An Act to amend the Supreme Court Act (understanding the official languages)

This bill was last introduced in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session, which ended in August 2015.

This bill was previously introduced in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session.

Sponsor

Yvon Godin  NDP

Introduced as a private member’s bill. (These don’t often become law.)

Status

Outside the Order of Precedence (a private member's bill that hasn't yet won the draw that determines which private member's bills can be debated), as of June 13, 2011
(This bill did not become law.)

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament often publishes better independent summaries.

This enactment amends the Supreme Court Act and introduces a new requirement for judges appointed to the Supreme Court to understand English and French without the assistance of an interpreter.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Votes

May 7, 2014 Failed That the Bill be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.

Supreme Court ActPrivate Members' Business

May 1st, 2014 / 6:05 p.m.


See context

NDP

Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB

Mr. Speaker, I stand before my hon. colleagues tonight to close the second hour of debate on Bill C-208, my bill that aims to make English-French bilingualism a new requirement for judges appointed to the Supreme Court of Canada.

I also want to thank my NDP colleagues who have spoken tonight and in the first hour and who support my bill. I would also like to thank the hon. member for Saint-Laurent—Cartierville and the Liberals who supported my bill in 2008, in 2010 and again today.

Everyone can see that the Conservatives are the only ones saying no.

This is my third attempt to get this bill through, and I hope that all my colleagues on the other side of the House will vote in favour of the bilingualism requirement for Supreme Court judges when we vote on May 7.

In recent weeks, I have had the opportunity to visit a few universities and a few communities to talk about Bill C-208. I went to Sudbury and had the opportunity to present my bill to students at Laurentian University. I also presented my bill to students in the faculty of law at the Université de Moncton and law students at the University of Ottawa.

People in my riding support my bill enthusiastically. Everywhere I went, people said that the bilingualism of Supreme Court judges was important for the equality of both official languages and equality in the access to justice.

Let me now tell the House about the support I have received from various stakeholders in the fields of official languages and justice.

In his letter of support for Bill C-208, the Commissioner of Official Languages, Graham Fraser, said:

...since 2008, I supported the principle that all Supreme Court justices should be bilingual, and that is still my opinion. I believe, out of respect for all Canadians, that it is a matter of ensuring that they are all served by judges of the highest distinction and greatest ability, who can hear and understand a case in either official language

The Barreau du Québec also supported my bill and said that:

[It] has always believed that functional bilingualism should be among a Supreme Court judge's required skills in order to ensure equal access to justice...

The Quebec Community Groups Network also supports this important bill. Its letter of support for Bill C-208, it stated that the QCGN supports the requirement that Supreme Court Justices be capable of executing their responsibilities in both official languages without the aid of an interpreter on the same basis. In addition, the letter stated that the QCGN believes that Bill C-208 strengthens the principle of the rule of law upon which our society is based.

The Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne, or the FCFA, and its members have also shown their support for Bill C-208. In its letter of support, the FCFA indicated:

...we find it completely unacceptable that, in this day and age, French-speaking Canadians still cannot be heard and understood by all of the judges who sit on the highest court in our country without the assistance of an interpreter.

I would like to thank all the people, groups and associations who shared with me their support for the important issue of the bilingualism of Supreme Court judges.

I would like to remind hon. members of the importance of my bill. This is a matter of access to justice. The Supreme Court is the highest court in the country, and it is very important for its judges to be able to understand both official languages without the help of an interpreter.

Second, having bilingual Supreme Court judges would ensure the equality of both the official languages. We have to remember that the Supreme Court has recognized the equality of French and English.

In conclusion, I urge all my colleagues to vote in favour of my Bill C-208.

We must protect the equality of our two official languages and equal access to justice. In particular, I am calling on the Conservative members from Quebec and the members who have francophone communities in their ridings, such as the member for Madawaska—Restigouche, the member for Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, and the member for Saint Boniface, who is the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages, to ask their Conservative colleagues to support my bill, which seeks to ensure that Supreme Court judges are bilingual. It is a matter of justice and equality.

Supreme Court ActPrivate Members' Business

May 1st, 2014 / 6:10 p.m.


See context

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Supreme Court ActPrivate Members' Business

May 1st, 2014 / 6:10 p.m.


See context

Some hon. members

Agreed.

No.

Supreme Court ActPrivate Members' Business

May 1st, 2014 / 6:10 p.m.


See context

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

Supreme Court ActPrivate Members' Business

May 1st, 2014 / 6:10 p.m.


See context

Some hon. members

Yea.

Supreme Court ActPrivate Members' Business

May 1st, 2014 / 6:10 p.m.


See context

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

All those opposed will please say nay.

Supreme Court ActPrivate Members' Business

May 1st, 2014 / 6:10 p.m.


See context

Some hon. members

Nay.

Supreme Court ActPrivate Members' Business

May 1st, 2014 / 6:10 p.m.


See context

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

In my opinion the nays have it.

And five or more members having risen:

Supreme Court ActPrivate Members' Business

May 1st, 2014 / 6:10 p.m.


See context

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

Pursuant to Standing Order 93 the division stands deferred until Wednesday, May 7, immediately before the time provided for private members' business.