The Napoleonic Code.
House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 1993, with 76% of the vote.
Renewal Of Canadian Federalism November 28th, 1995
The Napoleonic Code.
Renewal Of Canadian Federalism November 28th, 1995
It is a sham.
Renewal Of Canadian Federalism November 28th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, if I ever take on the duties referred to by the Prime Minister, I would consider it an insult to my position and to Quebecers to accept a solution that is unacceptable. Even his ally, Mr. Johnson, would refuse.
How can the Prime Minister expect Quebec to take seriously a resolution that falls far short of the proposal in the Charlottetown Accord which was rejected in no uncertain terms by Quebecers in the 1992 referendum?
Renewal Of Canadian Federalism November 28th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, perhaps it would be useful to recall that the man who just spoke is the main artisan of the forced patriation of the 1982 Constitution and of the demise of Meech Lake.
We know that nearly half of Quebecers supported sovereignty in the referendum and that many others voted for a thorough overhaul of the federal system. That being the case, what makes the Prime Minister think that Quebecers will be satisfied with a mere resolution that is meaningless as far as Quebec's distinct identity is concerned?
Renewal Of Canadian Federalism November 28th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister hastily announced measures with which he intends to meet his referendum commitments. In fact, he is trying to fool the public, but Quebecers will not be fooled by these cunningly worded resolutions on the distinct identity of Quebec, any more than they will be by the sham veto he proposes.
My question is directed to the Prime Minister. Considering that the cabinet committee on constitutional change only recently started its work and that the timeframe for unemployment insurance reform has again been changed as a result of his statement yesterday, will he acknowledge that his improvised announcement is intended to counter increasingly overt criticism of his leadership and his failure to deliver the goods?
The Constitution November 22nd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, what a sorry about-face. If I ever do go to Quebec City, I will tell Mr. Johnson not to hold his breath for the changes he is expecting from the Prime Minister.
Should we conclude, and this question is clear-if there is one thing I have learned in this House, it is how to answer questions-are we to conclude that, as of today, less than a month after the referendum, after the speech we all heard in which the Prime Minister promised Quebec everything anyone could ever want after the referendum campaign, are we to understand that he is reneging on these changes he made hastily at the time and that he is going back to his old strategy of putting English Canada to sleep and offering Quebec nothing?
The Constitution November 22nd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I note the profound sadness overcoming the Prime Minister at the prospect of my leaving the House of Commons, should the members of the Parti Quebecois so wish it. But he should not worry: I will not be far away.
I listened carefully to the Prime Minister's response on the changes he is not planning to make any more. Am I wrong, or did the Prime Minister say that he is backing down on the promise of constitutional change he made less than a month ago, that he is contemplating merely minor administrative changes and that his committee will now be called the ministerial committee on administrative change?
The Constitution November 22nd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, in the final stretch of the referendum campaign, the Prime Minister made a commitment to respond to Quebecers' desire for change. In the days following the referendum, the government set up two committees. One, chaired by the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, is to propose changes to the federal system by Christmastime. Yesterday, outside the House, the government
leader postponed the tabling of the committees' proposals by several months.
My question is for the Prime Minister. Are we to understand that the extension of the deadlines of the ministerial committee on constitutional change announced yesterday by the Prime Minister means he has been unable to rally the premiers of English Canada round a proposal for constitutional change?
Privilege November 2nd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, just now everyone heard the Deputy Prime Minister say I did not dissociate myself from the comments made by Mr. Parizeau on the night of the referendum. In fact, the very next day in a media scrum here in the lobby of the House of Commons, I publicly and clearly dissociated myself from his comments. I also pointed out that those who voted in the referendum on Monday were all Quebecers, that we are still all Quebecers and that no distinction should be made between the votes cast.
My statement was brought to the attention of the Deputy Prime Minister earlier today, twice in fact, by two Bloc members, but she refused to withdraw her accusation.
What she said implies that, by remaining silent, I approved of and agreed with what Mr. Parizeau said. This constitutes a violation of my rights as a parliamentarian and an attack on my reputation.
In the name of parliamentary democracy, I would ask you to discuss this with the Deputy Prime Minister and give her one last chance to do the right thing by asking her to withdraw what she said.
Privilege November 2nd, 1995
Yes, Mr. Speaker.