Human Resources Committee on April 25th, 2023

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Ms. Gazan, did you have your hand up?

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I appreciate the subamendment. I think it's unfortunate that it's not as clear in terms of protection for workers. I just want to have that on record.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Is there any further discussion on the subamendment of Madam Saks?

Mrs. Gray.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Now that it's finally come in and we've all seen it, can we have a moment for discussion?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Do you wish to suspend for a few minutes?

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Yes, just for a moment or two.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Good. We'll suspend for a few moments while members are considering the subamendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Currently on the floor is the second subamendment of Ms. Saks.

You all have it. Is there any further discussion on the subamendment of Ms. Saks?

Seeing none, Mr. Clerk, I will ask you to call a recorded vote on the subamendment of Ms. Saks to the amendment of Ms. Gazan.

(Subamendment agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)

We'll now move to the amendment of Ms. Gazan as amended.

Ms. Ferreri.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just want to put on the record where the thoughts are from this side in terms of this amendment. While the NDP has removed the previous proposed language of licensed child care—which we support, because we've been pretty adamant about including everyone and being universal—from the legislation, it still calls out public and not-for-profit, which goes against parents' rights to choose the child care that is right for them, which, again, goes against the main tenets of this legislation of quality, availability, affordability, accessibility and inclusiveness in child care.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Madam Ferreri.

Seeing no further discussion, I'll call for a recorded vote on the amendment of Madam Gazan as amended.

(Amendment as amended agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)

That means amendment CPC-2 cannot be moved.

Madam Bérubé, do you have an amendment to move in this section?

We're still on clause 7.

Go ahead, Madam Bérubé.

[Sylvie Bérubé, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Mr. Chair, Bloc Québécois amendment BQ-1 proposes that Bill C-35, in clause 7, be amended by adding after line 29 on page 5 the following:(3) Having regard to the special and unique nature of the jurisdiction of the Government of Quebec relating to early learning and child care in Quebec society and despite any other provision of this Act, the Government of Quebec may choose to exempt itself from the application of this Act by giving the Minister written notice to that effect, in which case that province may still receive the funding under section 8.

I will explain. As you know, the purpose of this amendment is to incorporate a clause to recognize Quebec's expertise in the guiding principles of the bill. This amendment also recognizes Quebec's jurisdiction and guarantees its right to withdraw with compensation from the application of this act. The idea is to avoid arguments between Quebec and Ottawa by recognizing from the outset what everyone knows here: Quebec is a forerunner when it comes to early childhood education and must continue to have sole control of its policies in this area.

In fact, Quebec was in the vanguard when it adopted its family policy over 25 years ago now. That policy, which can be described as progressive and feminist, enabled thousands of women and families to enjoy better work/life or school/life balance, specifically through the creation of a network of early childhood centres. This model is an asset and a source of pride for the entire Quebec nation. In fact, it is the inspiration for this bill.

This amendment therefore confirms the special and unique nature of the jurisdiction of the Quebec government in the area of education and child development, by giving it a right to withdraw completely with full compensation. As well, this is a field of exclusive provincial jurisdiction and we believe that this amendment, like all of the amendments we are proposing, will avoid arguments between Ottawa and Quebec in the future federal investments in this area.

I therefore invite all of my colleagues to vote in favour of this amendment and of recognition of all the work done by Quebec in the last 25 years.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Madam Bérubé.

The role of the chair of the committee is to rule on admissibility of amendments as dictated by House of Commons Procedure and Practice.

My ruling, therefore, on this amendment is that Bill C-35 sets out the Government of Canada's vision for a Canada-wide early learning and child care system. The amendment proposes to allow the Government of Quebec to exempt itself from the application of the bill, while receiving federal funding for its early learning and child care programs and services. As House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, states on page 772:

Since an amendment may not infringe upon the financial initiative of the Crown, it is inadmissible if it imposes a charge on the public treasury, or if it extends the objects or purposes or relaxes the conditions and qualifications specified in the royal recommendation.

In the opinion of the chair, the amendment proposes to alter the terms and conditions for spending provided in the royal recommendation. In addition, the amendment is contrary to the bill’s stated principle of creating a Canada-wide system, since there is no mechanism to allow any province or territory to opt out of that system while still receiving federal funding. Therefore, I rule the amendment inadmissible.

The ruling of the chair cannot be questioned.

[Sylvie Bérubé, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Mr. Chair, I challenge your decision and request a roll call vote.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Yes, my decision can be questioned, but it cannot be debated. Are you challenging my ruling, Madam Bérubé?

[Sylvie Bérubé, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Madam Bérubé has challenged my decision.

Mr. Clerk, I call for a recorded vote on the decision of the chair.

(Ruling of the chair sustained: yeas 9; nays 2)

The amendment of Madam Bérubé cannot be entertained by the committee.

We'll now move to CPC-2.1.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Mr. Chair, thank you for allowing me the time to present amendment CPC-2.1. I will try to be quick.

Amendment CPC-2.1 proposes that Bill C-35, in clause 7, be amended by adding after line 29 on page 5 the following:

(3) Federal investments in respect of early learning and child care programs and services subject to an agreement entered into with a province must be guided by the commitments set out in the Official Languages Act, in addition to the principles set out in subsection (1).

Clause 7 of this bill sets out the guiding principles of the funding granted by the federal government for early childhood services. The proposed amendment is critical in that it will ensure that the federal government takes its official languages commitments as set out in the Official Languages Act into account when it grants funding for early childhood services.

Bill C-13, An Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada’s Official Languages, specifically proposes to add a federal commitment to the Official Languages Act to advance learning opportunities starting in early childhood.

To help in understanding what is really happening, I will cite a few examples.

In New Brunswick, the government recently announced the creation of 1,900 child care spaces, 300 of which will be francophone. This means that barely 16 per cent of the spaces are being allocated for francophones, when francophones make up over 30 per cent of the population in the only bilingual province in Canada.

In Nova Scotia, faced with an outcry from francophones, the provincial government decided to reverse its plan, with funding from the federal government, to merge all francophone and anglophone child care centres in the province under a single provincial agency already in existence whose senior management is exclusively anglophone. That would have constituted a violation of section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

In Ontario, it seems that francophone child care centres will not have access to the provincial funding intended to improve wages in child care centres. Only private anglophone agencies, that pay much less, will be receiving this top-up funding from the province.

In conclusion, I want to cite the example of Alberta. Out of the1,500 new spaces announced recently, only 19 will be reserved for francophones. This means that 0.013 per cent of the spaces will be allocated to francophones in Alberta, when francophones represent over 2 per cent of the population of the province.

I could continue, with examples for British Columbia and Manitoba. Manitoba's history is positive, with the Manitoba government's intentions giving the province a good track record in terms of financial effects.

Members of the committee, I invite you to consider this point. This bill gives us the opportunity to offer the federal government tools it can use to get tangible results when it comes to francophone education and child care services in minority communities across Canada. I think this is important.

As I said at the beginning of the meeting, it is important to have this presence in all bill that come after. This is particularly important now that we have concluded the study on modernization of the Official Languages Act, the new version of which will probably be adopted by the House of Commons very soon.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mr. Godin.

Just to be clear, my intention is to conclude at 5:40 p.m., if that's agreeable. We started about 10 minutes late.

We will open the floor to discussion on the amendment of Mr. Godin.

Madam Saks.

[Ya'ara Saks, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank Mr. Godin for his suggestion.

I would ask at this time if we could get some, perhaps, weighing in by officials on the amendment proposed by my colleague.

[Michelle Lattimore, Director General, Federal Secretariat on Early Learning and Child Care, Department of Employment and Social Development]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

From a policy perspective, the amendment that has been suggested is consistent with what we know of the Official Languages Act at this time. There's nothing additional to comment on beyond that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Is there any further discussion?

Mr. Godin.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Mr. Chair, there is a typo in the text of the French version of the proposed amendment. The introduction should say "Que le projet de loi C-35, à l'article 7, soit modifié par adjonction, après la ligne 35... ."

I request the unanimous consent of the members to correct the typo in the wording of my motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

We'll go to the legislative clerk so we can make that.... In English, it's correct. In French, it refers to avant. We'll change it to après.

With that minor change in the French version, seeing no—

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

In English, it's wrong. In French, it's correct.