Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to thank the witnesses for their presentations.
It is very important to keep in mind that the Court Challenges Program's objective of clarifying certain constitutional provisions regarding language and minority rights does not consist in providing legal aid. The provincial programs are responsible for this.
I think that's been forgotten in this whole controversy, this whole debate, about what has been done here.
The principal reason for the court challenges program—and that's been outlined in the contribution agreement—was not to assist those who did not have access to legal aid, those who couldn't afford to go to court. The principal reason for the program, since its inception in 1978, was to provide clarification, to fund certain cases so that we could build a foundation of case law to clarify minority and linguistic rights in this country. That was the primary purpose of the program. Because in the 1970s, when the program was first created, there was a bit of a vacuum.
Now, why was there a vacuum in the 1970s? Quite simply, it was because in the preceding 10 years there had been a lot of significant pieces of legislation introduced that really brought Canada into a new age--a new age of rights, a new age of protection of minorities and the like. We had the Official Languages Act, 1969. Au Québec we had the 1977 Chartre de la langue française. In 1982, we had the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. So in that 10- to 15-year period, there was this massive...in some ways one could call it a revolution in terms of rights in this country, and a lot of it led to a lot of confusion about what exactly our rights were, because there wasn't a substantial body of case law.
So in the late 1970s, the Government of Canada decided to assist in the clarification and the establishment of this foundation of case law by funding this program. That has been the primary purpose of the program since the beginning.
However, I would argue, and the government has argued, that after three decades of court challenges, of case law, we now have a substantial body, a substantial foundation of case law that now defines what minority and linguistic rights are in this country. Is it completely defined? Of course not. The law is an evolving thing, and each year new cases come forward and things are further clarified. But I think it's a reasonable proposition to say that after three decades we have that substantial body, that substantial foundation in case law; and a substantial, significant, if not overwhelming, portion of minority and linguistic rights has been now defined in this country. I think that's something that has been forgotten, because I think a lot of people are conflating legal aid with the court challenges program, with the purpose of the court challenges program.
Second, I don't doubt that one of the criteria to receive funds under the program, under your program, was financial need. But the primary purpose of the program was not legal aid; that's a responsibility of the provinces. I think we also have to put into context the fact that the legal aid programs of the provinces are massive, more than half a billion dollars a year spent by provinces, through the assistance of the Government of Canada through the Canada social transfer, for legal aid programs for this country. So if people need access to courts, it's through provincial legal aid. And it's our contention that after close to three decades we have that substantial basis in case law.