Evidence of meeting #32 for Veterans Affairs in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was document.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
Betty Hinton Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
I think when something passes, it passes. If it passes in the House of Commons, all parties are committed to it.
9:30 a.m.
An hon. member
Or should be.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Anders
To be honest, I would take it simply as something the committee could vote on as a recommendation. What the department chooses to do at that stage, I don't know.
Mr. St. Denis and then Mr. Roy.
9:30 a.m.
Liberal
Brent St. Denis Liberal Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON
First, in the list, the fourth one, veterans have the right to “receive clear, easy-to-understand communications”. Do we need to add, for clarity, “in the official language of choice”? Do we want to make that very clear?
9:35 a.m.
Liberal
Brent St. Denis Liberal Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON
It's the client's right to choose the language of their communication.
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Anders
I'm writing, “in their official language of choice”. Or do you just want to say “in their official language”? “Of choice” is kind of obvious, it's either English or French, right?
9:35 a.m.
Liberal
Brent St. Denis Liberal Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON
Yes, “in either official language”, or something like that.
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Anders
How about, “in their official language”? It sounds more personal.
Is that it, Mr. St. Denis?
9:35 a.m.
Liberal
Brent St. Denis Liberal Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON
I was reading some of the commentary. Can we discuss some of the commentary?
9:35 a.m.
Liberal
Brent St. Denis Liberal Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON
At the top of the second page, the first italicized comment begins with “Keith”, I guess it's Keith Hillier who's mentioned. The third line, “We, CPVA”, which is what, the Canadian pensioners and veterans association? The Peacekeeping Veterans Association. “We, CPVA, should not be written into the document as a participant”. What is that writer...? Were they somehow signing off on something? What was the context of that concern? Does anybody know?
The only thing I can imagine is where it says they should not be written into the document as a participant, and then they mention the legal action and so on--and that's another point--maybe they were being asked to sign off that they have seen this or commented. I don't think anybody, in participating in something like this, is actually ever signing off. You don't give up your rights because you've participated in something.
Anyway, for the moment, that's my comment.
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Anders
Maybe if all the party leaders sign on to it they give up their right to criticize it later on. We'll see.
Anything else, Mr. St. Denis?
9:35 a.m.
Liberal
March 27th, 2007 / 9:35 a.m.
Bloc
Jean-Yves Roy Bloc Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
In the French version, we have a fairly serious agreement problem. For example, all of the articles in the bill of rights begin with a verb. However, line 5 begins with the word “Respect” and line 6, with the word “Reconnaissance”. The verb form should be used here, namely “Respecter” and “Reconnaître”. Otherwise, it just doesn't work in French. If you start off by using verbs, then all of the articles appearing in the bill of rights should begin with verbs. I haven't checked to see whether it's the same in English.
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Anders
In principle, I understand where you're coming from, Monsieur Roy, but I'm not sure which line you're referring to.
9:35 a.m.
Bloc
Jean-Yves Roy Bloc Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
I'm sorry, I'm referring to lines 5 and 6 which read “Respect de la vie privée et protection de leurs renseignements personnels;”. Instead, they should read: “Respecter la vie privée et protéger leurs renseignements personnels;”.
9:35 a.m.
Bloc
Jean-Yves Roy Bloc Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
The following article should say: “Reconnaître la contribution importante de la famille et de la collectivité à leur bien-être;”, not “Reconnaissance de [...]”.
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Anders
You're right. On number five, I take it you would like to start with the words “protect and keep private your personal information”.
9:35 a.m.
Bloc
Jean-Yves Roy Bloc Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Yes, that is to say: “Respecter la vie privée et protéger leurs renseignements personnels;”. Line 6 should say: “Reconnaître la contribution importante de la famille et de la collectivité à leur bien-être;”.
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rob Anders
Bear with me, I'm working on number five here. I take it number five is better as “protect and keep private your personal information”.
9:35 a.m.
Bloc
Jean-Yves Roy Bloc Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
The French version should read as follows: “Respecter la vie privée et protéger leurs renseignements personnels;”.
9:35 a.m.
Conservative