Evidence of meeting #56 for Official Languages in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cases.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Gisèle Lalonde  former President of SOS Montfort, As an Individual
Guy Matte  President, Court Challenges Program of Canada
Noël Badiou  Executive Director, Court Challenges Program of Canada
Kathleen Tansey  Vice-President of the Board of Directors, Court Challenges Program of Canada
Michel Gratton  Communications Consultant, Montfort Hospital
Jean-Rodrigue Paré  Committee Researcher

9:30 a.m.

Liberal

Brian Murphy Liberal Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB

Just for summary, then, if I get it right, the program was established in 1978 and had the linguistic character, essentially, first; then there was the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982 for the other rights. It wouldn't be unfair to say—this would be a sort of yes or no thing, because of the time—that this was first a program for the protection of entrenched language rights in the Constitution, and then because of the passage of time and new developments, it became a program for the protection of other rights.

9:35 a.m.

President, Court Challenges Program of Canada

Guy Matte

You're right.

9:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney

Mr. Badiou, you have a little bit of time left. Do you wish to add anything?

9:35 a.m.

Executive Director, Court Challenges Program of Canada

9:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney

We will therefore go to Mr. Nadeau.

9:35 a.m.

Bloc

Richard Nadeau Bloc Gatineau, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Ladies and gentlemen, good morning. I'm very pleased that you are here with us in a so-called official setting. At least your words will be reported to the House of Commons, to Parliament, to Quebeckers, Canadians and Acadians, and as well to all those individuals who may be affected by the work you do throughout Canada.

That being said, I would like to, at the outset, draw your attention to the excellent report adopted by this committee last May, which is entitled “The Vitality of Official Language Minority Communities”. It was tabled by Mr. Lauzon in the House of Commons. Because your first meeting was so tumultuous, not much media coverage was given to the report, but the fact remains that the document exists and it is excellent.

The issue of the Court Challenges Program is covered on pages 144 to 146. In recommendation 26, we ask the Canadian Parliament to restore the program. This was a unanimous request. I would like you to know that this document constitutes an additional tool for you. It was not done haphazardly, but was the result extensive travel last fall. Indeed, for the first time in our history, the Standing Committee on Official Languages met with minority official language communities throughout Canada.

The report includes various issues, including that one. It is very important that people know about this, and I wanted to bring it to your attention. I will not read the report: I think that the message has been conveyed. Nevertheless, I would like to point out that, with respect to the Court Challenges Program, no fewer than 21 advocacy organizations—and in saying this I'm not inferring that some organizations are more important than others—who are at the very centre of these minority communities, both Francophone and Anglophone, expressed their opinions on this matter. The report gives some good examples. You mentioned these earlier.

We have taken a look at the theoretical side, the legislation and all of that, and that is important. Indeed, in some instances we have had to fight to ensure that the legislation was amended and the Constitution analyzed. We had to determine whether or not it was appropriate to abolish this program or provide services in relation to school management, the Montfort Hospital, the disabled, or other causes.

We have with us the people who fought for the Montfort Hospital and they are watching. My question is for these two representatives, either Mrs. Lalonde or Mr. Gratton. I would like to know who these people are who supported you, who contributed to this process. How did you arrive at the conclusion that the Court Challenges Program should be maintained?

9:35 a.m.

former President of SOS Montfort, As an Individual

Gisèle Lalonde

As you know, this happened on February 24. The next day, the head stakeholders met, particularly leaders representing Franco-Ontarian associations. Our objective was to try to convince the government that they had made a mistake. In passing, I was a member of a major provincial committee, called the Who does what? or Qui fait quoi?, which had in fact been extremely close to the government in power at the time of the infamous mergers, etc. I felt that the government would understand if it realized that it had made a mistake. We immediately rented the Ottawa Civic Centre and held a gathering three weeks later. It was almost a miracle to be able to attract so many people. They came from Ottawa and the region. Some of them came from Quebec; others from Toronto, Kapuskasing and Hearst. Buses also came from Windsor. So people throughout the province were joining the fight. Furthermore, I think Michel and I met each individual from each town, I think. We told them everything about Montfort and their rights.

Then, young people joined in the fight, giving us extremely important support because they formed a human chain around Montfort and chanted our slogan, "Leave our hospital alone". We were really touched to see that young people, although it wasn't really their hospital—because their hospital was really the Children's Hospital—were with us nevertheless because they knew that it was the hospital used by their grandmothers, grandfathers, and where they had died. It was their parents' hospital or even where they themselves had been born.

We continued to fight. We wanted to make it an election issue. Unfortunately, the woman who was supposed to ask our question on Montfort fainted in public. She was moderating the leaders' debate and she fainted. So we missed our opportunity with regard to the federal government and the election campaign.

Then, we organized brick sales at the Festival franco-ontarien. We did all kinds of things to raise money. We didn't rely on the government. We tried to find our own solution. And we went on. Then the media throughout Canada started taking an interest in our cause. There were even people from Romania, Papua-New-Guinea, Morocco and ambassadors who came, because they had heard about it. The world became interested in our fight. They were trying to take away the only Francophone hospital in the province from the Franco-Ontarian minority.

You know, every year, Montfort trains some 40 Francophone doctors, family doctors, who are in demand across the country. They also train doctors who studied in an immersion program and who want to specialize.

We continued to fight. When the government offered to give us a clinic instead of a hospital, we did not accept, but rather we said that we would continue to negotiate with it. We worked for a year. In May, when Mr. Harris said that we had never tried to negotiate a solution, we realized that we were wasting our time. That is when we tabled in July...

You see, we weren't stupid, we didn't immediately turn to the courts. That is not what Francophones do. First they try because they know full well that it will cost them an arm and a leg to take the government to court, particularly the wealthiest provincial government and, at the time, the strongest government. It was like David and Goliath. Then we turned to the Ontario Divisional Court.

Ultimately, we won our case in the lower courts with the support of three out of three judges, two of whom were Anglophones. We won again in the Court of Appeal. Then, the government sent three ministers to tell us that it would not appeal the decision to the Supreme Court of Canada. That was a victory. All this to say that one doesn't turn to the courts for no reason. In answer to Mr. Nadeau, we got money from across Canada.

9:40 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney

Thank you, Ms. Lalonde.

9:40 a.m.

former President of SOS Montfort, As an Individual

Gisèle Lalonde

I mean that we got money from a wide variety of sources, we received letters from across the country, we had everyone's support. And on the weekend, we are going to give them medals and many other things to thank all the Francophones in Canada and the Anglophones who supported us.

9:40 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney

Thank you, Ms. Lalonde.

I will now recognize Mr. Godin.

9:40 a.m.

NDP

Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I'd like to thank you for appearing before the committee for the third time. Apparently, it takes 28 meetings before the government side hears the message, which means that we still have a few meetings to go. This is called advertising. It takes time before it works. Coca-Cola didn't sell its first bottle on the first day. I want to thank you.

When it comes to minorities, we are trying to change the terminology. We no longer want to use the word "minority"; we are a people. I think that this has already been well said: if Confederation happened, it's because two peoples came together. We want people to stop seeing us as a second-class group or a group that always has to fight. It's unfortunate that we still have to do so.

Ms. Lalonde, I want to really thank you on behalf of Canadian Francophones for the work that you have done with your team to save Montfort Hospital. Personally, one day, I gave a short speech at Montfort Hospital. I will always remember this. The fact that you fought for this cause was quite simply incredible. It wasn't easy.

In New Brunswick, the government wanted to do the same thing, in other words, shut down the schools in Saint-Sauveur. Mistakes were made. Police officers hit people on the head, people who weren't even part of the protest. In Quebec, a magazine said that it was police brutality, that there was blood on the hood of a car. It was incredible to see the government acting like this. Once again, these were French schools. Quite recently, hospitals were closed in Caraquet, Lamèque and Dalhousie. The government wants to build small local clinics and take away from communities their means of meeting health care needs. Battles are still being fought.

I keep asking myself this question. Why did the government make the decision without talking to you about it? It's as if it had already made this decision while it was still in opposition. We can only speculate. Something must have instigated this situation. Sometimes the government tells us not to worry, that it might table legislation in the fall. At present, a motion by a Conservative member, a government member, is demanding that something be done for Francophones. I think they're completely mixed up. Something somewhere is bothering them. Is it because the Court Challenges Program funded the same-sex marriage case? Is that the problem? Is there just one reason behind this decision? Do they want to take away the rights of one group in particular and have everybody pay? Is that the problem?

I would like to hear your opinion. I think that you must have an opinion. The Court Challenges Program has existed for a long time. You should know whether the program refused to give money to a majority opposed to a minority. Did someone ask for funding and didn't get it? Is it because, when the Conservatives were in the opposition, they weren't happy? Is it because they said that if they ever became the government, the program would have to go? I'd like to know your opinion on this subject.

9:45 a.m.

President, Court Challenges Program of Canada

Guy Matte

Thank you, honourable member. First, to quickly respond to a previous question, let me reassure you that we have read the report tabled by the Standing Committee on Official Languages. This is an extremely important document. It is long and has a lot for communities to think about. I think that the entire committee should be proud of having tabled such a document and made it available to Canadians.

As for your question, Mr. Godin, it's clear that we can only speculate since there were no consultations and the reasons given don't hold water. I can say, however, that some majority groups were not happy with some decisions made by the board of directors of the Court Challenges Program. However, that is part of the job. When it comes to ensuring minority rights, some members of the majority—no matter whether it is a linguistic majority or whether it concerns equality—will never believe in some of the rights recognized by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That is why the Charter was written. If we didn't need to recognize some rights in the Canadian Constitution if those rights were recognized by all Canadians, particularly with regard to section 15, which refers to race, religion, handicap and so forth, we would not need the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. You believed that it was necessary to have the Charter of Rights and Freedoms; now, it has to be tested to see how it will be applied in reality. Sometimes, not everyone is happy. Some groups don't like some decisions made by the courts. At the very least, the Charter had to be tested. Even if people are not happy, this right has been recognized.

Is that why the Court Challenges Program was abolished? We cannot say.

9:45 a.m.

NDP

Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB

The program was not designed to make everyone happy, but rather to ensure that the minorities or individuals who felt wronged by legislation know that they're entitled to the Court Challenges Program. It was not designed to allow an unhappy majority to be able to benefit so that both groups could take each other to court.

9:45 a.m.

President, Court Challenges Program of Canada

Guy Matte

I simply want to remind the committee that when a minority or a disadvantaged group goes before the courts on the issue of language rights, it is going against the government, be it federal or provincial. So it is already working against the majority, since a Parliament or a government represent the majority. When the government goes to court, it spends money doing so; that's normal.

9:50 a.m.

NDP

Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB

When the government says that the Court Challenges Programs was simply there to give money to lawyers with ties to the Liberal Party, what do you say to that? Is it true that the money was given to friends of the Liberal Party? I am not making anything up, this was said in the House of Commons. I would like to know what your answer is to this because you represented the Court Challenges Program.

9:50 a.m.

President, Court Challenges Program of Canada

Guy Matte

We are not able to provide that answer because we never asked the lawyers what their affiliation was. I'm convinced that if it was in our power to do so, we probably would have discovered people of all political stripes and, without a doubt, many without one.

9:50 a.m.

former President of SOS Montfort, As an Individual

Gisèle Lalonde

Mr. Chairman, I would like to clarify something. In our case, we had a dozen lawyers who met free-of-charge for a year, the whole time we were discussing this issue with governments. They met for a year in order to prepare the case. These 12 lawyers—who were certainly not all Liberals, I can assure you—who got together to choose Mr. Caza. Everyone knows that Mr. Caza is a Liberal, but he defends all minorities, regardless of who they vote for.

9:50 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney

Thank you for the clarification.

9:50 a.m.

former President of SOS Montfort, As an Individual

Gisèle Lalonde

When the government goes to court, it uses our money to defend itself.

9:50 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney

We are finished with that, and we are now going to continue our round of questioning.

9:50 a.m.

NDP

Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB

Mr. Chairman, he can continue to answer the question in the second round.

9:50 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney

You can continue as you like.

9:50 a.m.

former President of SOS Montfort, As an Individual

Gisèle Lalonde

This is what happens. I find it upsetting that the Prime Minister said that.

9:50 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney

I would ask you to stop now so that everyone can have a turn. We will now go to our parliamentary secretary, Ms. Boucher.

9:50 a.m.

Conservative

Sylvie Boucher Conservative Beauport—Limoilou, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to thank everyone who took the trouble to come to this official meeting. It is good to be here.

I am going to be very frank with you: personally and on behalf of my government colleagues, I was a bit offended and disappointed to see that you attended the May 17 consultation, from which we were absent. We also went across Canada and heard different points of view about the Court Challenges Program. I simply wanted to say that because I felt targeted and was personally offended.

I will address my question to Mr. Matte. To begin with, I would like you to explain exactly what criteria or conditions make someone eligible or ineligible for funding under the program. I want to know how the criteria or conditions are set and what the rules are. Who is consulted when these criteria or conditions are established? Have they changed since the program was created in 1994? If so, can you tell us what the changes are?