Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I speak on Bill C-6, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act.
Bill C-6, which was introduced by the industry minister on October 15, is nothing new. It is identical to Bill C-54, which was introduced by the federal Minister of Industry, on October 1, 1998. It fits in perfectly with the recent throne speech. This bill, therefore, was part of the recycled material found in the throne speech.
The government is trying two years later to make new things out of its old 1997 stuff. Once again, the government lacks imagination. However, it certainly is not short on imagination when it wants to interfere in Quebec's areas of jurisdiction. Last spring and also for the last few days, the Bloc Quebecois has expressed its opposition to Bill C-6.
During the fight led by my hon. colleague from Mercier, I had the opportunity to speak two times. All Quebecers had asked that Bill C-54 not apply in their province. The Parti Quebecois government, along with the Conseil du Patronat, the Quebec Bar Association, the CSN, the Chambre des notaires, and Option Consommateurs, had asked that the bill be withdrawn. Quebecers unanimously requested that the bill not apply in Quebec to avoid confusion and to promote the development of electronic commerce.
It is not complicated. If the government really wanted what is best for Quebecers, it would withdraw the bill. I will give a few reasons.
First of all—and this is the federal Liberals' trademark—the Minister of Industry introduced it without consulting the provinces. This bill encroaches on provincial jurisdictions, it is a step backwards for Quebec with regard to the protection of personal information, and its application in Quebec will create confusion. It is legally flawed, and it uses electronic commerce as an excuse to make an incursion into civil law. These six major arguments that should convince the federal Minister of Industry to withdraw this bill.
Before my colleagues even had a chance to express their opposition, before several of my colleagues even had the opportunity to present their arguments, the government House leader, true to form, with the support of his colleagues, decided once again to bring forward a time allocation motion to curtail debate. Where is democracy going in this parliament? The Liberals use this kind of motion on a regular basis to prevent democratically elected members from speaking freely on important issues, such as the protection of personal information.
However, many Liberal members who chair committees have systematically leaked information to the media. Confidential reports have been disclosed in the newspapers even before being tabled in the House of Commons. The federal government has no respect for democracy. It is high time parliamentarians from all parties addressed this problem.
What are the Liberal members opposite doing to defend Quebec with regard to Bill C-6? Nothing. They are silent on this issue, as they are on the Onex proposal, even though 5,000 jobs are threatened. They have nothing to say on the issue of hepatitis C victims, on the issue of employment insurance and on the issue of pay equity.
In 1980, Quebec had 73 Liberal members in Ottawa, 73 out of 75, and they were also said nothing when the federal government patriated the Constitution in 1982.
When the very illustrious Pierre Elliott Trudeau occupied 24 Sussex, he must have said “Way to go, Jean. You are doing a great job. The members from Quebec are keeping their mouths shut. You can go on centralizing and doing what you want. You can keep on walking all over Quebec. Your gang of members has realized that your way was best”. All this is revolting. It is revolting to realize that, generation after generation, throughout the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s, the federal Liberal government has kept to the same party line.
Between 1968 and 1984, with the exception of the brief reign of the Progressive Conservatives under Joe Clark, and from 1993 to the present, Liberal members have never broken the silence imposed on them, particularly when it comes to defending Quebec's interests.
Fortunately, the Bloc Quebecois is there to defend those interests. That is the Bloc Quebecois' raison d'être, and I am proud to be a member of this team of men and women who are fighting for Quebec.
So, as a good Liberal member, and a good minister from Ontario, the federal Minister of Industry therefore acted unilaterally and tabled his bill on personal information and electronic commerce without waiting for the results of the consultation he himself initiated.
I give you two examples. On June 12, 1998, at a meeting in Fredericton, the ministers responsible for the information highway agreed, and I quote from the press release given out after the meeting:
—to consult with each other, when appropriate, when considering the advisability of legislating the protection of personal information in the private sector.
On September 21, 1998 the federal Minister of Industry forwarded a copy of proposed legislation to his provincial counterparts, asking for their comments on a bill the government was getting ready to table. But there was no follow-up.
I repeat that this government is doing everything it can to interfere in areas that are Quebec's jurisdiction alone. The bill introduced by the Minister of Industry to protect personal information and electronic commerce was obviously long awaited, but the result was a big disappointment.
In conclusion, on behalf of Quebecers and all stakeholders in Quebec who have in turn spoken out against Bill C-54, now Bill C-6, we are again asking the federal government to show, just once in this legislation, just once in this Parliament, that it is listening to Quebec and to Quebecers, and to withdraw Bill C-6.