Michel Gauthier

[Speech From The Throne, February 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, in yesterday's throne speech, the government spoke of the next referendum in Quebec saying, and I quote:

But as long as the prospect of another Quebec referendum exists, the Government will exercise its responsibility to ensure that the debate is conducted with all the facts on the table, that the rules of the process are fair, that the consequences are clear, and that Canadians, no matter where they live, will have their say in the future of their country.

My question is for the Prime Minister or rather the Deputy Prime Minister, since the Prime Minister is not here.

Will the Prime Minister acknowledge that the next referendum in Quebec will be held under the Quebec referendum act and thus the rules will be those set out in Quebec legislation and not those the Prime Minister might want to impose?

[Speech From The Throne, February 27th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, this will certainly not be my longest speech. I will now move, seconded by the hon. member for Laurier-Sainte-Marie:

That the debate be now adjourned.

[Business Of The House, December 14th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, in the holiday spirit may I offer my best wishes to all of the members of this House, inquiring at the same time of my good friend the Leader of the Government in the House what he has in mind for us next week, outside of holidays?

[Child Care, December 14th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I understand the minister's response perfectly but it does nothing to change the fact that on the one hand the federal government is cutting general transfer payments to the provinces, which they are given to organize their own social services, and is then reinvesting that money into a child care package. That is called ramming your choices down the other's throat. If the federal government does not want to impose its choices on the provinces, all it needs do is stop making cuts in general transfer payments to the provinces. That would be a good way to give the provinces some help.

How can the provinces count on federal funding, when they can only be sure of it for three to five years? The need will still be there after that but the federal government can pull out unilaterally, again leaving the provinces to foot the bill, as it has with the transfer payments?

[Child Care, December 14th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, will the Minister of Finance admit that by cutting back the general transfers to the provinces for social programs, and ploughing part of the cuts back into child care, the federal government is imposing its choices on the provinces, which is diametrically opposite to the Prime Minister's promises of decentralization?

[Child Care, December 14th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, at the same time that the Minister of Finance was vainly trying to reach agreement with the provinces on distribution of the drastic cuts in social programs announced by Ottawa early this year, the Minister of Human Resources Development was freeing up $720 million for a new national child care strategy. Surprisingly, the Minister of Finance was totally in the dark about the announcement.

What explanation can there be for the Minister of Finance knowing nothing, at the very moment when he was discussing significant cuts in social programs with the provinces, about his Human Resources Development colleague's initiative, his decision to inject $720 million into a new daycare package?

[Points Of Order, December 14th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, it is certainly not out of a lack of respect for my hon. colleague, but I will be brief.

The Parliament of Canada Act and the Standing Orders of the House of Commons recognize the minority party with the most members as the official opposition. I do not want to offend my colleague, but there are 53 of us and 52 of them.

[Social Programs Financing, December 13th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, in view of the Minister of Finance's attitude toward the legitimate request by the Government of Quebec, will the Prime Minister acknowledge that his referendum commitments to decentralize were nothing more than window dressing and the only decentralization he foresees involves sending the bills to the provinces?

[Social Programs Financing, December 13th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, despite the Prime Minister's referendum commitments to decentralize the federal apparatus, the Minister of Finance yesterday rejected out of hand the request of the government of Quebec that it transfer the tax resources the federal government invests in health, social assistance and post-secondary education.

Since he is reneging on his referendum commitments on decentralization, will the Prime Minister acknowledge that his government's hard-line approach to Quebec is a return to the tried and tested recipe to slow his decline in popularity with English Canada, which is to put Quebec in its place?

[Referendums, December 12th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that a politician of the Prime Minister's stature does not understand one cannot stop a people on their way to becoming economically independent.

How can the Prime Minister expect Quebecers to believe him when he says he kept the solemn commitments he made during the referendum campaign, when he changes his tune in English Canada and refers to his own commitments as three little promises of no consequence?