44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 12, 2022 10:00AM
Madam Speaker, the NDP has always been a strong advocate for that program, which aims to support court challenges brought forward by minority communities. Obviously, this affects many francophone minorities and has been very useful in the past.
I would like to take this opportunity to say that we are very pleased that the Commissioner of Official Languages has new powers to issue orders. I hope the minister will be open to amendments so that these order-making powers also apply to part VII of the Official Languages Act, which is not included in Bill C‑13 at this time, but which we in the NDP want to put forward. The commissioner should be given the powers to issue orders for part VII of the act.
130 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague.
I am surprised by the decision to choose for New Brunswick, an officially bilingual province, a lieutenant governor who does not speak French, when the court already ruled that it is against the law to have a lieutenant governor who cannot speak French. That decision was made and it was final.
Is there anything in Bill C‑13 that will change this example?
70 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her good question.
I do not think that the bill can change the prerogatives of the Prime Minister to choose the governor general or lieutenant governors. However, I think they need to set a very clear framework: The official languages are important. We have to give the act more teeth. Unfortunately, the Prime Minister did not listen and did not follow the philosophy of the act over the past few years. Specifically in the case of New Brunswick, it was truly insulting to the public, the Acadian nation there. We think that is extremely unfortunate.
However, I am not sure that Bill C‑13 is the best way to legislate this.
119 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I have a question for my colleague from Rosemont—La Petite‑Patrie.
Does he agree that Bill 101 should also apply to federally regulated sectors in Quebec?
32 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Joliette for his question.
I completely agree with him on that. That has always been part of the NDP platform. The majority of federally regulated business have already voluntarily become subject to Bill 101. That said, I find that what is in Bill C-13 is also very interesting in terms of the right of consumers to be served in French and the right of workers to work in French.
I believe that this is an excellent step forward, and I think that the Bloc Québécois should consider it to be major progress.
106 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his lively speech.
I would like to know if he believes that it is important to improve this bill by moving amendments that are supported by stakeholders across the country. Do we need a better law?
43 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, there is absolutely something we can work on. There are many aspects of this bill that can be improved.
I look forward to working on this bill in committee and making amendments. I hope that the government will be open to that and will listen to people from francophone communities in Quebec and outside of Quebec.
58 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/22 9:46:07 p.m.
- Watch
The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan has a point of order.
14 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I believe we have fallen below the requirements of quorum.
12 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/22 9:46:23 p.m.
- Watch
4 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I rise on another point of order.
On page 295 of the second edition of Joseph Maingot's Parliamentary Privilege in Canada, Maingot lists constitutional requirements regarding parliamentary procedure that must be obeyed and includes in that list section 48, which deals with the quorum of the House. Page 186 states the courts have the legal power to inquire into the procedural history of a bill that has been assented to.
Since Bill C-13 is currently being considered without quorum, I trust the courts will take note of my point of order today in the event that Bill C-13 is challenged in court. I note that if the government continues to sit late with this special order in place, every bill considered under this order could be struck down by the courts.
136 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/22 9:47:08 p.m.
- Watch
The Speaker has already ruled on this matter and said that the motion was in order.
We cannot call quorum.
Does hon. parliamentary secretary want to add to the decision that I have just given?
35 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, no, I have another point of order. This is the second time in the last 24 hours that this particular issue has been raised by Conservative members. They had a similar ruling on this last night, and now the member is basically bringing up the same ruling.
If he wants to challenge the Chair's decision, I am sure there is a course of action for him to do that, but simply standing up and calling a point of order on something that has already been dealt with by the Chair is inappropriate. I think he should know better than that.
103 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/22 9:47:57 p.m.
- Watch
I appreciate the additional information but I had already ruled on it.
I want to remind the hon. member that it has been ruled on and quorum cannot be called.
The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.
39 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I just want to be clear that I respect the authority of the Chair. We are debating a different bill tonight, and the implications for how courts might rule on what has taken place are important to put on the record in the context of a different piece of legislation that we are debating. I also want to emphasize—
62 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/22 9:48:31 p.m.
- Watch
I appreciate the attempt by the hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan. I have double-checked with our clerks as to the decisions that have been rendered, and I have been advised that the Speaker has ruled on this and quorum cannot be called, based on the motion that was put before the House.
Resuming debate, the hon. member for Cloverdale—Langley City.
66 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, prior to entering politics, I had the privilege of spending 34 years working in the public service with Parks Canada moving around the country. I saw at that time how important the Official Languages Act was to the provision of services to the public and tourists who require French services in Canada.
I also saw how important it was to the official language minority communities that I encountered in Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia, Yukon and Northwest Territories. I saw that these communities had the desire to thrive and really celebrate their culture. However, they also experienced a lot of struggles in this pursuit. That is why it is my pleasure this evening to speak to the importance of Bill C-13, which is our government's proposed modernization of the Official Languages Act.
I was delighted, first of all, to see the Minister of Official Languages table a bill so quickly in the 44th Parliament. This was one of our platform promises during the last election and it was in her mandate letter. She not only delivered on this commitment, but tabled a bill that is even stronger than the bill that was tabled during the previous Parliament. I want to thank and congratulate the minister for her efforts on this.
All along, ever since the Prime Minister first promised to modernize the Official Languages Act, our goal has been to put forward a bill that reflected the linguistic realities of all Canadians. We wanted a bill that protected and promoted French for everyone in the country, including in Quebec. We wanted a bill that defended our official language minority communities from coast to coast to coast.
With Bill C-13, we have delivered on that. In fact, we have delivered a bill with teeth that responds to what we heard from the Commissioner of Official Languages, from parliamentarians here and in the other place and from stakeholders all across the country. Let me illustrate this point by highlighting a very specific example: the powers granted to the Commissioner of Official Languages and the compliance of federal institutions covered by the official languages regime.
In recent years, Canadians have lodged an increasing number of complaints with the commissioner. Over the past decade, that number has gone from a few hundred complaints every year to more than a thousand complaints annually. Last year, the Commissioner of Official Languages received a record number of complaints. While this reflects a more widespread understanding among Canadians of linguistic rights, it also shows that Canadians expect us to do more. They expect our institutions to do better when it comes to respecting official language obligations.
These complaints go to the Commissioner of Official Languages because he has the power to investigate these complaints and publish his findings. However, we heard from the commissioner himself that this was not enough. The commissioner wanted more powers in order to fulfill his mandate and to make sure that the official language rights of Canadians were being respected. As an officer of Parliament, the commissioner felt that he needed to have the same powers as other officers of Parliament, particularly the Information Commissioner. We heard this request, and with Bill C-13 we acted.
From day one after our bill receives royal assent, the commissioner will have a wider range of powers that will allow him to do his job and make sure federal institutions live up to their obligations under the Official Languages Act. We are giving the commissioner a continuum of enhanced powers, widening the scope of what he will be allowed to do.
To begin with, the commissioner will have the power to establish compliance agreements with federal institutions. These agreements would be entered into between the commissioner and federal institutions and would detail the specific terms with which the federal institutions would have to comply in order to fix their non-compliance. The commissioner would then be able to oversee the implementation of the agreement to ensure federal institutions are fully complying with the terms.
If non-compliance persists, the commissioner would have the power to issue an order requiring the federal institution to change its course immediately. If this order did not yield the expected results, citizens and the commissioner would be allowed to elevate the matter. The bill also specifies the commissioner would be allowed to use other methods of dispute resolution, such as mediation, to try to diffuse a situation.
In some situations, for companies that deal with the travelling public, such as Air Canada, Via Rail, Marine Atlantic and airport authorities, the commissioner would even have the power to impose administrative monetary penalties. The commissioner would be able to impose penalties for individual complaints, giving him more power to ensure that these companies, which are routinely the subjects of the most complaints, live up to their obligations. While such penalties would only be used as part of a continuum of powers, in cases where companies refuse to comply with the Official Languages Act, they represent a major win for the Canadian travelling public in an industry where non-compliance issues have been known for a long time.
Under this bill, the commissioner would be given the power to publish the findings and recommendations of his investigations. This would strengthen institutional compliance by establishing public precedence on a large body of linguistic issues.
To be sure, the commissioner's day-to-day functions would remain largely unchanged. The commissioner's office would still be responsible for handling complaints from citizens and federal public servants who have difficulty working in the public service, being served or communicating with federal institutions in the official language of their choice.
The commissioner would also be allowed to continue to produce reports, investigate on his own initiative and educate federal institutions by sharing his recommendations and corrective measures. Again, these changes come at the request of the Official Languages Commissioner. We heard these changes were necessary to ensure Canadians could speak in either official language when dealing with federal institutions, as well as businesses in federal jurisdictions, and our government has acted.
These changes will ensure that Canadians see their linguistic realities reflected in their institutions, and they ensure that in cases where Canadians are not able to get the services they need in the official language of their choice, they would be able to file a complaint with the Official Languages Commissioner, who would be able to respond with enhanced powers.
I recently met with La Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique. This organization believes we can do more, as well. Since the enactment of the Official Languages Act, it has enhanced the use of French and English in Canada, but it has consistently lacked precision, as well as the means to ensure its full implementation. Living daily life in French remains difficult in various places throughout the country, including in my province of British Columbia. La Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique has advocated for various enhancements, including a greater overarching authority over federal institutions that are responsible for implementing different parts of the act. There also needs to be greater clarity on what federal institutions need to do concretely to promote French and English, and support official language minority communities. Our legislation would also modernize the Official Languages Act.
Bill C-13 represents a major improvement over our previous legislation, which was already a very ambitious modernization of Canada's official languages regime. We are doing this because we understand that if we want an Official Languages Act that responds to the needs of Canadians, we need a bill that is bold and that speaks to the realities of minority official language communities in Canada, whether they are francophone or anglophone.
That is why I am so proud to stand and speak in support of Bill C-13, which is the modernization of the Official Languages Act.
1327 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the member spoke about non-compliance in the travel industry, and he talked about the appropriate responses.
Now, I wonder if the member could speak to the maximum fine that could be levied, and whether he thinks that maximum fine is sufficient, given the size and scale of the companies we are often speaking about in the case of that sector.
Could he also speak to the failures of his government to meet current targets around francophone immigration, and the fact that this bill asks the minister to put in place a policy? Frankly, the government is failing to meet its existing targets, so passing legislation telling it to have a plan and targets, when it is not meeting its existing targets, seems to really miss the need for action that is already lacking.
136 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, on the member's first point about fines, the enhanced authorities that we are talking about for the Official Languages Commissioner are needed. They are needed to go after companies, as we said, that often find themselves in non-compliance. Fines are one tool, but I spoke of some of the other instruments that would be available, as far as investigating complaints and enforcing corrective measures for that.
I would also say that our government has taken official language rights forward through this legislation. We are committed to increasing immigration, and to helping maintain and support a flourishing official language community both in Quebec for English minority communities, and throughout the rest of the country for francophones.
119 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, for 52 years, all federal subsidies under the Official Languages Act have gone almost exclusively toward strengthening the anglophone community in Quebec. The reason given was that this community is a minority, even though it is part of the English Canadian majority.
In the throne speech and in the preamble of Bill C‑13, the government appears to recognize that francophones in Quebec are part of the francophone minority in Canada and in North America. Why not amend these positive measures to support the francophone community, to support French Quebec?
93 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
