Those are the cries of a party in fear of being snowed under in the coming election.
Section 5 of the social union agreement, entitled “New Canada-wide initiatives supported by transfers to Provinces and Territories”, states:
With respect to any new Canada-wide initiatives in health care, post-secondary education, social assistance and social services that are funded through intergovernmental transfers--
That means from one level of government to the other. It goes on to state:
--whether block funded or cost-shared, the Government of Canada will:
Work collaboratively with all provincial and territorial governments to identify Canada-wide priorities and objectives
Not introduce such new initiatives without the agreement of a majority of provincial governments
Each provincial and territorial government will determine the detailed program design and mix best suited to its own needs and circumstances to meet the agreed objectives.
This is the important paragraph:
A provincial/territorial government which, because of its existing programming, does not require the total transfer to fulfill the agreed objectives would be able to reinvest any funds not required for those objectives in the same or a related priority area.
I will repeat the last part of that paragraph.
A provincial/territorial government which, because of its existing programming, does not require the total transfer to fulfill the agreed objectives would be able to reinvest any funds not required for those objectives in the same or a related priority area.
This is a paragraph of great importance to us. I am no lawyer, but I am told that this provision specifically addresses the right to opt out with full financial compensation.
The social union framework agreement contains the right of provinces to opt out with full compensation. The federal government has expressed its willingness to respect this clause in all dealings with Quebec, even though Quebec did not in fact sign the agreement. We must therefore conclude that Quebec already has the opt out right that Motion No. 394 seeks.
It seems to me then that Quebec already has the right to opt out that the hon. member for Trois-Rivières wants. This pleases us in the Canadian Alliance, because we are fully in agreement with this type of policy andr the division in our federalist system.
At the same time, however, Quebec is not a de facto nation, and nothing can be done here to change that reality.
Consequently, neither I nor my Canadian Alliance colleagues can support Motion No.394.