Thank you for announcing the funding.
First of all, I would like to express my support for you, Mr. Chairman. We traveled together in the Canadian West. I am very confident that you are a person of integrity. I note that you have not brought the Conservative Party accountant with you in order to run this committee today. That is a good start.
I would also like to congratulate the witnesses. I am from New Brunswick and I am clearly an Anglophone, but I am part of the Acadian community through marriage. I am fully aware of the fact that in the Greater Moncton community, we had the requisite tools in the CCP toolbox to advocate for a school. We had to fight, among others, the provincial government to ensure that new schools were built in order to prevent assimilation. I am using your words, Mr. Gratton, because these are issues that affect us as well. We are indeed grappling with the problem of assimilation.
I have a question for Ms. Tansey and another for Mr. Matte.
I apologize, but I am a lawyer. It's not my fault: I was assimilated when I was young. I see that the objectives of the program have been divided into two parts. The first part underscores the importance of linguistic rights in Canada's Constitution and the second pertains to other human rights, which are obviously very important. As a lawyer, construction rules come to mind. Would it be accurate to say that the primary objective of this program is to protect the language rights enshrined in the Constitution? Do these rights supercede the others or are they on an equal footing with them? As a lawyer, I know that government lawyers use the words that give meaning to the document. In these circumstances, I am wondering whether that is the intent of the document.
Mr. Matte is it true that the government did not consult the people managing this program before abolishing it? Is it true that the Minister, Ms. Oda, simply telephoned you to inform you that the program had come to an end?