Madam Speaker, what I got out of my colleague's speech was that he thinks it is important for us right now to look ahead, review the legislation from the 1880s that exempted Canadian Pacific from taxes, assess its relevance today and what benefits it might bring to the public, and then amend it as needed.
I think this is necessary, absolutely, and I think that everyone in the House agrees. I find it fascinating that we are debating amending a constitutional text that today is putting people at a disadvantage and making them unhappy, leading them to call for an amendment.
I want to ask my colleague about another potential constitutional amendment. In 1867, the British North America Act was passed, imposing a constitutional order on Quebec. The same thing happened in 1982, when another constitutional order was imposed on Quebec, an order that Quebec has never supported or endorsed. To this day people in Quebec are calling for change and openness.
I would like to know whether my colleague thinks that the existing constitutional framework is satisfactory, compared to the old one, given our present demands and needs. Does he think it has been adequately adapted? If not, how does he plan to address this?