House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2021, with 50% of the vote.
Business of Supply May 15th, 2023
Mr. Chair, the reality is that, after the minister spent all of that money on his plan for housing in Canada, 32% fewer homes will be built in the coming year. Could the minister explain why there will be 32% fewer homes built after he spent $92 billion?
Business of Supply May 15th, 2023
Mr. Chair, I am going to take a slightly different tack. All evening, the minister has been saying that we are asking ridiculous questions. However, he has not answered any of the questions that he has been asked since the evening began.
I am going to ask him a very simple one. After spending $92 billion on his housing plan, does he think that he knows more than everyone else?
Carbon Pricing May 12th, 2023
Mr. Speaker, Canadians cannot take it anymore. We have said it over and over in many different ways. They are fed up. What is this Prime Minister doing? He is planning to increase the carbon tax again. Contrary to what he says, it will have an impact across Canada, including in Quebec. Quebec is not separate from the rest of the country, it is part of it. Everyone will inevitably be affected.
This confirms that costs for farmers and truckers will increase again. What will happen in the meantime? Ultimately, everyone ends up paying.
Will the Prime Minister wake up and abandon these disastrous policies?
An Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada's Official Languages May 12th, 2023
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.
An Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada's Official Languages May 12th, 2023
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.
An Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada's Official Languages May 12th, 2023
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.
The Economy May 11th, 2023
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are stretched to the limit. They are struggling to get by. They are at the end of their rope, they are fed up and they cannot take any more.
Meanwhile, this government is digging in its heels and taking even more money out of their pockets and off their paycheques. It is continuing with its plan to increase the price of gas, groceries and housing. The people in my riding talk to me about it every day.
The Prime Minister should stop taking luxury vacations all over the world and listen to Canadians, who also talk to him every day.
Will he finally put an end to his policies that are driving up the cost of consumer goods?
An Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada's Official Languages May 10th, 2023
Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my friend a question. There was a consensus within the Canadian francophonie about setting up a central agency in charge of overseeing enforcement of the act within Treasury Board. Everyone was in agreement. Unfortunately, the Liberals rejected this option in multiple ways.
Still, it would have been the best approach. Having two authorities in charge of oversight does not work. The past 50 years are proof.
The Conservatives are not alone in asking for this. The entire Canadian francophonie was asking for it too. I would like my colleague to tell me why he thinks the Liberals consistently rejected this option.
Carbon Pricing May 9th, 2023
Mr. Speaker, ever since this Prime Minister came to power, everything costs more. A family of four will have to hand over $1,065 more for food. One in five Canadians is skipping meals, and more and more people are turning to food banks. What is this Prime Minister doing? He is making things worse by increasing the carbon tax. Contrary to what he is saying, this increase has an impact across the country, even in Quebec.
Will he finally get rid of these policies, which increase the price of everything we buy?
Public Safety April 28th, 2023
Madam Speaker, Canadians in our big cities are feeling less and less safe on the streets and when taking public transportation. The Prime Minister's soft-on-crime policies are to blame. Violent offenders are back out on the streets the same day they are arrested and others are serving their sentence from the comfort of their living room instead of in prison.
Will the Prime Minister and his government finally get back to work so that violent criminals are punished and victims are protected?