Budget Implementation Act, 2023, No. 1  Madam Speaker, I wonder if my colleague could talk about the callousness of this budget. This budget contains little or nothing for housing, at a time when Quebec and Canada are in crisis, when there is virtually nothing for seniors and when health transfers are meagre. Meanwhile, it does contain a provision to modernize or amend the Royal Style and Titles Act to confirm that the King of England is indeed the Canadian sovereign.

Warsaw Ghetto Uprising  Mr. Speaker, more than six million Jewish people were murdered between 1933 and 1945, and more than two and a half million were transported in cattle cars to death camps for extermination. I acknowledge that it is a strong word, but it is appropriate. Those people were systematically, unceremoniously and unemotionally killed for no other reason than that they were Jewish.

The Budget  Madam Speaker, obviously, there are some worthwhile measures in this budget. We are not going to say no to a good thing. However, I wonder whether some steps are being skipped in implementing these procedures. I would like my colleague to tell us more about two aspects. First, I see that $31 million will be allocated to establish a national counter-foreign interference office.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, the Quebec National Assembly is concerned about the possibility under Bill C‑5 of conditional sentences for some violent crimes, such as sexual assault. It is clear that Bill C‑5 opens the door to problems. The Bloc Québécois reiterates the fair compromise it had proposed during consideration of Bill C‑5 that was rejected by the Conservative-Liberal federalist bloc: to restore minimum sentences for gun crimes and armed sexual assaults, while allowing judges to make exceptions.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, according to the media, four victim advocacy groups backed Quebec's concerns. We cannot ignore them. The minister has the right to make a mistake, and it would be honourable to admit it. I would remind him that, at the time, everyone seemed open to the Bloc Québécois compromise, including the experts who appeared before the committee.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question. I know this member as a great parliamentarian and a very competent legal expert. That said, obviously we are not against mental health care. I have never met anyone in Quebec who was against apple pie. Everyone likes it. People with mental health issues need to be taken care of.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. I have a great deal of respect for him as well. I know that there are many health care issues in British Columbia. My heart goes out to the people in that province. That said, I agree with the premise of the motion, which is to prohibit private health care and try to improve public health care.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, what I can tell my colleague is that we dream similar dreams but have different ideas about how to achieve those dreams. He dreams of a great nation from coast to coast to coast with rules that apply from coast to coast to coast to everyone who lives from coast to coast to coast.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, I want to begin by saying that I agree with my colleague from Jonquière. He is very reasonable. I would add to the list of the problems with this government the fact that it has been unable to issue paycheques properly for years. I have been a member of the House since 2015, and we have been hearing about the Phoenix pay system all this time.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, the myth, the legend, that is what we are talking about today. Beyond the legend, there is a constitutional problem, because health is not a federal responsibility, but rather a provincial one. There is also a problem in relation to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which protects a certain number of rights.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, the notwithstanding clause has basically only been used by Quebec, in order to protect and promote our national language and our unique values. It is no coincidence that the Liberals and the NDP are attacking it today. They want to contest Bill 96, which protects French in Quebec, and Bill 21, which protects state secularism.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, I am going to talk about the notwithstanding clause, the only bit of autonomy that the Constitution guarantees Quebec and the provinces. It was the compromise that Prime Minister Trudeau senior came up with so that the provinces would agree to his Constitution, which, by the way, was never signed by Quebec.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, it seems complicated and difficult. Maybe my colleague should reread the Constitution, or perhaps read it for the first time. Nowhere in section 33 does it say that the notwithstanding clause represents the first or the last word. It is exclusively up to Quebec and the provinces.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. He is a passionate man who, in my opinion, respects the rights and freedoms of individuals and peoples. I have two questions for him. First, am I to understand from his speech that he supports the Constitution Act, 1982, except for section 33?

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague, whom I respect, for his question. I will repeat what I said when finishing my speech because he is addressing an important matter. I briefly spoke about this at the end of my speech. This is what democracy is all about: I do not have to agree with Doug Ford and he does not have to agree with François Legault.