Madam Speaker, I do not have the same attitude problem that others had toward the Speaker this morning, so I sincerely apologize.

Why did the Bloc Québécois not take this opportunity, knowing that it would change things in Quebec? They know it would. The Bloc introduced Bill C‑390 on May 22, 2024. However, it waited until the day after this measure was implemented in Quebec to alert everyone and accuse us of being heartless. What the Bloc Québécois and its leader put up as bargaining chips is a bill on supply management and a bill on pensions. If the member is unable to convince his own leader to move forward and he is unable to convince him of the urgency, what makes him think he can hastily convince us to move forward with this today? It is a fantasy. It is totally irresponsible. I invite the member to tone it down, stop insulting us and take a look in his own back yard. What is the Bloc Québécois's strategy for moving its Bill C‑390 forward?

This eminently sensitive and complex issue touches on individual values. I was a member of Parliament in Quebec City when the debate started back in the early 2000s. I was present when the vote took place, and I voted in favour of it. I was also there when MAID was implemented. The debate was not over in a day. It simply got the ball rolling. People sat down together, thought things through together and talked together. A multi-party committee was struck. After that, people reached a position and decided to move forward with MAID. Parliament had spoken. Some people in my own political party in Quebec City voted against it. That was all right, because this debate touches on deeply entrenched and personal beliefs, and matters of conscience. I think that is important to highlight.

In politics there is partisanship. The Conservative Party gets blamed for a lot of things, so I am going to correct a few points. As far as health is concerned, my colleague the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons rose to say how bad and dangerous we are on issues of health. I would like to remind the House of another event I witnessed. When Prime Minister Harper was in charge, it is thanks to him that Quebec had its first asymmetrical agreement with the federal government. My colleague from Lévis—Lotbinière was there. I was in Quebec City and I saw that. The Conservative Party is a party that listens to the provinces and has demonstrated over the years its concern for respecting and accommodating the provinces.

Throughout my career, I've had to make some decisions that were much easier than others. For example, as labour minister, I changed labour standards and the Labour Code. That was a huge undertaking, but it was easier for the government than moving forward with medical assistance in dying. Nobody said this was an easy file. What I am saying today is that we need to be careful. Rushing this will get us nowhere fast, and we have no right to be anything less than thorough as we consider such an important issue.

At the end of the day, what do Canadians expect us to do? They expect us to make good decisions.

Had we acted quickly and thoughtlessly, we would have gone along with the current Liberal government's haphazard approach and ended up in the unbelievably absurd position of allowing MAID for people whose only illness is a mental disorder. Faced with that, we raised a red flag and insisted on waiting because we were not ready. We studied the issue and convinced the government not to bring it into effect on March 17, 2023, as set out in the act. We managed to extend the deadline by one year, to March 17, 2024. In the end, the decision was made to wait three years.

In conclusion, it is always better to take a little more time than to make irreversible mistakes.

Dominique Vien

$400,840.00