You asked me to answer your question, sir. I can tell you, on the subject of the resolution of Quebec's National Assembly to not recognize the Constitution of 1982, that there is a difference between “to not recognize” and “to be subject to”. We are still part of Canada. We may not recognize it, but we are subject to it. Let us not mix debates. I will stop here on that matter.
Your second question on guarantees on teaching in English under section 23 was not the one raised in committee. That question concerned section 93. Here again, a number of debates are being mixed up. The subject is the suspension of subsections 1 to 4 of section 93, which people do not want applied in Quebec. Section 23 has nothing to do with the debate. It will be debated at some other time, in Quebec and not here.
Section 93 does not guarantee the protection of anglophone minorities in Quebec and francophone minorities elsewhere. The member for Bourassa put it very well earlier, when he said that section 93 had nothing to do with protecting language rights in Quebec.
This is the sort of debate they wanted to get us involved in, but this debate and the committee's mandate concern the repeal of subsections 1 to 4 so that denominational school boards may be replaced by linguistic school boards.
I hope I have answered succinctly, because the member wanted to drag me into a much broader debate.