SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 117

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 25, 2022 10:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 117 - Oct/25/22
Mr. Luc Thériault (Montcalm, BQ)
  • Oct/25/22 10:58:43 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, my colleague talked about the 1982 Constitution and its association with the Crown. He is trying to tell us that the symbols are unimportant, but there are symbols in a democracy. Anyway, we usually get rid of symbols when they outlive their usefulness. I would remind my colleague that not a single premier of Quebec has ever signed the Constitution since its patriation in 1982, a process in which the Crown played an essential role. What is more, I am unaware of any Acadian descendants, including myself, who are not deeply offended by the minister's comments and his complacency toward a Crown that is guilty of genocide against Acadians.
112 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 117 - Oct/25/22
Mr. Luc Thériault (Montcalm, BQ)
  • Oct/25/22 11:50:31 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. It is interesting to see someone who has decided to actually participate in the debate. The Bloc Québécois has opened the door and invited the members of the House to take part in a debate capable of generating comments as intelligent as the ones made by my colleague. How would she characterize the attitude of the Conservatives and Liberals who simply want to ignore the debate, despite the fact that people have been talking about the public's dissatisfaction with institutions? That dissatisfaction is often the result of institutions being maintained even though they are outdated. Should their attitude be characterized as: (a) lack of courage; (b) crass complacency inherent in a colonial attitude; (c) total ignorance of history; (d) all of the above?
137 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 117 - Oct/25/22
Mr. Luc Thériault (Montcalm, BQ)
  • Oct/25/22 1:41:34 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, since arriving in the House, I have often heard my colleagues opposite give speeches of contrition for violations of human rights. Since this morning, we have heard all sorts of things and it seems that due to ignorance, complacency or lack of courage, they are content to defend the status quo without feeling any embarrassment about what the Crown did to the Acadians, which is literally a genocide. Can my colleague explain why the members opposite are not embarrassed with respect to Acadian descendants when they swear allegiance to the Crown?
93 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border