Madam Speaker, neither the Act of Union of 1842 nor the British North America Act of 1867 nor the Constitution Act of 1982 defines an orderly breakup of our great country. In the face of this fact, the reality is that all the many viewpoints put forth by the separatist forces in the absence of precedent are in many cases inaccurate projections about the way things will be in a sovereign and separate Quebec.
I believe Canada will accept separatism if it is the result of a clearly worded referendum on the issue and reflects the will of the majority of Quebecers. But whoever said outside of Quebec that sovereignty association was a negotiable option? A new and better Canada requires four strong foundations. It needs four principles to stick to.
First is responsible spending. Irresponsible government spending by this Liberal government, the massive debt it continues to add to and excessive taxation it proposes to put forward have weakened the financial foundation of the old Canada. We need to rebuild the new national home on the principle of financial responsibility. The federal government must balance its budget and keep taxes in check.
Second is the equality of provinces and citizens. Our old Canadian home is built on the fault line which separates French and English rather than on the solid ground of what all Canadians have in common. It is undermined by the linguistic,
cultural and constitutional policies that do more to divide us than to unite us. We need to rebuild our national home on the principles that all Canadians will be treated equally regardless of race, gender, language, culture, creed and that all provinces have the same powers and responsibilities over their own destinies.
Third is democracy. Our old Canadian home is built on a system that serves the political elite and only allows your input at election time. We need to rebuild our new national home on the principle that you will have more say in how the national household is run. Elected officials will be accountable all of the time, not just at election time.
Finally, a criminal justice system is the fourth principle, that is more effective, leaving less interpreted for judges, that recognizes victim rights over criminal rights.
The reality of the consequences of Quebec separation will in many ways be very costly for all Canadians. Bloc Quebecois members claim that federalism has not, cannot and will not work. They point to the failures of the Constitution Act, and the Meech Lake and Charlottetown accords as sufficient proof. While I agree that these constitutional efforts represent failure, they failed everyone, not just Quebecers because the wrong people were negotiating the right things the wrong way, top down.
What the premier of the province of Quebec is presently doing by first introducing a draft bill, passing it in the legislature of Quebec first and then going to the Quebec people is making the very same mistake. It is a top down approach. It is something that may not be accepted by the rest of Canadians in Canada. Therefore, it is imperative that when Quebecers and the provincial Government of Quebec look at this issue that they address it on the basis that the simpler the question the better.
If Bloc Quebecois members are questioning why the federal government is refusing to participate in the discussions that will go across the province, it is because it has no solution. It is waiting for other people to step forward and the Reform Party is trying to fill that gap.
I believe that in the province of Quebec the voters should be asked first, then a bill drafted and negotiated. Then the people of Quebec will have the legitimacy to begin negotiations with the rest of Canada.
