44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 12, 2023 10:00AM
- May/12/23 10:28:29 a.m.
- Watch
I would like to remind members that this is the time for questions and comments, not speeches.
The quicker we can get a question in, the quicker we can get the answer, and more people can participate in the debate.
Resuming debate.
The hon. member for Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier.
50 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/23 10:28:51 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, in response to your intervention, you are absolutely right, but there are so many things to say about that particular file. It is so very important. That is why we are so passionate and why we have been working diligently for many months.
First of all, I would like to ask for unanimous consent to split my time with my colleague from Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, who is an excellent representative for his constituents.
84 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/23 10:29:14 a.m.
- Watch
Is that agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
7 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I thank all my colleagues for their openness. I will therefore be sharing my time with the member for Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup.
As I rise in the House today, I cannot help but feel disappointed. All that, for this? The Liberals tabled a white paper in February 2021 that clearly stated in black and white that the Treasury Board was to become the central agency responsible for implementing the Official Languages Act, as I pointed out in my question earlier. A few months later, in June 2021, the official languages minister at the time, currently the Minister of Foreign Affairs, introduced Bill C-32. An election was called two months later. What a coincidence. A lot of time was wasted, and we had to start over at square one.
The new Minister of Official Languages introduced her bill, C-13, in March 2022. We were told that the bill solved all the problems and that it had to be passed as quickly as possible. The Liberals begged the opposition parties to co-operate and expedite the bill. It was referred to the Standing Committee on Official Languages, where we heard from witnesses so we could do our work effectively. All of a sudden, the Liberals moved a motion to cut off debate. We had to move so quickly that we wasted eight meetings discussing this problem that had been caused by the Liberals at committee.
They are talking out of both sides of their mouths. They want us to move quickly, but they muzzled us for eight meetings. The opposition parties worked together to take the time needed. We reached out to the Liberals several times to try to get them to listen to reason. They wanted four meetings and we wanted twelve, so we split the difference and decided on eight. I think that is a good compromise. It shows that the opposition parties were acting in good faith. As for the Liberals, that is another story.
The Conservative Party takes bilingualism in Canada very seriously. We worked hard in committee, as I mentioned. We took the time to listen to stakeholders across the country. We worked to respond to their concerns. I am talking about stakeholders like the Fédération des communautés francophone et acadienne du Canada, the Fédération nationale des conseils scolaires francophones, the Commissioner of Official Languages and many others. These people live with the reality of being a linguistic minority every day. The Liberals would have everyone living in these official language minority communities, particularly in New Brunswick, believe that they are responding to their demands.
451 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
I want to tell everyone living in those official language minority communities—whether it is in New Brunswick, the Northwest Territories or British Columbia—not to worry, because the Conservative Party of Canada is there for them and always will be.
In committee, we received a pile of amendments from all parties. About 10 amendments were tabled by the NDP; the Bloc proposed over 80, and we tabled about 60.
It comes as no surprise that the Liberals were ready. They had written a white paper, then introduced Bill C-32, followed by Bill C-13. They must have refined their bill, at least I hope so. However, they filed about 50 amendments, which is pretty interesting. In addition to the 50 amendments, it was clear that there was some dissension within the Liberal caucus. Among those 50 amendments, there were duplicates, which means that two Liberal members had tabled the same amendments. This goes to show how much time they are wasting. Are they even talking within their party? Are they talking to the anglophone members from Quebec? It is a mess. Then they want us to move quickly. They say this issue is so important. This is just one example of Liberal incompetence and inconsistency.
Again this week in the House, the Liberals proposed amendments that could and should have been put forward in committee—but no, they are holding up the process. They claim that it needs to move quickly, but they are holding up the process. Worse, to hear the Liberals talk about official languages, the decline of the French language and the need to protect both official languages, it all seems to be so important to them. However, there was a vote at report stage yesterday, and the Deputy Prime Minister, whom we have been looking for in all the committees, and even in the House of Commons, did not even vote, even though we have a virtual application to do just that. The Minister of Justice, who is a Quebecker and is affected by this legislation, did not even vote. Worse yet, the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Quebec lieutenant, who is the main party involved and has responsibilities under this bill, did not even vote. Official languages and the decline of the French language are so very important to them—we had another clear demonstration of that yesterday.
This government's lack of interest and disengagement is obvious again today. What day is it? It is Friday, the day when members have the least amount of time to speak. Who is in charge of the agenda? The Liberals are. Who chose to do this on a Friday? The Liberals did. What does that mean? It means that they do not want to hear about this, that they want to sweep it under the rug. That is obvious, because there is bickering within the Liberal caucus. This is just more smoke and mirrors, to create the illusion that the Liberals care about official languages.
Let us talk about the stakeholders. We met several, but I want to talk about two in particular. The Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada, or FCFA, which represents 2.8 million French-speaking Canadians outside Quebec, was calling for six amendments. It was not a huge or unreasonable request. How many of those amendments were fully adopted? Not one was adopted. Good job, Liberals. The Conservative Party agrees with those recommendations and brought forward amendments along those lines. Unfortunately, the NDP-Liberal coalition ignored the FCFA. It did the same thing to the Commissioner of Official Languages. The Liberals and the NDP did not listen.
The bill moved a step forward, but at a snail's pace. It is not that important, then. It was just one step forward. I think I would walk a long, long way for our official languages, but this bill, sadly, goes no farther than a single step. As parliamentarians, this was our chance to take concrete action to reverse the very real decline of French in Canada, and even in Quebec. It is deplorable that official language minority community stakeholders are not being listened to and get nothing but empty words.
I am concerned about the future of Canada as a country bilingual in English and French. We must remember that we have a Governor General who is bilingual but does not speak French. When we talk about bilingualism in Canada, we are referring to the two official languages, the two founding languages.
I was born a francophone in Canada, and my children speak French. I hope that my grandchildren will be able to speak French, here, in Canada. I am proud to be Canadian. I am proud to be a Quebecker. I am proud to represent the people of Portneuf—Jacques‑Cartier. I will fight tooth and nail for francophones in Quebec and across Canada. My ancestors fought that fight and I will continue fighting it. I am proud of our bilingual Canada, and I am not alone: More than 80% of Canadians value their bilingualism.
I want to remind members of one thing. The Official Languages Act was introduced in 1969 and modernized in 1988. Who did that? The Conservatives. The Harper government was the first to recognize the Quebec nation in a united Canada. He understood Quebec and its unique linguistic reality, and he recognized that it was important for the country.
Quebec has the largest pool of francophones in North America, and it must have the tools it needs to preserve its language and culture, which, by extension, will help francophone communities across Canada.
Our leader, the member for Carleton also values the French language. He is educating his children in French and he speaks both official languages here in the House. He understands the challenges and is making an effort to protect and promote both of Canada's official languages.
In closing, I would again like to reassure the official language minority communities. Unlike the Liberals, we have heard them very clearly and we will call for a single central agency and an enumeration of rights holders. We heard them.
It is truly important to the Conservative Party of Canada that Canada remain an English-French bilingual country, and it will focus on reversing the decline of French and protecting both official languages.
1077 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, first, I would simply like to say that, since 2015, our government has basically doubled the investments in all areas of official languages through our official languages action plan. We are making historic investments of $4.1 billion over the next five years.
Second, I listened attentively to my colleague's comments. He said that he listened to what the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada, the Société nationale de l'Acadie and the Société de l'Acadie du Nouveau-Brunswick had to say. I would like to know whether he really paid attention to what they were saying because, over the past six, seven or eight months, stakeholders across the country have been telling us that they are looking forward to the passage of Bill C-13. They openly and publicly told us that this is a good bill, an ambitious and robust bill.
All of the parties in the House have told us where they stand on this bill except the Conservative Party. Their position is a big mystery.
My question is this. Will the Conservative Party support the bill, yes or no? If my colleague wants to ensure that his grandchildren have the opportunity to talk and live in French, then I think it would be a good idea for the Conservative Party to support the bill.
238 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/23 10:41:47 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Official Languages has very good questions and she is passionate about this issue, which is why she asks a lot of questions.
She says that her government has doubled investments since 2015, but that is not the whole issue. Throwing money around, the way the Liberals are used to doing, is not necessarily the solution. We must have tools, such as empowering the Treasury Board as a central agency. It is important to put money into it, but that is not a magic bullet, and it is not a Liberal magic wand.
Now, I do not understand this dogged determination to know a party's position ahead of time. I would like to remind the minister that, according to the procedures of the House, voting is a parliamentary right. If we want to respect House practices, we exercise our right to vote here.
Even if I disagree with her way of doing things, I do appreciate my colleague and I would like to assure her that the Conservative Party will be here to vote.
179 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by thanking my colleague for supporting several of the Bloc Québécois's proposed amendments to Bill C-13. We know that the Government of Quebec made some demands, and we tried to get as many of them adopted as possible.
Things were going well at the start, but later there was some manoeuvring on the part of some Liberals, who even voted against the bill yesterday. We could always ask our minister about that.
With regard to the action plan for official languages, we have a government here that says that French is threatened in Quebec but then chooses to subsidize only English in Quebec. That is quite shocking. What does my colleague think? Does that make any sense to him?
132 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/23 10:44:06 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from La Pointe-de-l'Île. I was pleased to work very productively with him in committee. We are both interested in protecting French, which is in decline, and promoting both official languages. However, the Conservatives have a vision for Canada, while my colleague has a vision for Quebec.
I completely agree with him. It is unacceptable that 20% of the money is going to English-speaking communities in Quebec. English is not under threat in Quebec and across Canada; French is.
What is the proportion of anglophones in Quebec compared to francophone minorities outside Quebec? That would be 8%. Why is the Liberal government giving them 20%?
If I had to speculate, I would say it was to buy the silence of anglophone MPs from Quebec. It makes me seriously wonder, and I am very much in tune with my Bloc Québécois colleague, whom I want to thank again for the work he did in committee.
169 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/23 10:45:16 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, today's debate on the Official Languages Act has to be placed in the context of the demographic decline of francophone minority communities.
Given that both Liberal and Conservative governments have consistently failed to reach the 4.4% target of francophone immigration, aside from this attempted legislative fix the Liberals are proposing, does my hon. colleague from the Conservatives have any ideas on why successive Conservative and Liberal governments have failed to reach that target? As well, does he have any ideas of his own on how to best meet that target?
94 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/23 10:46:02 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, yes, there is a problem with immigration. I would remind my colleague that this Liberal government has been in office since 2015. I cannot answer for them.
The Liberals met the target this year, probably with the help of their marketing firm, making sure that they got good press and that everyone knew they met their immigration target. This has happened only once since 2003, so there is definitely a big problem.
I want my colleague to know that we are going to do everything we can, once we are on the other side of the House, to ensure that official languages and the decline of French are a government priority.
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague, with whom I sit as a member of the Standing Committee on Official Languages, as well as all the parties who worked on Bill C‑13 in committee. The committee members worked for some time on studying the bill.
I sincerely think that my colleague did extraordinary work and that we did everything we could to improve this bill, unlike the coalition between the NDP and the Liberal Party, who prevented us from adopting certain amendments. Despite that, I think that we did good work.
I am pleased to rise today to speak to Bill C‑13, an act to amend the Official Languages Act, to enact the use of French in federally regulated private businesses act and to make related amendments to other acts. We are now studying the bill at third reading after having studied it in committee. The way I see this legislation and the entire process for the final adoption of this bill is that it is a lot of effort for little result. We did a colossal job and in the end we do not have much to show for it. That is about the size of it.
Some will say that it is better than nothing. Of course it is better than nothing, but this bill does not go far enough. In committee, this Liberal government tabled no fewer than 31 amendments. It was actually more than 31. Even yesterday, the Liberals tabled amendments in the House. Clearly, they were not prepared despite all the work they said they did beforehand on the previous bill, which was introduced before the 2021 election, and on the white paper. In passing, the white paper set out some extremely important elements, which, unfortunately, were not kept in the bill.
The fact that a government tabled so many amendments to a bill that it drafted demonstrates how poorly thought-out it was. With the complicity of their faithful allies, the NDP, the Liberals imposed closure so this bill would be studied quickly. The closure motion stated that, after a certain amount of time, all the amendments would be deemed adopted by the committee without them even being studied. So much for respecting the work of parliamentarians in committee.
The bill ignores the requests for amendments made by the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadiennes, or FCFA, and the Commissioner of Official Languages. Their requests are not found in the final text of the bill. We were not given the time we needed to discuss them properly. The FCFA is the organization that brings together the largest number of associations and organizations representing francophones in Canada. It had only six requests; it did not put forward 80 of them. Not a single one of the FCFA's requests ended up in the bill.
I could spend hours naming the problems with this bill, but I will concentrate on a few points on which we put forward amendments. Our party put them forward in good faith to give the bill more teeth and to give organizations the necessary tools to slow the decline of the French language in Canada. Unfortunately, those amendments were all voted down by the NDP-Liberal coalition.
We tabled amendments regarding the power given to the Treasury Board.
The Official Languages Act has been around for over 50 years. We have seen the result. French is in decline everywhere, not just in Canada but also in Quebec. It has been proven that the way the act is designed, but especially the way it is managed, structured and overseen, is not working. Everyone was unanimous on the proposal made by many organizations across Canada. Even the Liberals were on board in the beginning. In their white paper, they said that the central agency of the Treasury Board would be responsible for enforcing the act. Unfortunately, that is not what we are seeing and that is not what is going to happen in the current bill. That is really unfortunate.
The bill as it now stands contains a provision to change the act every 10 years, unlike how it was before. There is a provision that says that we can review the bill every 10 years. We suggested that it should be every five years, but our amendment was once again defeated.
That said, these 10 years should give us enough time to examine and verify whether it would have been feasible to make a central agency responsible for implementing the act. Ten years will be enough time to check whether making the Treasury Board the lead for implementing the bill would have worked. We could have made changes after 10 years, but no, a decision was made to stick with the same approach.
Despite what the Minister of Official Languages said, the Treasury Board leads the only three agencies that have the binding authority needed to address violations of the act.
We tabled amendments to that effect, and the majority of francophone organizations also made this request, but they were all rejected.
We made concessions, proposed amendments to the amendments in order to reach a compromise, but again, they were flatly refused. In my mind, that confirms the lack of desire to make this bill more effective.
With respect to the enumeration of rights holders, another very important element is that Bill C‑13, in its current form, does not ensure that all children of rights holders will continue to be counted under section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
As set out in the act, rights holders are divided into three categories of individuals who have the right to send their children to official language minority public elementary and secondary schools. This right allows the children of rights holders to preserve their mother tongue and retain their constitutionally guaranteed rights.
Currently, the government is only obligated to estimate the number of rights holders, and that was the subject of much discussion. We proposed including a question to this effect in the census, but it was rejected. This will unfortunately lead to an underestimation of the number of children of rights holders.
As for reviewing the legislation, we proposed that Bill C-13 be reviewed every five years. As I said earlier, unfortunately, that too was rejected. At least it is going to happen every 10 years. As I said earlier, we did a tremendous amount of work but have very little to show for it. The 10-year period is part of that. Once again, it is better than nothing.
The same goes for the powers granted to the Commissioner of Official Languages. We wanted to increase the commissioner's power and give him the tools needed to enforce the act with businesses and federal agencies. The problem is that it means the federal government might have to fine federal agencies. It is important to understand that, here in Ottawa and in all government organizations across the country, several agencies and departments are not meeting their official languages obligations, especially in writing. The government is still sending English-only messages across Canada, on many platforms. There is no translation.
With our amendments, the commissioner would have been able to crack down on this and do his job more effectively, but once again, the NDP-Liberal coalition did not want to enhance the commissioner's powers.
The last thing that could have been improved, but was not, also concerns part VII of the act. We wanted to include obligations to ensure that federal institutions would implement more measures to protect and promote both official languages. This country was founded 150 years ago, and there were two founding peoples. After all these years, one might think it would be second nature to communicate in both languages, but even today some departments communicate only in English. That is completely unacceptable.
Clearly, Bill C‑13, which we are debating today, is incomplete and has several flaws. The powers of the commissioner were not strengthened, there is no central agency to enforce the act and the act will not be reviewed every five years to keep it up to date.
After eight years of this government, it is difficult to trust that it will stop the decline of French in order to protect the strength of both official languages.
Again, I want to thank my colleague and colleagues because the Standing Committee on Official Languages may be the least partisan of all the House of Commons committees. Honestly, I have been a member of that committee for a long time. We have done some absolutely spectacular studies that are very interesting and very instructive at that committee.
The process involved in Bill C‑13 was derived from its primary objective, which was to improve the legislation and come to a consensus among all parties to ensure that we have the best Official Languages Act possible in Canada. Unfortunately, that did not happen. However, fortunately, in 10 years, we will be able to review it. When a majority Conservative government is in power in the next few months or next year, we will review the act when the time comes to do so.
1547 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/23 10:56:22 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his work on the Standing Committee on Official Languages and his support for a number of proposals.
I would like to hear his opinion. We know that the House of Commons recognized Quebec as a nation with one official and common language, French. We know that, in the beginning, language was supposed to fall under Quebec's jurisdiction.
What does my colleague think about the Government of Quebec's request to have authority over linguistic development and management in the province, while respecting the rights of the anglophone community, obviously?
With regard to positive measures, what does he think about the action plan that we have seen that invests a massive amount of money in English in areas under provincial jurisdiction?
I also would like to know whether he agrees that we should review the act before the 10 years is up, because, although I think that this bill does make some progress, it will continue to have an anglicizing impact on Quebec.
173 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/23 10:57:31 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, to answer the last question my colleague asked, because he asked several, yes, a Conservative government would review the act, likely within 10 years. We believe that a central agency is absolutely fundamental to managing official languages in this country. Our leader, the member for Carleton, has said very clearly that the act is not strong enough and does not go far enough and, most importantly, that there is no central agency to ensure compliance.
I also want to talk about the division that we have been seeing on the Liberal side. In fact, yesterday, one Liberal member abstained from voting on the Liberal bill, and another voted against it. Anglophone MPs from Quebec have been working hard to derail the process of passing this bill. It was unmistakably clear that the Liberal Party of Canada is divided.
142 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/23 10:58:37 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to return the favour and thank my hon. colleague, who is an active participant at the Standing Committee on Official Languages. He is doing a great job.
The minister said she has a great relationship with Quebec's minister of the French language, Mr. Roberge. That is interesting because I saw Mr. Roberge make a statement about the massive investment in Quebec's anglophones. I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on that.
80 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/23 10:59:12 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, during the process, at the last minute, less than 12 hours before a meeting of the Standing Committee on Official Languages, we were presented with a series of amendments proposed by the Government of Quebec, so we were able to speed up the bill's passage, because it was about Quebec's demands.
Once again, it was a game of ping-pong between the two ministers, one in Quebec and one in Ottawa, who could not come to an agreement. That is pretty much what happened. The day before yesterday they were once again patting each other on the back while holding a falcon. Maybe they will be less happy three months from now, I have no idea, but one thing is certain. We in the Conservative Party will listen to Quebec, and we will solve this bill's problems in the future.
145 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/23 11:00:12 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to the incredible nurses and nurse practitioners in my community of Windsor—Tecumseh and to say thanks for their dedication, talents and compassion.
On Monday, our community gathered to recognize nurse practitioner Mary Cunningham as the recipient of the Lois Fairley Nurse of the Year community service award. Mary, reflecting on her 46-year career of service above self, much of it taking care of the most vulnerable in the intensive care unit, says she always wanted to be a nurse, since she was a little girl. “I think when you touch people’s lives and you can help people, there’s nothing more rewarding than that”, says Mary.
Nursing is a calling, and nurses are our angels. To Mary, my wife Shauna and all the incredible nurses and nurse practitioners who look after our community, we wish them a very happy National Nursing Week.
157 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/23 11:01:09 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, wildfires continue to ravage communities across Alberta, including in Parkland, Yellowhead, Brazeau County and Drayton Valley. A state of emergency is in place and many residents have evacuated to the towns of Stony Plain and Spruce Grove.
Last weekend, our community stepped up to help the evacuated families by hosting a pancake breakfast at the Stony Plain Legion. I would like to thank all the volunteers who showed up, including Roger Hebblethwaite and Kristine Alex, as well as those from the Stony Plain Legion and the Kinsmen Club. I also want to thank our generous local businesses like Freson Bros., the Grove RV and the Co-op for their generous support.
While there has been some rain, the situation remains volatile. I want to thank Parkland Mayor Allan Gamble, MLA Shane Getson and their teams for their leadership.
Finally, I also want to thank all of our first responders, particularly our newly deployed Canadian Forces members, for their assistance at this terrible time. This is truly an all-of-Canada effort, and I am so proud of my community for stepping up to help our neighbours in their time of need.
193 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/23 11:02:18 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, today I rise to pay tribute to all mothers across Canada who will be celebrating Mother’s Day this weekend.
As we celebrate this special occasion, I cannot help but reflect on the immense contributions of mothers across Canada. As a member of Parliament, I am privileged to represent the values and aspirations of my constituents, but today I want to take a moment to recognize the hard work and dedication of my wife, Monica, who is the mother of three and grandmother of six. She has been a source of inspiration and strength for our family, and her selflessness and devotion to our children and grandchildren have been unwavering.
Indeed, mothers everywhere play an essential role in shaping the lives of their children and building strong families and communities. They provide care, support and guidance to their children, and they instill the values that shape their character and shape our future. On Mother's Day, let us celebrate and appreciate the countless contributions of mothers in our lives. Let us honour them, cherish them, and give them the respect they deserve.
I wish a happy Mother's Day to all.
194 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/23 11:03:34 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the out-of-control wildfires in western Canada have forced thousands of my fellow Albertans from their homes. Even worse, many have no homes left at all, like one of my elders, Harry Supernault. A retired community leader and constantly hard-working man, he carved his home out of the bush in the East Prairie Metis Settlement. He has raised his children and his grandchildren on that land, passing down many invaluable indigenous teachings, his home now reduced to ash.
My friends, let me be clear, this crisis is the product of the deadly combination of climate change and UCP austerity. The UCP's cuts to first responders and firefighter programs, like the rappel program, have undoubtedly left Albertans with less protection. Albertans are paying for the Conservatives' dismantling and defunding of first responders.
To Harry and to folks like him, I say, “We are with you. Stay strong, and we will rebuild.”
157 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
