(Vingt heures quarante-cinq minutes)
Mme
Hivon
:
Bonjour. Alors, je dois vous dire qu'après tout ce qu'on a vécu dans les
derniers jours, on pensait avoir tout vu, mais, au cours des dernières heures,
le gouvernement a carrément ajouté l'insulte à l'injure. Il nous a appris,
séance tenante, en déposant une nouvelle liasse d'amendements que,
contrairement à ce qui était écrit dans son projet de loi depuis le tout début,
qui était que les commissaires scolaires allaient donc voir leur mandat se
terminer le 29 février, eh bien, ça va se terminer dans les prochaines
heures, dès que le projet de loi, selon toute vraisemblance, va être adopté et
que le gouvernement va faire sanctionner la loi, parce qu'il vient écrire que
c'est désormais la sanction qui va faire foi de tout.
Concrètement, ce que ça veut dire, c'est
que l'arrogance de ce gouvernement-là, le cynisme de ce gouvernement-là n'ont
aucune limite, et ça, c'est extrêmement inquiétant. Je disais plus tôt aujourd'hui
que le Parlement, ce n'est pas le jouet du gouvernement. Eh bien, il semble de plus
en plus clair que, dans son esprit, c'est ce que souhaite le gouvernement, c'est
de s'approprier cette institution-là, s'approprier le travail législatif à ses
propres fins et surtout en ne respectant pas la base de ce que devrait être la
transparence en démocratie.
Voulez-vous bien m'expliquer pourquoi le gouvernement
a fait cette manoeuvre-là, alors que, dès le début, dans son projet de loi, il
avait tout le loisir de dire, bien évidemment, que ce mandat-là prendrait fin
lors de la sanction? Pourquoi il a mis le 29 février? Pour que tout le
monde croie que ce serait ça, la date. Et, bang, il arrive, il passe le bâillon
trois semaines plus tôt, et là les commissaires scolaires se transforment
littéralement en fantômes cette nuit. Et donc le gouvernement décide que c'en
est fini, et là il y a tout un enjeu. Non seulement il y a un énorme enjeu de
transparence parce qu'il n'y a personne qui a été prévenu de ça, mais pourquoi
il fait ça? Bien, il leur enlève la capacité juridique, il leur enlève donc la
capacité légale.
Alors, évidemment, on comprend tous les
répercussions de ça. J'ai posé des questions directement au ministre, à savoir
pourquoi il faisait ça. Il n'a aucunement répondu. Je lui ai émis l'hypothèse
que c'était précisément pour pouvoir enlever la capacité légale aux
commissaires scolaires qui, par exemple, auraient pu poursuivre le
gouvernement. Il n'a rien dit, il n'a pas nié tout ça. Alors, je pense que
c'est extrêmement gros, la manoeuvre est extrêmement claire et grosse. Et ça,
franchement, dans une démocratie qui se respecte, ce n'est pas des choses qui
devraient se passer.
Et ça, c'est sans compter le mépris qui est
affiché envers ces gens-là. Je veux bien qu'on puisse avoir toutes sortes de
vues au Québec sur toutes sortes d'enjeux. Le gouvernement a droit à ses vues.
Nous, on pense qu'on a droit aux nôtres, puis l'important, c'est de pouvoir
faire un débat. Mais au-delà de tout ça, est-ce que, comme élus de l'Assemblée
nationale, on peut avoir un minimum de respect pour des gens qui ont quand même
été élus, qui ont quand même donné de nombreuses années de leur vie au service public?
Alors, de faire les choses de cette manière-ci, je pense que ça dépasse
l'entendement.
Et très concrètement parlant, qu'est-ce qui
va se passer? Qu'est-ce qui va se passer, là? Là, c'est le directeur général, à
partir de demain, dimanche, lundi qui va donc être le seul lien avec les
parents, avec tous les gens qui gravitent dans l'univers de l'éducation puis
qui auraient le goût de pouvoir s'adresser à quelqu'un pour toutes sortes de
demandes. O.K., mais il n'y a aucune période de transition. Alors, je pense que
c'est un peu pourquoi tout le monde est peu sous le choc. Au-delà de toutes les
idées, au-delà de tous les points de vue, il y a non seulement un facteur
humain derrière ça, mais il y a un facteur énorme de savoir vers quoi les gens
vont se tourner.
Puis ça me ramène, en terminant, sur cette
question fondamentale de la transparence. Le gouvernement a utilisé comme un
cheval de Troie, il a agité comme un hochet la question de la fin des élections
scolaires. Mais il a totalement caché tous les autres enjeux plus complexes,
plus difficiles à comprendre, qui sont contenus dans ce projet de loi, et moi, ça
m'inquiète énormément, parce que qu'est-ce que la population peut connaître?
Quel genre de communication le gouvernement a fait par rapport à ce projet de
loi là, qui va avoir énormément d'impact sur le terrain, dans la vie de tous
les jours pour les élèves, pour les enseignants?
Et là il se retrouve, le ministre, complètement
isolé par rapport à son réseau. De plus en plus les parents... on a reçu des
tonnes de lettres dans les 24 dernières heures, les comités de parents se
dissocient de cette réforme-là, les enseignants, on l'a vu autant par leurs représentants
qu'individuellement, se dissocient de ce projet de loi là, et évidemment beaucoup
de gens qui gravitent dans l'univers scolaire.
Alors, bien franchement, je pense que
c'est un constat d'échec. Un bâillon, c'est toujours un constat d'échec, mais
là, ce soir, le ministre se retrouve isolé face à un constat d'échec par
rapport à tout son réseau, et je pense qu'il y a des limites à vouloir gérer le
Parlement comme une business.
So in English, yes. I
feel that, you know, the minister and his Government... the Government
and the minister just keep pushing the boundaries of arrogance and cynicism,
because what we saw today, in the last hours, by the tabling of new amendments
is just unbelievable.
There's this new
amendment that totally changes the time of ending of the mandate of the
commissioners, and this time is in the coming hours when it was supposed to be
at the end of February. And even the minister had said : You know, it
could be a little bit later also, we can be flexible. So how come suddenly,
with no notice, he comes and he says : No, it's
when the bill will be sanctioned, a little bit later, after its adoption? It's
just a lack of respect. It's just also a clear way to try to put aside all the
legal existence of these commissioners so that they cannot move forward with
any action possible. And, you know, I think that it is also a great lack of
consideration for people who have been involved, who gave their time, who have
been elected.
So, you know, above what
we think about this reform... we can have different points of view, but I think
that something that should be of our concern, as elected members of the
National Assembly, is the way we treat people. And we saw today a great, great
disrespect of people.
Mme Fletcher
(Raquel) : Can you speak... the hypothesis
that you mentioned that he's doing this in order to take away the
commissioners' power to...
Une voix
:
Sue.
Mme Fletcher
(Raquel) : ...to sue him, yes?
Mme
Hivon
:
I asked the Minister really clearly why he was doing such a change, and he
didn't give me any answer. He just said that, you know, it was in his power to
bring amendments. And I said : OK, we saw that, that you're able to bring
many, many amendments, but why did you not just decide, when you drafted your
bill, to put that the sanction would be the time that the mandate of the
commissioners would be ending and... Because, you know, he could have done that
when he tabled the bill. And he said: Because we looked at things and we
decided that it would be, you know, if... when we adopt the bill would be a
best time, we evolve, and all that.
And then I
asked him: It doesn't make any sense because, you know, from the start,
generally, the normal rule is at the sanction… that most articles come into
force, so, clearly, you wanted to lead us to think something else. And so, is
it because, as the commissioners feared themselves — they were telling
this this morning again — you want to take away all their legal and
their juridical personality, you know, so that they cannot take any action? And
he didn't answer that. So, I think that somebody who doesn't say anything, you
know, consents and I think this is what it's all about.
Mme Fletcher
(Raquel) : The Minister kept repeating that he
has confidence in the system and that people should have confidence in him. And
at one point, you kind of mocked him or... You said : Well, I guess we
don't need to be here and...
Mme
Hivon
:
Exactly.
Mme Fletcher
(Raquel) : It was... Obviously, you were
becoming frustrated. Why were you becoming frustrated about his saying over and
over again: You should trust in me?
Mme
Hivon
:
Because the Government is considering the Parliament as its backyard. They are
considering that they can do whatever they want. You know, he was just
saying : Well, I don't have to answer that, you know. Just have confidence
in me.
Well, you know, our job,
as legislators, is to ask questions, to go into the deep of what is proposed,
to look at the details, to make sure, because we're not just having this
legislation for tomorrow, we're having it for years and years, you know. So, we
cannot just have an act of faith and say: Oh, yes, we believe you. We will stop
asking any questions. We will... Why are we showing up even? We just have to
trust, you know, this good Government that, you know, will be always taking the
good decisions for the good people.
Well, this is not how it
works, and I have been here for more than 10 years. And I cannot believe
the amount of cynicism and arrogance that was shown in the last days, you know,
with the declarations of the Prime Minister, saying, you know, that it was a
waste of time, the parliamentary committees. Are they hearing what they are
saying, you know? Are they really thinking that they own this Parliament? This
is not how it works.
And, you know, from what
we have seen in the last weeks, I think that we should be careful because they
have been going forward, going backward, you know, having to adjust many times
their reforms, what they plan to do, and I think that it's not in itself
something that gives confidence, quite the contrary. So, hearing the Minister
saying: Just be confident, I'm confident in the process, and everything will be
well, well, I think it's a little bit short.
Mme Fletcher
(Raquel) : Just one last question about...
There were a number of things that came up, the conflicts of interest, that the
training for... that the new board of governance that he said, you know: It's
in the works, we are working on it, it will be in place and... I'm not sure who
it was, maybe it was your colleague. He said: Well, good luck.
Does the... At the end of
the day, does the Minister get... does he deserve what is going to come to him?
Because, if this is a mess at the end of the day...
Mme
Hivon
:
No. Well, I think it's really sad, because I'm really afraid it's going to be a
mess, because, you know, obviously, it's not well prepared. And obviously we
ask for details, we don't have any answer, we ask for… where is this code of
ethics? Oh, well, we are drafting it right now. Either it's false, either he is
very nonchalant about all of that.
But it's really worrisome
because it's... the impacts will be on the children, the impacts will be on the
students everyday in our schools. The impacts of having a reform that is not
well prepared, that will not land properly and, furthermore, that will take all
the energy of all the system, you know, just focusing on how the people in the system will deal with this new way of working with
this new reform, it will not leave the energy for all the other priorities we
should have.
So yes it's really
worrisome and it's really worrisome that the Minister takes that so lightly, you know. No plan of communication. Who's
going to tell the parents that they cannot, you know, turn to their commissioners? Will they call their Members of the National Assembly when they have a problem?
OK, they will call the general director of this new entity but, OK, so he's
going to operate alone for months because this new board will only be created
in June, something like that. So, for many months, he will just deal with that
alone and then, oh! he will bring people on a board. And this new director will
be the spokesperson. It doesn't make any sense, you
know, and, for the regions, there are a lot of worries.
How can you have just a general director being a voice, being able to say to
the Government : We need more support for this, we need more money, we
need to fight for the little schools in the small villages, you know, when they don't have any leverage
and they are a civil servant who don't have any independence? Those are a few
things I'm worried about.
Une voix
: Merci.
Mme
Hivon
:
Merci.
(Fin à 20 h 59)