Michel Gauthier

[Referendums, May 15th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said this morning on "Good Morning America" that Quebec's right to decide its future was not enshrined in the Constitution, but that Canada was a democratic country and if the people of Quebec expressed their wishes clearly they would be respected.

Will the Prime Minister acknowledge that, in the light of these remarks this morning, he went much too far yesterday in the House when he said that Quebec could not unilaterally declare its independence following a democratic referendum?

[Referendums, May 15th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, how does the Prime Minister explain the subtle changes he made this morning on "Good Morning America" to his statement of yesterday that there was no question of permitting Quebec to unilaterally choose sovereignty following a referendum?

[Referendums, May 15th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, on October 24 in Verdun, the Prime Minister intimated to Quebecers that a yes vote in the referendum was irreversible. Finally, yesterday, the Prime Minister said that the federal government would certainly not permit Quebec to declare sovereignty unilaterally, thereby denying Quebecers' right to decide their future. Today, the Prime Minister has to qualify his position, because the path he chose was a dead end.

Would the Prime Minister acknowledge that, by taking a legal route to resolve the constitutional issue, which pleases the other Canadians temporarily, he is heading down a cul de sac, which he will have to get out of sooner or later, having once again falsely lulled the rest of Canada?

[Referendums, May 14th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, is the Prime Minister, who was ultimately responsible for the constitutional mess of 1982, aware that his strategy of isolating Quebec from the rest of Canada is not leading anywhere but to a constitutional crisis even more serious than the one we have been in since the imposition, 15 years ago, of a Constitution that no one in Quebec has signed?

[Referendums, May 14th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, will the Prime Minister acknowledge that, by associating with Guy Bertrand, whose intention it is to subordinate the democratic decision of Quebecers to the approval of all the provinces, he is recreating the climate of confrontation he so skilfully created in 1982?

[Referendums, May 14th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister, of course.

By changing its strategy and joining forces with Guy Bertrand in taking a hard line against Quebec, the federal government is setting itself up for a confrontation not only with Quebec separatists, but also with federalists, because it is clearly aligning itself with the advocates of plan B, that is the plan to take a hard line with Quebec.

Will the Prime Minister acknowledge that the federal government's decision to get involved in the Bertrand case to establish the supremacy of law over democracy is tantamount to requiring Quebec to get the permission of all the provinces of Canada in order to act on a majority vote in a referendum?

[Referendums, May 13th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice is knocking himself into a cocked hat in an effort to prove he is not supporting Guy Bertrand, but everyone in Quebec knows, everyone in Canada knows, that the federal government is joining forces with Guy Bertrand to please the rest of Canada.

Since he is so good at explanations, perhaps he would explain why the Prime Minister told Quebecers, before the latest referendum, that a yes would mean an irreversible outcome, when he had planned at that point a legal challenge to the right of Quebecers to decide their future? Perhaps he could explain.

[Referendums, May 13th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the government's action must be interpreted as a challenge to Quebecers' right to decide their future themselves. The government is trying to subordinate this right of Quebecers to a decision by the courts.

Does the Prime Minister realize that, with this action and by trying to join forces with Guy Bertrand, not only is he launching a direct attack on sovereignist Quebecers, that is obvious, he is attacking all of Quebec including his former partners on the no side in the latest referendum?

[Referendums, May 13th, 1996]

Yes, Mr. Speaker.

Having stated he would respect Quebecers' wishes and accept separation, could the Prime Minister or somebody else on his behalf explain whether, having jumped into bed with Guy Bertrand to deny Quebecers' right to decide their own future, he is not now denying what he himself wrote not that long ago?

[Referendums, May 13th, 1996]

No, they do not like to hear that, Mr. Speaker, the-