Michel Gauthier

[Referendum Campaign, October 19th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, it is always a surprise to hear the Prime Minister say in all seriousness that he wants to solve Canada's real problems when, during the past four weeks we have been sitting, the government has not tabled a single major piece of legislation on real issues. There are limits. We know he is keeping things until after the referendum.

The director general of election is distributing a brochure in Quebec, under the Referendum Act, which sets out the yes and the no positions. I would ask the Prime Minister whether the no side position in the brochure distributed by the director general of election accurately reflects his government's constitutional position?

[Referendum Campaign, October 19th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, in what should have been his most important speech in the referendum campaign, yesterday the Prime Minister simply gave Quebecers a warning by refusing to promise any sort of constitutional change to the present federal system. Once again, the Prime Minister has been the passionate defender of the status quo.

Are we to understand from the Prime Minister that he is asking Quebecers to vote no while refusing to commit to any constitutional change, even though his Quebec allies on the no side are rejecting the status quo?

[Privilege, October 18th, 1995]

Very well, Mr. Speaker, because I respect your decision, and it is truly for that reason that I will comply. For the record, I would just like to say that the words the hon. member for Madawaska-Victoria ascribed to me are incorrect. I never said that, plain and simple.

[Privilege, October 18th, 1995]

I rise on a point of order to ask you, Mr. Speaker, since you are here to provide guidance, how, according to standard procedure, I should go about setting the record straight when a member puts words in my mouth that I never said.

I would like to know what to do, so that I can then raise my point of order, Mr. Speaker.

[Privilege, October 18th, 1995]

May I ask a question, please?

[Privilege, October 18th, 1995]

We will check up on what was said-

[Privilege, October 18th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker-

[Referendum Campaign, October 18th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, does the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs not realize that the finance minister's apocalyptic speech, which was actually received with some scepticism by industrial development advisers, gets us nowhere and is in fact is oddly similar to the speeches they made on free trade a few years ago, and which subsequently turned out to be all wrong?

[Referendum Campaign, October 18th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, would the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs not agree that his colleague in the Finance Department has gone too far by taking such an irresponsible approach, since his responsibility and first duty as finance minister is to avoid any statements that might cause a negative reaction on the financial markets?

[Referendum Campaign, October 18th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, in an apocalyptic speech to Quebec's industrial commissioners, the finance minister predicted one million jobs would be lost the day after a win by the Yes side, thus upsetting a number of people in the audience, who obviously felt uncomfortable with these outlandish claims. The minister added that according to him, it was a conservative estimate and that it might even be more than one million.

My question is directed to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. Would such farfetched statements not seriously compromise the credibility of the finance minister and are they not a definite indication that panic has struck the federal side?