Michel Bellehumeur

[Supply, April 29th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to part of the member's speech and I wonder if I understood and if the member has really analyzed the situation in certain provinces. I will not speak about British Columbia, the example used by the member, I will speak about Quebec.

In Quebec we have the Crime Victims Compensation Act. It is not true that this act compensates victims or covers their rights only when the offence is punishable by imprisonment of more than two years. It applies to all crimes, as its name indicates. Therefore whenever anyone suffers damages as the result of a murder, theft or bodily harm, regardless of whether the crime is punishable by imprisonment for two, five or ten years or six months or a fine, the Crime Victim's Compensation Act applies.

Provinces without such legislation may be provinces where interest is lacking. It is not up to the federal government to establish it. This legislation is provincial. It is a provincial matter. In Quebec we created this legislation with the Crime Victims Compensation Act.

I would like to know from the member, with speeches being made, things proposed and people accused, whether the members of the Reform Party have at least done an analysis? Could the member who just spoke tell us whether, from his research in certain provinces, the legislation he has just quoted applied to all victims of crime or just some? I would like to know whether he really seriously analyzed the situation in British Columbia and Quebec.

I think he will conclude that it is not a matter of federal jurisdiction and he will follow our example of advocating each province's passing legislation to compensate victims of crime and to enshrine victims' rights. We in the Bloc say that victims' rights must be protected, but the right legislature must do the job, and I think the Reform Party is once again mistaken.

[Supply, April 29th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, my congratulations to the hon. member for Drummond for having grasped the problem. I do not think that Reform has. The Reform Party, and this we have seen in several matters, makes comments, talks about certain things without really understanding the ins and outs of the subject.

Anything concerning the victims of criminal acts, and all of the issue of victims' rights, is the responsibility of the government of each province. If the Reform Party understood this rather important little item, it would perhaps see fewer problems in certain matters, would perhaps accuse us less of talking sovereignty or Constitution, if they at least wanted to respect the present Constitution. That is where one of the problems of the federal government lies, and the Reform Party represents that problem very well, the desire to legislate in areas that do not belong to it.

As I saw for myself when a member of the justice and legal affairs committee where we assessed the Young Offenders Act among other things, we in Quebec are at least 25 years ahead of the Reform Party. I understand that they do not understand that this is an area that does not belong to them, that this is not a federal jurisdiction. If everyone respected the Constitution, the country might not be so deep in debt today, perhaps we would not be discussing the things we are today.

I would like to ask the hon. member for Drummond, perhaps for the benefit of the Reformers, to repeat the extremely important bit of her speech in which she said that Quebec has an act for compensating the victims of crime. I would like her to go over it a bit so that the Reform members might understand what they did not grasp. Now we are giving them the chance to turn to the French channel and listen to the answer they will get.

[Race Car Driver Jacques Villeneuve, April 29th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, only a few days before the museum dedicated to race car driver Gilles Villeneuve is officially inaugurated in Berthierville, his son Jacques demonstrated yesterday at the European Grand Prix that the Villeneuves' achievements are not over yet.

By winning the Formula I Grand Prix on the course in N«rburgring, Germany, Jacques Villeneuve showed that he is a great driver just like his father.

Jacques, the people of Quebec admire you and the people of Berthier are very proud of your victory.

Given Jacques Villeneuve's tremendous self-discipline, great panache, determination and nerves of steel, this first checkered flag is certainly not his last. This stunning victory is only the first step on his way to the top.

Fasten your seat belts; Jacques Villeneuve is on the path to glory.

[Department Of Human Resources Development Act, April 18th, 1996]

Talk to the Speaker, not to the Reformers. He has nothing to say.

[Distinct Society, April 17th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, it is not my fault that the minister felt excluded from the "we" in my reference to Quebecers.

What credibility can be given to a new minister of intergovernmental affairs, when it took the unanimous denunciation of the National Assembly to reveal to us the full extent of his feelings on this proposition which, just hours before, he was trying to sell us on right here?

[Distinct Society, April 17th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I am sick and tired of hearing the minister tell us that we Quebecers are lucky to enjoy our institutions within Canada. That is appalling.

The Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs can go ahead and try, as he has yesterday and today, to dissociate himself from the Liberal Party of Canada's resolution adopted this past weekend, but the fact remains that he voted in favour of this demeaning concept.

Will the minister admit that it is a cause for alarm that a concept as important as the one adopted by the Liberal Party for its new orientation has been endorsed by the Prime Minister, without the minister responsible for this having any opportunity to say anything about its content beforehand?

[Distinct Society, April 16th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the comment made by the minister applies to himself because he never answers the questions put to him, even though he is only starting his political career.

Does the minister realize that, by supporting the 1982 patriation of the Constitution and giving his unconditional support to this resolution, he is totally isolated in Quebec, since both the Quebec federalists and sovereignists are opposed to it?

[Distinct Society, April 16th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

As reported by the media, it is obvious that the new intergovernmental affairs minister was not consulted before the Quebec wing of the Liberal Party of Canada passed its new resolution replacing the notion of distinct society with a narrower concept which only recognizes Quebec as the principal homeland of French language, culture and legal tradition in North America.

How can the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs have any credibility during his Canada-wide tour, given that, at the first opportunity, the Prime Minister leaves him out of the discussions on the new constitutional resolution?

[The Budget, April 16th, 1996]

Let us not forget Lac-Saint-Jean.

[Distinct Society, April 15th, 1996]

It would have been far wiser, Mr. Speaker, for the Liberals to find out what the minister's answer was before applauding.

Is the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs not demonstrating through his reply that, just like the Prime Minister, he has absolutely no grasp of the Quebec reality?