Stéphane Dion

[The Constitution, April 8th, 1997]

If so, what is required is a consensus that includes Quebec's anglophone community. What we are asking for is a consensus, reasonable support. We are not asking for unanimity.

[The Constitution, April 8th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know how many times I have said this, but we are not giving a veto to any group.

I have already asked the hon. member this question: Do she and her party consider Quebec's anglophone community part of Quebec?

[The Constitution, April 8th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I never mentioned a constitutional guarantee. I asked for guarantees that, in a democratic society, can take other forms. They can be guarantees of a legal or regulatory nature, or moral commitments.

As things stand now, the Government of Quebec has included a number of "whereas" clauses. Some could be amended, some could be added. There are lots of things that could be done without necessarily altering the Constitution. This is just as true in this situation as in many others, by the way.

[The Constitution, April 8th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the Quebec premier, Mr. Bouchard, felt on February 21 that the official opposition would oppose his plan and asked us to act even if the official opposition did not agree, because, as he put it, when they vote like that, it does not preclude a consensus.

So all that is missing now is the consensus. I presume my counterpart, Mr. Brassard, is working closely with the anglophone community to find out exactly the source of the problem and reason for the community's reticence in approving the project. This is his job, and we are following with considerable interest. As soon as there is a consensus, we will be delighted to move on this, in the House of Commons.

[The Constitution, April 8th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, on those specific points, I am saying the same thing as my counterpart, Mr. Brassard, the Quebec minister of intergovernmental affairs. He said, on February 13: "I think we consider that the consensus includes the English community. I think it is obvious that the English community must be a part of a consensus on a change of this nature".

[The Constitution, April 8th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the government has said the same thing since the outset in this. First, a bilateral amendment is possible between the National Assembly and the Parliament of Canada.

Second, a consensus is required and must, obviously, include the linguistic minority in the province. Third, a debate must be held in the National Assembly before it is held in Parliament.

[Tobacco Act, February 21st, 1997]

moved:

Motion No. 1

That Bill C-71, in Clause 2, be amended by replacing lines 24 and 25 on page 2 with the following:

"ing tobacco leaves and any extract of tobacco leaves. It includes"

Motion No. 3

That Bill C-71, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing line 33 on page 4 with the following:

"less than the prescribed quantities or portions of the"

Motion No. 8

That Bill C-71, in Clause 20, be amended by replacing, in the English version, line 30 on page 7 with the following:

"tics, health effects or health hazards of the"

Motion No. 26

That Bill C-71, in Clause 40, be amended by replacing, in the English version, line 39 on page 15 with the following:

"Minister within the prescribed time and in the prescribed manner."

Motion No. 29

That Bill C-71, in Clause 45, be amended by replacing, in the French version, line 32 on page 17 with the following:

"11 ou 12 ou le détaillant qui contrevient à"

[The Constitution, February 20th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the leader of the official opposition made another suggestion that may well reduce the likelihood of a court challenge. It is up to the Quebec government to determine whether this is the best solution and to discuss the matter with the leader of the official opposition.

I think that the official opposition in the House of Commons now realizes that a consensus is required. So far, it had always maintained that all we had to do was to accept a proposal put forward by the Government of Quebec.

[The Constitution, February 20th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I will have to repeat the three basic points made from the very beginning by the Government of Canada in this matter.

First, on the face of it, what the Government of Quebec is proposing appears to be feasible, bilaterally, under section 43 of the Constitution Act of 1982 amending formula.

Second, the Government of Quebec must build a consensus around its proposal. Incidentally, my Quebec counterpart, Jacques Brassard, is now saying the exact same thing as I am, thereby contradicting the opposition in this respect.

Third, this is a matter that must be debated by the provincial legislature before being referred to the Parliament of Canada. That was what happened in each of the four previous bilateral amendments.

[The Constitution, February 12th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, it is not up to the Government of Canada to comment on the proposals that will be made by the various groups in the debate that has just started on the modernization of the Quebec school system.