Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for ruling that my colleague did not actually have a point of order.
Some serious questions must be asked when we hear the comments that we did in the media with respect to the direction your government might be taking. We have to look at reality. These days we're trying to convince people to vote. We're trying to give young people in schools a reason to vote once they have reached voting age. We're trying to show them that progress is possible and that we live in a democracy.
Living in a democracy also means that we have the right to speak. We have the right to free speech in Canada. Some countries do not have that right. To decide yourself or in collaboration with your party to cancel a meeting of the Standing Committee on Official Languages—Acting contrary to a democracy is a dictatorship. One needs to be very, very careful. If we want to show our young people and the Canadian public that it is important to vote, then we also have to prove to them that we live in a democracy.
For a few weeks now we have been hearing the Minister responsible for Official Languages tell the House that the committee is master of its own fate and that the committee members are masters of the committee. I would like that minister to come here this morning and explain what she means by masters of the committee when you took a unilateral decision to cancel such an important committee meeting with two minutes' notice.
Members on the other side of the House may have said that enough had been said about the Court Challenges Program, but just because some individuals are no longer interested in the issue does not mean that we, the official languages communities, must automatically go down on our knees before them and stop moving forward.
The cancellation of the Court Challenges Program was criticized by everyone. I heard some individuals say that we shouldn't be concerned, that we still had the right to go before the courts but that we would have to go it alone or request legal aid.
The purpose of the study of the cancellation of the Court Challenges Program was to ensure that official languages communities would be respected if certain legislation or jurisdictions attempted to eliminate or restrict their rights. The decision to call witnesses before the Official Languages Committee was not made two minutes before the meeting began. I came through the door that you see, people were here, and I was in a good mood because we were going to study in a proper, thorough manner the cancellation of the Court Challenges Program. Now we can't do that.
I read the comments that you made to the various media. It's unfortunate, but we're in politics to make policy. If I didn't want to be part of a political party, then I would be an independent member. Whether you like it or not, there will always be some partisanship at a certain level. That is the reality in Canada.
We have the right to hold partisan opinions. That being said, the Official Languages Committee has always worked to improve the lives of our citizens and has always attempted to advance the cause that is dear to our hearts. I have been a member of this committee since I was first elected in 2004 and I can tell you that I think that this decision was unacceptable.
You could have made the decision one, two or three days before the meeting, but you decided to shut things down two minutes before we were scheduled to convene, with no explanation. You could have at least given us an acceptable explanation. In saying that you thought the previous meeting had been too partisan, you clearly went too far. One has to be able to respect committee members' wishes.
Thank you.