House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2015, with 62% of the vote.
Calgary Declaration December 4th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, I think that the hon. member has a hearing problem.
We have just said that there is no special status; there is a recognition of a fundamental dimension of Canada. Rather than letting its leader make inept statements on Canada in Alberta, the Reform Party is certainly welcome to go to Quebec to talk about the Calgary declaration.
Calgary Declaration December 4th, 1997
However, we disagreed with the Reform Party on this issue because the Reform Party regarded distinct society as a special status while we did not see it that way.
In the Calgary declaration, this misunderstanding has been eliminated. Anything that is available to one province will also be available to the others. There will be no special status. And we are very pleased and confident that all Canadians will recognize Quebec society as a fundamental component—
Calgary Declaration December 4th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, I think that the hon. member is the champion of confusion.
Calgary Declaration December 4th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada welcomes any initiative, any effort made by the members of this Parliament who want to have a positive dialogue with Quebeckers, and I am sure that the Reform Party will learn a great deal from Quebeckers in the process.
Canadian Unity December 1st, 1997
Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member will accept that what he said is wrong. It is nonsense.
He knows that we are working very hard. All the parties believe in unity for Canada. The results are promising. We must keep going. A good way to do it would be for he and his party to be strongly behind supporting the Calgary declaration.
Canadian Unity December 1st, 1997
Mr. Speaker, if I may reassure the member, the forces of Canadian unity are now overtaking Quebec's separatist forces.
Minister Of Intergovernmental Affairs November 27th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, democracy would have been better served had a clear question been put to the people. Then, it would have been clear how much Quebeckers wanted to remain within Canada. Support for the yes side would not have been artificially inflated for the sole purpose of winning the referendum, with a separation they did not want in the first place forced on Quebeckers.
Minister Of Intergovernmental Affairs November 27th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, once again, it is a question of semantics. We are not talking about Quebec's plan, but the plan to secede that Quebeckers have rejected twice already.
Minister Of Intergovernmental Affairs November 27th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada has said and is saying that Quebeckers have the right to not lose Canada to confusion and repeated trickery.
Minister Of Intergovernmental Affairs November 27th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, first, we are not talking about Quebec but about the PQ government.
Second, the leader of the official opposition in the National Assembly, Mr. Johnson, described the question as fraudulent.
Third, the Prime Minister challenged the Bloc to put the question clearly. He said that if they put the question clearly, Quebeckers would make them face the music. So the word on the yes side became “Chrétien, Quebeckers are going to make you face the music”. It was libelous.