Senator Gold: Thank you. As Government Representative in the Senate, I’m pleased to answer this. We are all many things. I’m a constitutional lawyer and an English-speaking Quebecer, but I’m answering as the Government Representative.

With regard to the use of the “notwithstanding” clause, clearly the clause is legal. But its consequences, of course, are serious: It suspends the rights and freedoms guaranteed by both the Quebec Charter — in the case of a Bill 96 invocation — and, of course, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The government is of the view that if a government chooses to use a remedy of this magnitude it must set out and defend the exceptional circumstances that justify the limitation or suspension, indeed, of these fundamental protections.

The government is particularly concerned when governments use the “notwithstanding” clause in a pre-emptive manner, which is the case with regard to Bill 96, before the debate has begun and before the courts have ruled on the scope of the restriction. The Government of Canada has been clear in that regard.

[Translation]