Canadian Heritage Committee on April 18th, 2024

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

We'll go to the Liberals for five minutes.

I believe it's Mr. Noormohamed.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Go ahead.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I would like to provide some additional information for Mr. Godin.

I just want to tell him that, from 1978 until March 31, 1981, $103,338.35 was allocated to the court challenges program essentially to assist people in challenging Bill 101, which René Lévesque had introduced in 1976.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Thank you, Mr. Champoux, on that note.

We'll now go to the Liberals for five minutes.

Mr. Noormohamed, go ahead.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome to the witnesses.

I want to know one thing. What was the impact of the cuts that the Harper government made to this program?

[David Dendooven]

Thank you for your question.

As I mentioned earlier, the program was abolished. As a result, there was no program left to fund challenges to affirm official language and human rights.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

What I want to know is what the consequences were for the communities and individuals that couldn't afford a lawyer.

[David Dendooven]

Mr. Chair, I don't think I can answer that question.

However, I can say that, if you look at the annual reports being submitted, you will see examples of cases that have been funded in order to affirm certain rights. All I can say is that those cases couldn't have been funded at that time.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Great. Thank you very much.

I'm conscious of time.

At this time, if I might, I would like to bring forward the motion that has already been submitted and circulated by the clerk, Mr. Chair.

Would you like me to read it out?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Why not?

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

It is:

That, notwithstanding the motion adopted by the committee on Thursday, February 1, 2024, with respect to the review of Bill C-316, the committee schedule two meetings with witnesses on April 18 and April 30 respectively; that the deadline for amendments be April 26, 2024; and that the committee begin clause-by-clause consideration no later than May 2, 2024.

Mr. Chair, the reason for wording the motion this way is to respect the ruling we had from the chair last week, and also to ensure that we are able to do this and get this study done in a timely fashion.

I hope we can move quickly to pass this motion and move forward.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Thank you, Mr. Noormohamed.

The motion originally was adopted, but you're 48 hours in, so I will open it up for debate.

We'll go to Mr. Champoux first.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Chair, I understand the intention behind the motion that Mr. Noormohamed is bringing forward today, and I don't disagree with the principle.

However, we're at day one of what's proposed in the motion. In other words, we're coming to the end of the first meeting that Mr. Noormohamed proposes be held on consideration of this bill. If we had had this proposal and discussion earlier, today's meeting might have been planned differently. Allow me to explain.

The Bloc Québécois attaches importance to consideration of the bill, and we intend to call very few witnesses. We've invited only two witnesses, whom I consider extremely relevant. We would like to have a chance to hear those two witnesses and to have them heard in committee. However, I can't confirm now that either of those witnesses or that the two witnesses invited by the Bloc Québécois will be available on April 30, the last date we have on which to hear witnesses.

It seems to me that precipitating matters in this manner will prevent us from doing a proper job. Once again, I don't disagree with the idea at all. We definitely have to work quickly. We have a lot on our plate between now and the end of our parliamentary business. However, I don't think it makes sense to allow only one more meeting to hear from witnesses before commencing clause-by-clause consideration. That shows a lack of respect for the parliamentary business we have to conduct.

I therefore move an amendment in the same spirit as that of Mr. Noormohamed's motion, but one that will at least allow the committee some time to do its work properly in the present circumstances.

I will read the proposed amendment:

That, notwithstanding the motion adopted by the committee on Thursday, February 1, 2024, with respect to the review of Bill C-316, the Committee schedule a minimum of three meetings with witnesses on April 18, April 30 and May 2 respectively, that the deadline for amendments be no earlier than April 30, 2024 and that the Committee begin clause-by-clause no earlier than May 7, 2024.

I have the written version here, in English and French, which I can immediately offer to our clerk so she can retranscribe it and circulate it to committee members.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Thank you, Mr. Champoux.

Ms. Ashton, your hand has been up, and then I'll go to Ms. Thomas.

Go ahead, Ms. Ashton.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

I think I've already spoken to this sentiment previously.

I support the motion put forward by Mr. Noormohamed.

This is a very brief bill, and we are keen to see it move forward as quickly as possible, and that means moving it through committee as soon as possible.

I support the initial motion—

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Go ahead, Mr. Champoux.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Are we debating the motion or the amendment?

I think Ms. Ashton is speaking to Mr. Noormohamed's motion, whereas we're debating the amendment.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Yes.

Ms. Ashton, are you speaking to the new amendment?

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Pardon?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Are you speaking to the new amendment?

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Pardon me. Let me explain. I'm opposed to the amendment and support the original motion.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Okay.

We're dealing with the amendment.

Ms. Thomas, go ahead.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Sure.

I wish to pause for a moment to understand what the amendment is.

Can the clerk read it into the record?