Official Languages Committee on May 15th, 2007

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Lemieux mentioned that the committee has heard witnesses, travelled and produced a report. I do not dispute that, but all that means is that we have done our job. Had we not done that, we would have no right to be here and would have to be replaced. We did our job as members of Parliament and as members of this committee.

The situation before us today is entirely different: the chairman overstepped his mandate by making a decision that he should not have made, and we are entirely unsatisfied with his explanation. However, the committee can still continue to operate even if there is a vote asking the chairman to step down. It is up to you to propose somebody to replace him. It is up to you to tell the communities whether, yes or no, you want the committee to continue to work.

If the committee decides that the chairman must step down, the rules, as you know, state that you have to field another candidate for the position. If you choose to do so, the committee will continue to operate; we will continue to hear witnesses; and we will continue to work for the well-being and development of all communities around the country. It is up to you. We are responsible for part of the decision, the other part is in your hands.

Should you decide not to propose another name, you will be responsible for knowingly and deliberately putting an end to the committee's work, meaning that we will no longer be here to listen to and work with the communities. The decision is in your hands. Assume your responsibilities. Do not try to put all the blame on the opposition. It is up to you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Thank you, Mr. Rodriguez.

Mr. Godin.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Mr. Chairman, I would like to comment on what Mr. Lemieux just said. He said that you acted properly as chairman when you cancelled the meetings. I think that he said that. Perhaps he could clarify it further for me. He seems to be saying that a chairman can decide that an agenda is not valid even though a majority of committee members have agreed to it. No chairman has ever been given this power in any committee in which I have participated.

He referred to me as my party's whip. Let me tell you that I am very proud of the fact that the New Democratic Party is the only political party that elects its whip every year in January. I have been elected as the whip since the year 2000. This shows that caucus members respected my decisions, because they had seven opportunities to get rid of me. They could have done it seven times, Mr. Lemieux. If they say that they no longer want me, I am sure that it will not spell the end of the NDP caucus. However, your party wants to dissolve this committee. Now the decision is yours.

According to the Standing Orders, if the motion for Mr. Lauzon's resignation is adopted, it is incumbent on the government to appoint someone else to the committee. After that, you can appoint the chair of your choice. If you choose to do that, then you will be attacking the francophone minorities, as you have done during the past months. Now the decision is up to you. You will show us whether the Conservative Government of Canada intends to respect both official languages of the two peoples that came from Europe to settle in Canada in the 1600s. We have had a Constitution with two official languages since the 1800s.

It is up to you to decide and to your government to show Canadians if it respects these principles. You cannot hide behind statements like those made by Mr. Jay Hill, who claimed that this committee is not important. You cannot hide behind that and pretend that Canadians are not frustrated. You cannot hide behind that. You yourself said that this is an important committee and that we had produced a good report. You personally said that we had travelled all over Canada, from coast to coast to coast.

Now you will decide whether or not to show respect, but you will not decide whether or not the committee should continue to exist. The committee will continue existing today, and the day after that. There is no way that the Conservatives can abolish Canada's parliamentary official languages committee and deprive us of our democratic right to freedom of speech. I am sorry.

While Canada's Prime Minister may decide which of his party members can speak to the media, he cannot decide this for members of the opposition. This is not what democracy is about. My dear friends, I leave this matter in your hands.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Thank you, Mr. Godin.

Mr. Nadeau.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Chairman, regarding the statements that Mr. Lemieux just made, I want to emphasize that this committee will not be dissolved even if you are no longer its chair. The committee will be suspended and will not be able to sit until it has a new chair. Both vice-chairs will keep their positions. Mr. Chairman, I'd like you to confirm what I just said, in consultation with the clerk.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Perhaps the clerk can read out exactly what will happen next.

[The Clerk]

I am quoting from page 830 of the House of Commons Procedure and Practice by Marleau and Montpetit.

If no motion proposing a member for the position of chair is adopted, no other business can be transacted. When an impasse is evident, the members disperse and must be reconvened by the clerk at a later time, with the election of a chair remaining their first order of business.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

This applies only to the chair.

[The Clerk]

This applies only to the chair. The vice-chairs would keep their positions, but let me quote from page 829:

All of the chair's powers can be delegated to the vice-chair, but the vice-chair cannot preside over a committee meeting while the office of chair is vacant.

In any case, the vice-chairs remain in their positions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Is that all?

Mr. Harvey.

[Luc Harvey, Conservative, Louis-Hébert, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I listened very attentively to all the comments. We have been sitting on the Standing Committee on Official Languages for more than a year. This was the first time that I sat on a committee. It was one of my first experiences. I think that the committee has done good work until recently. The Official Languages Committee travelled all over Canada to see what was happening on the ground instead of merely inviting one or two witnesses representing communities in minority situations. We didn't just visit one or two cities; we travelled for nearly three weeks.

Let us also consider the government's record. It allocated an additional $30 million to communities in minority situations all over Canada. Let us keep in mind all the things that the committee did during the past year. To my mind, there is no justification whatsoever for this kind of motion. I also recall that about a month ago, the opposition wanted to ram through a part of the report that only made a few recommendations, because the opposition members were afraid of an imminent election and wanted to use a part of the report—

[Luc Malo, Bloc, Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC]

Mr. Chairman, on a point of order, that discussion was in camera.

[Some members]

Oh, oh!

[Luc Harvey, Conservative, Louis-Hébert, QC]

Ms. Folco, since your article was published in a newspaper, shall we agree not to let ourselves get flustered by this? Moreover, Mr. D'Amours made a statement pursuant to Standing Order 31. Therefore, let's be careful, all right?

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Mr. Harvey, Mr. Malo is right, we must respect the confidentiality of an in-camera meeting.

[Luc Harvey, Conservative, Louis-Hébert, QC]

If that's the case, then I will choose not to remember that part of it.

Mr. Chairman, all I can say is that I have full confidence in you. You have done good work, and I am sure that you will continue doing good work as chair.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Thank you.

Does anyone else wish to speak?

Mr. Chong.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

I think we're going to have a problem here unless people can get their minds around the motion that's in front of us.

The logical argument that nobody can contest is that the government members on this committee have indicated support for the chair, Mr. Guy Lauzon. As government members on this committee, we do not wish to see anybody but Mr. Lauzon as chair. In other words, the four government members on this committee are not prepared to become the new chair. So we've indicated our support for the present chair, and we're not willing to change that position.

The second thing that is not contestable is that Standing Order 106(2) states that the chair must be a government member. Therefore, if you remove this chair, Mr. Guy Lauzon, the business of this committee will stop, because the business of the committee will not continue until the issue of the chair has been settled.

We have also indicated that we are not prepared to have anybody in that chair other than Mr. Guy Lauzon. So if you vote to remove him as chair of this committee, the work of this committee will stop ad infinitum.

So that's a decision that you will take. If you don't wish to see the business of this committee continue, then vote in favour of Mr. Godin's motion, because the business of this committee will then stop. It's very simple.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chong.

Monsieur Godin.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

This will be my last intervention, because I want to go on to the vote. I just want to clarify a point.

Mr. Chong says that you have the confidence of the committee members here. In a parliamentary committee that is suppose to be independent to some degree, it is sad to hear a group saying that it is expressing its own opinion, despite what we can read in this morning's newspaper:

In an interview with Canadian Press, Mr. Hill stated that he would not replace Mr. Lauzon if the opposition forced him to leave.

And now, regarding the government, they said the following:All the Conservative MPs have also been instructed to refuse the position if it is offered to them.

This was taken from a Canadian Press article that was published this morning.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Thank you, Mr. Godin.

Does anyone else have anything to say?

Mr. Lemieux.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Yes, I'd like to summarize a few things. The first thing is that as I mentioned,

we have done a lot of good work together. You have been and you still are the chairman, and it was under your leadership that we were able to do this work. As I said, the people on the opposition side are angry, and I understand that. They would like to have a new chair, but how long will that last? Until the next time they are angry or displeased? Yes. We would be establishing a precedent whereby whenever opposition members are unhappy with a decision, they could force the chair to resign. Why not?

Mr. Chong has raised a valid point. If the opposition votes to remove the chair, no one here is going to take it over. Knowing that now, you are voting to terminate the work of this committee.

[An hon. member]

You are voting to terminate this committee.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

You are voting to terminate. There is no reason for Mr—

Excuse me, I have the floor. Thank you.

There is no reason—

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

A little bit of respect, please.

Just a minute, Mr. Lemieux.

Oui.