Quebec-France Agreement On Child Support  Mr. Speaker, the agreement was approved because it did not contradict in any way the Canada-France treaty at the time.

Oral Question Period  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to repeat what I said a moment ago: I did not say that the hon. member did not lie.

Oral Question Period  Yes, Mr. Speaker, I withdraw all these words.

France-Quebec Agreement On Collection Of Support Payments  Mr. Speaker, we have to come up with an agreement that provides Quebeckers with good services. Thus, with the aim of signing an enforceable agreement, which therefore, in the opinion of both governments—the Canadian and the French governments—must be done within the rules of the Canada-France agreement, the Government of Quebec is invited to negotiate in good faith with the Government of Canada.

France-Quebec Agreement On Collection Of Support Payments  I will now answer the question. No foreign government wants to find itself in a situation of having to reveal to Canadian federal authorities the content of an agreement it is to sign with a Canadian province. This, however, is the situation that Mr. Bouchard's government placed France in, by refusing request after request to inform us of the content of the agreement.

France-Quebec Agreement On Collection Of Support Payments  Mr. Speaker, first of all, I wish to withdraw what I said earlier. I did not say that the member for Beauharnois—Salaberry had not lied.

Franco-Quebec Accord On Child Support  Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Quebecois is contradicting itself. The Minister of Foreign Affairs has just explained that the French government cannot sign this agreement without the assurance that the Canadian government is in agreement. That is the fundamental issue. I will not accuse the hon. member of lying, as the leader of the Bloc Quebecois is forever doing.

Minister Of Intergovernmental Affairs  Mr. Speaker, I think pretty well everyone knows that the French government is embarrassed each time the Government of Quebec tries to get it involved in the matter of Canadian unity. I think French government policy is one of non-interference and non-indifference. The policy must therefore be respected, and things would go much better for the signing of an agreement such as the one we are talking about at the moment.

Minister Of Intergovernmental Affairs  Mr. Speaker, clearly the French government is embarrassed each time the Quebec government tries to push it into the middle of our internal disagreements. It does not want to get involved, it has no intention of doing so. The agreement must be in harmony with the France-Canada accord.

Minister Of Intergovernmental Affairs  Mr. Speaker, on July 29, 1997, the French government supplied the Government of Canada with a draft text and sought its opinion. The French government will speak for itself, but we are well aware that it wants to remain friends with the Government of Quebec and the Government of Canada.

Minister Of Intergovernmental Affairs  Mr. Speaker, I can only repeat what I said. The French government has no intention of becoming mixed up in our internal disputes. It is up to us to reach agreement. This agreement would be good for Quebeckers. It is easily accomplished if the Government of Quebec would agree to sit down with Canada's Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Minister Of Intergovernmental Affairs  Mr. Speaker, once again this is an agreement made under the Canada-France agreement, one which has operative force and involves criminal matters, and one which must of course be made within the Canada-France framework. This is very feasible. All we have to do is work together with the Government of Quebec, and not get the French involved in our affairs.

Calgary Declaration  Mr. Speaker, all parties in the House with one exception have never been as united for Canadian unity than they are now with nine of the premiers. They are united for principles that Canadians support from British Columbia to Newfoundland. An Angus Reid poll yesterday showed strong support for a federation that respects the equality of provinces while recognizing that one of them is obviously unique in an anglophone North America.

Appointment Of A Special Joint Committee  Madam Speaker, I enjoyed the hon. member's speech but his reply did not please me nearly as much. He launched into a debate that was completely off topic. The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that the Constitution Act of 1982 applies. It does. The reasons put forward by the PQ government in Quebec and other political parties for not recognizing the Act of 1982 are very shaky.

Appointment Of A Special Joint Committee  Madam Speaker, I am ready when he is, but this is not the right time. The hon. member is contradicting himself. While in his first speech his heart went out to the anglophone community, he is now bothered that, under a charter of rights and with the support of a large majority of Quebeckers, a support which they have expressed in one poll after the other, the use of English on commercial signs has been allowed.