Stéphane Dion

[British Columbia, September 26th, 1997]

Do we think it is so horrible, I do not know. To speak about separation and secession is irresponsible in Quebec. It is irresponsible in British Columbia.

Each province has its problems and concerns and governments are not always as good as they should be. But what does this have to do with secession?

[British Columbia, September 26th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I think it would be very helpful if the hon. member were able to quote what I said.

[Speech From The Throne, September 26th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to hear that the member understands our federation is flexible and accommodates various mechanisms. The ones actually used with this program will have to be discussed with our partners.

[Speech From The Throne, September 26th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I will use my example of Wales another time.

The announcement for students is excellent news. You know, the Natural Sciences Engineering and Research Council, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and the Medical Research Council of Canada offered, for the last year available, bursaries worth $175 million to 13,359 students. Many of us benefited from them, including perhaps the hon. member. The member for Saint-Laurent—Cartierville did. If even more students can benefit, it will be a good thing for students in Quebec and Canada.

[Speech From The Throne, September 26th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, far from making any threats, the government is calling for calm and democratic debate of very serious matters: How does secession square with democracy? There is no model for it anywhere.

Let me illustrate. The leader of the Bloc Quebecois and the Premier of Quebec gave the example of the recent referendum in Wales, noting that 50% plus one was enough. I must give you the following information, which is important to the debate. The Tories asked the British Prime Minister not to apply the results to a simple decentralization because—

[Speech From The Throne, September 26th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, Quebecers are visibly losing faith in the Bloc Quebecois. This is clear from the recent election.

The very great majority of Quebecers want to remain in Canada. This is clear not just from the polls, but from speaking to average citizens. And the more they could be convinced that they do not have to choose between Quebec and Canada, that these two formidable entities can join forces and make them stronger and will be more indispensable to them than ever in the next millennium, the more they will turn away from the Bloc Quebecois in mistrust.

[Calgary Declaration, September 25th, 1997]

—if ever the Calgary declaration were to become an interpretive clause, which is possible, although it has not happened yet, of course, as it is under discussion, the interpretation given would guarantee Quebecers that the courts would take into account today's unique, as opposed to yesterday's distinct, character of Quebec society.

There is not a single serious jurist who would say that being unique had anything less to recommend it than being distinct.

[Calgary Declaration, September 25th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, in fact—

[Calgary Declaration, September 25th, 1997]

And that is why they far prefer anything advancing Canadian unity to anything calculated to destroy the country, as one of the Bloc Quebecois members put it, and I am not distorting his words.

[Calgary Declaration, September 25th, 1997]

We can pin our hopes on the fact that Canada is a country Quebecers want to keep. And that is why the Bloc Quebecois finds the Calgary declaration so annoying. It is annoying because Quebecers want to remain in Canada.