Michel Bellehumeur

[Supreme Court Of Canada, October 1st, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's silence on issues as important as this one is quite telling.

Does the Prime Minister recognize, and I hope he has the courage to rise and respond to the question, that in addition to using the Supreme Court of Canada for strictly political purposes, he has just undermined its credibility with this highly partisan appointment?

[Supreme Court Of Canada, October 1st, 1997]

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

The Prime Minister has just appointed Michel Bastarache to the Supreme Court of Canada, not long after this same Liberal government had appointed him to the New Brunswick Court of Appeal.

Does the Prime Minister not find it indecent to appoint to the highest court in the country a former colleague, someone very close to him, someone close to the Liberal Party of Canada, someone who co-chaired the national committee for the yes side during the referendum on the Charlottetown accord?

[Speech From The Throne, September 29th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, another member from the province of Premier Harris, who claims to recognize Quebec as unique in the same way the Pacific salmon is unique.

The hon. member has heard her colleague for Anjou—Rivière-des-Prairies, in answer to my question as to whether he, as a member of the government, recognized Quebecers as a people, reply “Yes, of course”. He even went on to add: “Everyone does”.

I am therefore asking the hon. member, a member of the same party as the member for Anjou—Rivière-des-Prairies, whether she recognizes the existence of the people of Quebec. If so, why did she vote against the Bloc's amendment to the motion on the throne speech.

So there are two questions: Does she recognize the people of Quebec and, if so, why did she vote against the amendment we moved in this House?

[Speech From The Throne, September 29th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, it could take me quite some time to respond to this, but I shall try to be brief.

Since this morning, we have been hearing all sorts of things. We heard about such things as the homeland of culture, having a unique character and being a distinct society. The hon. member referred to distinct realities in the case of Quebec, etc.

We had Meech, we had Charlottetown, now we have Calgary and tomorrow we may have Canada's Wonderland. Had Walt Disney been a Canadian, Mickey Mouse might be the one making the premiers' declaration. Members opposite should get serious.

One thing being overlooked is Quebec's historical perspective. I am thinking of Quebec's premiers, in particular of Maurice Duplessis. The hon. member for Anjou—Rivière-des-Prairies certainly remembers that, in the fifties, Mr. Duplessis said the Canadian confederation was a treaty of union between two great nations. Not a treaty between typical, unique or distinct societies, or whatever else. Later, Jean Lesage spoke of two founding peoples.

Will the member opposite, who is boasting because he is a government member, tell us here whether or not his government recognizes that Quebecers are a people?

[Speech From The Throne, September 29th, 1997]

You still haven't replied.

[Speech From The Throne, September 29th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the hon. member for Burin—St. George's, a Newfoundland riding.

We know very well the important role that Newfoundland played in the aborted Meech Lake accord, which mentioned that Quebec was a distinct society.

Given that the Speech from the Throne mentions the unique character alluded to in the Calgary declaration, I would like the hon. member from Newfoundland—and I am sure he knows what happened, he knows the role played by Clyde Wells in the failure of Meech Lake—to tell us whether, in his opinion and the opinion of his party, the expression unique character of Quebec society as used in the meaningless Calgary declaration has the same meaning as the expression distinct society had in the Meech Lake accord.

This is a simple question to which I would appreciate a simple and clear answer from the Conservative member.

[Speech From The Throne, September 29th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, since this is questions and comments, I will refer to the remarks made by the member for Barrie—Simcoe—Bradford. She spoke of Quebec's unique character. I am pleased to have this opportunity to ask her, as a member from Ontario, a question on this specific issue.

As we know, the Ontario premier, Mr. Harris, said shortly after the Calgary declaration that Quebec was just as unique as Pacific salmon is.

The hon. member claims to be in politics for the purpose, among others, of saving this great country. This is fine rhetoric, but nothing concrete is ever done. Still, Quebecers are patient as they approach the new millennium.

The hon. member, who is a government member, told us she shares our history. If, indeed, she knows Quebec's history—not the one told in Ontario schools, but Quebec's true history—if she knows about the traditional claims made by Quebec premiers since the fifties, will she tell this House whether or not her government does recognize the existence of the people of Quebec?

This is very short. Aboriginal peoples are recognized. So, as a government member, will the hon. member tell us whether Quebecers are a people, yes or no?

[Speech From The Throne, September 29th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the industry minister chose earlier not to answer a question a Bloc Quebecois member was asking him.

The hon. member was asking whether or not the House recognizes the existence of a Quebec people; given the importance of that question, I will turn to the NDP member and ask him if, as a representative of the New Democratic Party, he can give us an answer.

Does his Party recognize the existence of a Quebec people? I would really like him to give us a clear answer because this question is closely linked to the Speech from the Throne, when it comes to national unity and the unique character of Quebec society. We in Quebec believe this is not enough.

Even some federalist Liberal organizers say it is an empty shell. I would like to know in no uncertain terms whether or not the member from the New Democratic Party recognizes the existence of a Quebec people.

[Calgary Declaration, September 25th, 1997]

Yesterday, that's right.

[Canada Elections Act, April 25th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I add my voice to the government House leader's to say that, while we may not always have seen eye to eye and agreed on how things should go, we have always appreciated your honest and straightforward approach in the position you occupy.

It was a pleasure to be here to defend the interests of Quebec of course, but also, in some ways, those of Canada, since we played our part as watchdogs on a number of issues. I very sincerely hope we will be back with a new mandate to work together toward Canada's prosperity, and especially Quebec's.