referendum. For Quebec, it meant the loss of a number of powers conferred on it by the original Constitution.
Imagine for a moment, and I ask the Leader of the Opposition to picture this, that the American Congress decided, without consulting one quarter of the American states—California, Florida, New York—to change the American Constitution. Imagine for a moment that that were to happen. There would be a second American revolution.
Faced with an identical situation, since Quebec represents one quarter of the Canadian population, Quebec looked for an accommodation. Even now, with the demand from the National Assembly, Quebec is looking for an accommodation, without recognizing the Constitution, which was the result of a process from which it was excluded.
The NDP member mentioned that it was in good faith that he supported patriation of the Constitution in 1982 because, he says, 74 Liberals representing Quebec said it was all right. First of all, since Liberal members were involved, he should have been on his guard. Am I not right, Madam Speaker?
When all parties in the Quebec National Assembly say that they are taking a particular stand, it seems to me that this House should take notice. I await my hon. colleague's comments.