Mr. Speaker, it was with a great deal of interest that I listened to my colleague from the Progressive Conservative Party, the member for South Shore.
I am very happy that the member also talked about what the member from the Canadian Alliance addressed at the beginning of his speech; in other words, the agreement that was reached between the Minister of Heritage—represented by the parliamentary secretary—and the opposition parties that clauses 21 to 23 should be withdrawn because they do not belong in this bill.
The Progressive Conservative Party, through its new member on the Standing Committee on Heritage—this was his first experience—did not see it that way.
I attended the committee meetings after the House adjourned and I heard that the agreement had fallen through. I saw to what extent this government was not very proactive and disregarded the opposition parties. I agree with my Conservative colleague that this government cannot be trusted.
As he said, his province freely joined the Canadian Constitution in the 1940s. Perhaps there will be another opportunity to do the reverse. One never knows.
I share his concerns with respect to this idea of interpreting history. History changes, but it can also be interpreted by adversaries who have a first-hand knowledge of the situation, wherever they stand on the political spectrum.
As for his interpretation, I do not know whether the Progressive Conservative Party will vote in favour of the bill. His party was very vague, saying it would decide when it comes time to vote. I call on members to listen to the Bloc Quebecois, which will have many questions about this. I am very happy that he listened attentively to my colleague, the member for Drummond.