Michel Gauthier

[1992 Referendum, September 23rd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, is the minister's response not proof in itself of this government's failure to recognize that Quebec is different from the rest of Canada? Is it not a tacit admission of the fact they are unable to accept this fundamental difference for one thing? Now, I would like to ask him: is the Premier of Quebec stating before the Quebec National Assembly that there was an agreement not sufficient proof of the existence of such an agreement? does the minister doubt the word of the former Premier of Quebec?

[1992 Referendum, September 23rd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, as he was leaving the House of Commons, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs started his media scrum by stating: "The federal government owes nothing to Quebec". How arrogant! As for the Prime Minister, he keeps saying that he needs to get a bill before he can pay the Quebec taxpayers the $26 million he owes them.

The minister knows full well that the people of Quebec paid twice for the referendum, once for the referendum in Quebec and again for the one held in the rest of Canada. Why then persist obstinately in refusing to pay what they owe to Quebec?

[Business Of The House, September 22nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would hate to deprive my colleague, the government House leader, of the opportunity to tell us about the business of the House for the coming weeks. So, as is the custom, I would ask him to tell us his priorities for the coming days.

[Privilege, September 22nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to rise on a question of privilege on behalf of my 53 colleagues from the Bloc Quebecois.

Based on the precedents you just mentioned, I am sure you will understand that we have no choice but to demand an apology for an unacceptable, in my opinion, and unparliamentary accusation made by the Prime Minister during Question Period, when he accused members from the Bloc Quebecois of having been elected under false pretences.

It is not only the most serious insult than can be levelled at a member of this House but also an attack on the democratic and electoral process itself that allows us to sit here. Bloc members were elected with a very clear mandate, a very well-defined goal

within a very structured approach that was explained many times to Quebec voters.

Under these circumstances, out of respect for all 53 Bloc members, for the millions of Quebecers who voted for us and for all those who share our vision of society, I ask the Prime Minister to apologize and withdraw his comments.

[1992 Referendum, September 22nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, if the Prime Minister of Canada wants to know what we were doing in a federal election, we were getting elected. He still does not realize that.

Is the Prime Minister's attitude, which deliberately and for no good reason is depriving Quebec of the $26 million to which it is entitled, is that attitude supposed to reflect this new spirit of co-operation with the new Government of Quebec? Will the Prime Minister of Canada, from now on, take the position that agreements do not count and he is the boss?

[1992 Referendum, September 22nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, instead of going on about the Quebec government's referendum, which is none of his business, perhaps the Prime Minister should start by paying his bills, and I am referring to what he owes Quebec.

On January 28, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs said in the House that he was looking into the request from the Government of Quebec. On May 4, the minister stated that the government had not yet reached a final decision. Yesterday, he said in passing that the government would not pay, which has been confirmed by the Prime Minister.

Is the Prime Minister trying to say that the federal government's refusal to pay the $26 million was motivated by the election of a sovereigntist government in Quebec, which would

confirm what was said by the Deputy Prime Minister on Tuesday: "That is the price of separation."?

[Public Finances, September 20th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, faced with the difficulty of obtaining figures or anything solid from the Minister of Finance, I am asking him today-we know he has figures and a target-to tell this House by how much he intends to reduce government expenditures in order to keep the election promise made by him and the Prime Minister.

[Public Finances, September 20th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, according to two studies published by the C.D. Howe Institute and by Quebec economist Pierre Fortin, the government is an estimated seven to ten billion dollars short of being able to keep its election promise of reducing the deficit to 3 per cent of the GDP by 1996.

Since the Minister of Finance is quite obviously unable to say where he will cut, could he tell us by how much he intends to reduce government expenditures in order to keep the election promise?

[Canadian Security Intelligence Service, September 19th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, would the Solicitor General not agree that the best way, in fact the only way, to shed all the light on CSIS's alleged actions would be to set up a royal commission with real powers so that we can find out exactly what CSIS did?

[Canadian Security Intelligence Service, September 19th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, serious allegations have been made during the summer putting in question the integrity of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, better known as CSIS.

CSIS has allegedly used an informant to set up a Canadian racist group. The same informant is also alleged to have infiltrated the entourage of the Reform Party leader.

My question is for the Prime Minister. Given the seriousness of the situation, does the Prime Minister think it is acceptable for CSIS to infiltrate a democratically formed political party, collect information on the CBC and the Canadian Jewish Congress, and contribute to the foundation of a Canadian racist group?

Does the Prime Minister consider that this is right?