Mr. Speaker, it is interesting to see our colleague express his emotions while trying to teach a lesson to my colleagues on this side of the House.
However, he forgets that it is the supreme court ruling which stated that the political players will be the ones to determine what is a clear majority in reply to a clear question, depending on the circumstances of any future referendum. This does not go against the bill put forward by the government.
My colleague will recall that, during the last referendum, when one entered the city of Montreal one could see posters showing the Canadian dollar, the “looney”, with a Yes beside it. There were other posters with a shovel and a Yes, suggesting that if we voted yes, we would have much more money in our pockets, and yet other posters suggesting that there would be many more jobs.
This was hypocrisy on an international scale. It shows that the question was not clear.
Is my colleague opposed to a clear question without any other hypothesis? Does he agree with that yes or no?