Official Languages Committee on Feb. 14th, 2008

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

No. I will address this, Chair.

At the beginning of the meeting Monsieur Godin tabled a motion, and we've allowed discussion on who should come in front of this committee pertaining to the work we're doing. No one cut me off when I was talking about the Canada Public Service Agency. I didn't see arms going up and people saying, “Oh that's irrelevant. Cut him off, get him back on track.” We discussed bringing in other witnesses. I haven't heard push-back on that.

We are trying to finalize our work on official languages as the official languages committee. As part of the discussion on the motion, and in keeping with what we've been discussing all morning, I'm proposing a potential witness, and all of a sudden they're upset about this one. Why didn't they cut me off about the Canada Public Service Agency when I brought that up?

In accordance with the way the debate has been managed this morning, I'm raising a valid point that the Liberal members here advocate for official languages. They say they respect the choice of unilingual anglophones and unilingual francophones to be served in their own languages, and we're not to pressure them to pursue bilingualism, for example.

But we have a star candidate. He's not an unknown; he's a candidat vedette. There's even talk of his running for the leadership at some future point. He made headlines across Canada with his comments insulting unilingual anglophones and unilingual francophones across Canada. The Bloc should be interested in this because they—

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Mr. Godin, you wish to raise a point of order?

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

Mr. Chairman, earlier Mr. Lemieux said that Mr. Godin introduced motions three minutes before the meeting ended. He also said that you were a very good chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

That's a point of view, Mr. Godin.

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

I don't disagree on this Valentine's Day.

He hasn't introduced a motion. The motion we're discussing doesn't concern future witnesses. It asks that the minister appear before the committee. He doesn't even have the heart to introduce a motion to call for other witnesses. We've found a solution to his concern: we've said that the minister can be accompanied by whoever she wishes. We'll hold the meeting in a bigger room or at the Château Laurier if necessary. She can bring whoever she wishes, but let's move forward.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Pardon me, I'm going—

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

Otherwise, let him say that's it's obstruction and we'll drink coffee until 11 o'clock.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

I allow your point of order. I remind committee members that the discussions must be on the subject of the motion or propose amendments thereto, if that's the case. Of course, if committee members wish to introduce subjects that are not related to the subject under study, that may form the subject of a separate motion, with 48 hours' notice.

Mr. Lemieux, I turn the floor back over to you and ask you to state your intention to introduce an amendment or a change.

There's another point of order.

Mr. Petit.

[Daniel Petit, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Mr. Chairman, as Mr. Godin has been a member for a long time, perhaps he could help us. When a motion is under study, we can amend it, as far as I know.

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

He just said that.

[Daniel Petit, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

We're discussing and we may introduce amendments. I want to be sure I have clearly understood. We have the right to introduce amendments immediately. Each amendment will be considered on its merits.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Mr. Petit—

[Daniel Petit, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

We're discussing the main motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Mr. Petit, it's—

[Daniel Petit, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

From the start, we've been asking Mr. Godin for explanations and we've been talking solely with him. In reality, all the questions put to you are directed to Mr. Godin. You aren't in question; it's Mr. Godin who is. We're trying to find out from Mr. Godin what the scope of Ms. Verner's testimony will be. Will she be testifying solely on the plan as a whole? We're simply trying to limit the debate.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you.

That's more of a point of debate than a point of order. I'm going to hand back over to Mr. Lemieux. If other speakers wish to be added to the list, it is still possible to do so.

I now ask Mr. Lemieux to conclude his argument.

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

Well, no, I may not be ready to conclude.

Chair, this is how this committee works. When they're not happy, they just--

[Jean-Claude D'Amours, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

We're not even talking yet.

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

He says he's not talking. That's an enormous contradiction because he just spoke. It's incredible.

Mr. Chair, this is how this committee works. When everything goes the way of the opposition, they are quite happy to move things along--and let's be slamming the gavel and let's be defining the future order of business and let's continue on. As soon as there's any resistance to what it is they want to do or any debate--Mr. Godin, obviously, is not used to debate here on the committee--then all of a sudden there are points of order.

There he goes....

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Mr. Godin.

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

Briefly, we agree to ask him to stop talking aimlessly. Let him introduce a motion and we'll study it. I want to have nothing to do with Justin Trudeau. He can walk from the Atlantic to the Pacific; that's not why we're here this morning. I want to know whether the minister is coming to testify or not. If he isn't satisfied with that, let him introduce a motion and we'll study it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

That's not really a point of order, Mr. Godin.

There are a lot of interruptions. We've been debating for an hour. I'd like us to conclude the debate. We're going to break for a few minutes, if committee members consent to that. Otherwise, we'll continue.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Welcome back, everybody.

Okay, tout le monde, let's go.

I would ask members to resume debate.

We took a little break. I remind you that we're debating Mr. Godin's motion. There are four speakers on the list: Messrs. Rodriguez, Harvey, Bélanger and Simard.

But first, Mr. Lemieux, you have the floor.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I was in the process of saying that I don't understand the position of the Liberal members. It's very confusing. The Liberal Party seems to be very divided on its view of official languages.

I bring up the case of Justin Trudeau. I am suggesting that we should talk to him as a committee to figure this out, because he made some highly offensive statements about unilingual anglophones and unilingual francophones, and he did it in front of 400 professors in Edmonton. This was not some sort of quiet discussion he had with someone; this was very public, and he is an approved Liberal candidate.

As I said, it was carried across Canada. For example, it was in L'Acadie Nouvelle, out in your part of the woods. It was in La Presse. It was in the National Post. It was in Le Devoir. This news is across Canada, and yet here we sit with this confusion.

[Raymond Simard, Liberal, Saint Boniface, MB]

Mr. Chairman, in all the committees on which I've sat, the discussion has had to relate to the motion—