Official Languages Committee on May 31st, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Very well. Both Mr. Nadeau and Mr. Harvey are on the list.

I am told that four meetings have been scheduled for the issue of the Court Challenges Program. This is what is on the agenda. It can be moved by one of the members of the committee.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I agree on holding four meetings on the Court Challenges Program, but is there also a possibility to add a meeting with the Commissioner of Official Languages, in such a way that not all four meetings are held back-to-back? We agree on this.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Absolutely.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

In fact, when this committee was sitting previously, I raised the matter of the Canada-community agreements. I would like this topic to be placed on the agenda, but not necessarily for the end of June of course. I would like for this motion to be accepted so that by the fall, when we return, we can start the process of how the Canada-community agreements are being applied in each of the provinces and territories. The object would be to determine whether or not improvements are needed.

My colleague Mr. Godin said that he had a list of possible witnesses to talk about the Court Challenges Program, in addition to my list. I will give it to you. I have no objection to Mr. Godin's list being placed before mine.

I will therefore move that we hold four meetings on the Court Challenges Program, and in between we could hold an additional meeting with the Official Languages Commissioner to hear him talk to us about the report he tabled last May. We will also make sure that we will deal with the Canada-community agreements by the fall, in addition to the SNA and Radio-Canada issue in the Atlantic region.

Thank you.

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

I did not understand my colleague's motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Could you please draft this? Mr. Nadeau is moving that we hold four of our next meetings on the Court Challenges Program, followed by the other subjects. While he writes up his motion, we will hear comments from committee members on the proposal they will have to deal with.

Mr. Harvey.

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

If we're not mistaken, theoretically, the House may adjourn on June 8. This means that we can hold meetings next Tuesday and Thursday.

With respect to the Court Challenges Program, we conducted consultations throughout Canada. We met with people from British Columbia to New Brunswick. The Commissioner of Official Languages produced a report and talked about this matter. We have two meetings remaining. Earlier, Mr. Godin talked about meeting with representatives from Radio-Canada. He also talked about meeting with the minister and the commissioner to talk about the commissioner's report. We only have two meetings left. I don't know what we can add to what has already been said. If we keep constantly repeating the same thing, I'm not sure if this will necessarily advance the Court Challenges Program issue.

We know that the government is taking action, and assessing what can be done. We can set this matter aside—I'm not saying that we should ignore it or stop talking about it—until the month of October, and if nothing has happened then, we will take up this issue once again. However, if the Nonetheless, if the goal is to continue making this a political subject, go ahead. Some matters have to be dealt with, whether it is the Air Canada or Radio-Canada issues The Official Languages Commissioner's report was made public. We haven't even met with him yet, and we are talking about summoning other witnesses to talk about the Court Challenges Program, when we only have two meeting left. Later on, we will meet again in September. That is my opinion. I'm not saying that we have better things to do. I simply believe that everything pertaining to this subject has already been said. We held a consultation that lasted four weeks all across Canada. This has been done.

We are talking about starting up the entire process once again when there are other priorities. The Court Challenges Program is not the only matter to be dealt with. Other topics have to be raised. If Mr. Godin, or any other member of this committee wishes to add new information that has not already been mentioned, let's move ahead. Otherwise, I believe that we have priorities, among which is meeting with the Official Languages Commissioner to listen to what he has to say. He has tabled a report and we have not met with him yet. If we invite him, we will have one meeting remaining. And yet, we're saying that we want to hold four more meetings on the Court Challenges Program.

I have a question for you. I would like for you to convince me that, indeed, certain things have not already been said on the subject. I would very much like to hear what you have to say. Otherwise, let's move on with the other priorities. There isn't just a single one, there are several. We mentioned them, and I would like us to be able to discuss them.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Harvey.

Ms. Boucher.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

We also talked about meeting with representatives from the Vancouver 2010 Olympic Games. I believe it's important to meet with these people. I really wish we can meet them. We also talked about a topic that is of particular interest to this committee, the subject of young people, young francophones outside Quebec, schools, and so on. I think it is important to meet with those who represent our future. We have gone part of the way. Young people are the ones who are going to inherit what we pass on to them. I think it's very important to talk about young francophones living outside Quebec. I hope that we'll be able to work as a team. That's all I have to say for now.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Ms. Boucher.

Ms. Folco.

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I have several points to raise. Firstly, what I suggested was to continue with our agenda. We are not about to launch new initiatives. We are suggesting that the agenda which was agreed upon by all members of this committee a few weeks, be respected. From the very beginning, we have been asking for this: that we abide by the committee's decision to hold meetings on the Court Challenges Program.

Secondly, we obviously do not know when the House is going to adjourn. There are rumours that it might be next week. We do not know this. We have to rely on the calendar we were provided with. Therefore, there would still be four meetings ahead of us. What I would then propose is that the commissioner be invited alongside other witnesses, so that we can hold a meeting and have several witnesses at once, and progress as quickly as possible. I would suggest that the commissioner be invited to meet us no later than next Thursday. That is the second point.

Thirdly, I insist that this committee hear from anglophone witnesses. Within the committee and elsewhere, there is a perception that this committee is concerned only with French language minority rights, and this is a good thing. But it must also be concerned with the rights of English-speaking minorities in Quebec, and give the public the impression that it is also concerned with the situation of anglophone minorities. I strongly hope that anglophone witnesses from Quebec also be invited to the committee to speak about the Court Challenges Program.

I would have a suggestion which might not please everyone but Mr. Nadeau has shown me a report, --which he cannot table because it is drafted in only one language, -- on the testimonies heard last week by members of the opposition only. I insist on this. Last week, we did not sit as a Standing Committee of the House of Commons, far from it. However, in keeping with my colleague, Mr. Luc Harvey's reasoning, if we do not want to hear from the same witnesses again, which is a possibility that I would like government members to entertain—we should read the document once Mr. Nadeau has tabled it in both official languages. Government members should read the summary and inform us as to whether they wish to re-invite the same witnesses and have them repeat what has already been said, or accept this report as an official version. This is a friendly suggestion that I am making to my Conservative colleagues.

Lastly, I would very much like to talk about young people. Obviously this is important. It is a pity that Ms. Boucher is not here, since this was her suggestion. I would very much like to talk about young people, but if there is no Court Challenges Program, young people will have nothing to stand on, and the meeting would be useless. If currently adults aren't able to exercise their rights under the Charter, it would be pointless to talk about the situation of young people 10 and 15 years of age. This would just muddy the waters.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Madame Folco.

I will now pass the microphone to Mr. Nadeau.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I simply want to clarify a few of the comments made by my colleague Mr. Harvey earlier on. News of the House adjourning next week are just rumours. I have not heard anything official. According to the calendar, the House may sit until June 22. Even if the House were to adjourn tomorrow morning, it remains nonetheless, Mr. Chairman, that this committee may continue to operate even if the House is not sitting. In this context, given the fact we are dealing with very important matters, we should perhaps consider that this committee may continue to work even if the House decides to adjourn. We have all witnessed the fuss that this matter has raised, and with reason. It was more than a fuss, political positions were taken on the issue of the Court Challenges Program.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Before handing the floor over to someone else, Ms. Folco can you tell me if your earlier suggestion to have the Official Languages Commissioner appear was or was not part of an amendment?

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Yes.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

In addition to the suggestion about English-speaking Quebeckers.

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Mr. Nadeau, if you will, I would suggest that he appears no later than next Thursday. I know that there are rumours about the House adjourning, you are entirely right, but I do not want to run the risk of missing him.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

We would have to prepare the amendment.

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

I would move the amendment according to which the commissioner be invited to appear no later than next Thursday, June 7.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

We're talking about the Official Languages Commissioner.

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

One moment please, there's a point of order.

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

I thought the committee had been dissolved, which means that all pending motions are null and void.

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

No.

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

No? I'd like to have the clerk double check the process. You can table another motion, but I do not believe that we can resuscitate a motion that was tabled at the last meeting of the committee. This is a point of order.

Am I right or wrong?