Pierrette Venne

[Referendum Campaign, October 27th, 1995]

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

The Minister of Fisheries and Oceans has launched an operation to bring thousands of federalists from across Canada to Montreal. The government is even urging its employees to go there to put pressure on Quebecers under the pretence that they suddenly love them.

Does the minister not feel that the best way to show Quebecers they are loved would be above all to respect their laws, starting with the referendum act?

[Referendum Campaign, October 25th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, are we to understand the reason the premiers of English Canada are so steadfastly blocking constitutional change is once again because of the bargaining that went on before the start of the referendum campaign between them and the Prime Minister of Canada in which they promised there would be no constitutional change for Quebec, as the editorial in the Daily Gleaner indicates?

[Referendum Campaign, October 25th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Labour.

Clearly, English Canada categorically rejects any possibility of constitutional change in Quebec's favour. This is why the leader of the Reform Party said there was no market for a distinct society, that it was old hat.

Will the Minister of Labour acknowledge that, although the Prime Minister has been saying he wants to enshrine the principle of a distinct society in the constitution, he will be unable to because of the steadfast opposition of English Canada as expressed yesterday by the premiers of British Columbia, Newfoundland and Manitoba?

[Canadian Dollar, October 24th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, that is totally false. The Leader of the Opposition did not say that.

Will the Minister of Finance admit he has a responsibility to make a commitment that, the day after a yes vote, he will argue in favour of negotiations beginning quickly with Quebec to reach a partnership agreement, as the interests of both parties dictate?

[Canadian Dollar, October 24th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.

The Premier of Quebec and leader of the Yes side clearly expressed his intention to continue to use the Canadian dollar once Quebec achieves sovereignty. He also committed a sovereign Quebec to assuming its share of the enormous Canadian debt.

Does the Minister of Finance not believe that he too should be clear and, rather than allow uncertainty to pervade the financial community, he should indicate that he has in fact prepared a plan "B", should the yes side win on October 30, as it likely will, which he has stubbornly refused to confirm up to now?

[Referendum Campaign, October 23rd, 1995]

A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker.

How can the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs expect the people of Quebec to think that there would be a place for Quebec in his Canada after a no in the referendum, when we are familiar with the points of view of his Prime Minister's best buddies, Clyde Wells and Roy Romanow, and when we know that his Prime Minister systematically refuses to give any hope whatsoever and any response whatsoever to the pleadings of his allies on the no side?

[Referendum Campaign, October 23rd, 1995]

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

Last week, the deputy chair of the no committee, Ms. Lisa Frulla, demanded that Ottawa withdraw completely from the area of culture, declaring that Ottawa had no business interfering in this area of exclusive Quebec jurisdiction.

Can the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs tell us whether it is his feeling that, in the field of culture as in the other questions raised by Daniel Johnson, Quebecers will be given no response before October 30?

[Referendum Campaign, October 20th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, will the Prime Minister tell us clearly whether or not his government intends to withdraw from Quebec's areas of responsibility such as education, health, manpower training and regional development and to fully compensate Quebec through tax point transfers?

[Referendum Campaign, October 20th, 1995]

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

In a brochure sent to all Quebecers by the director general of elections in Quebec, the No committee states, and I quote: "-the

government of Quebec must control its areas of responsibility". What this really means is that Ottawa must stop using its spending power to interfere in Quebec's areas of jurisdiction.

Could the Prime Minister tell us if his government agrees with this position? And if so, does it intend to withdraw from areas of jurisdiction in which it is interfering through its spending power, notably education, culture, health and manpower training?

[Referendum Campaign, October 19th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, we support the concept of distinct society when it really means something.

Must we gather from the Prime Minister's refusal to make a commitment to recognize Quebec as a distinct society in the constitution that he not only does not believe in it himself but that he is also unable to get a sufficient number of provinces to agree on this issue?