Official Languages Committee on March 13th, 2008

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order on rules.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Go ahead.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Parliamentary committees are supposed to follow parliamentary convention. Convention states that remarks, comments, and questions are to be directed to the chair of the committee in the interests of ensuring detached discourse. So if we're going to have discussions here, questions are supposed to be directed to you, not to other members of the committee—

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

Through him.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

—or to the witnesses themselves.

So I would suggest that all the members on this committee follow convention and direct their remarks and questions to the chair. If they have questions for other members of the committee, they should direct them through the chair to the other members of the committee.

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

That's what I did.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chong, for reminding us of the basic rules of procedure for a committee.

I think it would be best for everyone if we allowed Mr. Rodriguez to finish his intervention. If other committee members wish to speak, just let me know. If people want to raise certain issues, we will put their names down on the speaker's list.

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

I would like to thank Mr. Chong for reminding us of the Standing Orders. I would also like to say that I had put my question to Mr. Lemieux through the chair. I even gave a signal and I said that my question was for Mr. Lemieux, through the chair. I got my clarification.

This leads me to point out a flagrant contradiction, Mr. Chairman, in what Mr. Lemieux said. Indeed, on the one hand, he told us that the subcommittee should not have invited Mr. Lord, because it made a decision without first consulting the main committee. On the other hand, he told us that we should have heard from a witness who had been invited by that same subcommittee. So according to Mr. Lemieux, we did not have the right to invite Mr. Lord, but we did have the right to invite someone from Statistics Canada, whom we should have heard from. And then Mr. Lemieux blames us for not having listened. This is a double standard: either the committee can go ahead, or it cannot. Mr. Lemieux should be more consistent and honest in what he says.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Rodriguez.

I have on my list Mr. Bélanger, Mr. Harvey, Mr. Lemieux and Mr. Nadeau. I would also remind committee members that we have to discuss another motion.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chairman. I would like to know whether one of us must move discussion of the next motion or whether this will happen automatically, since it is on the agenda.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Mr. Nadeau, we normally follow the agenda. Since we have just adopted the motion, normally someone would have to move the second motion for discussion, and then we would be productive by voting on that motion.

It is Mr. Bélanger's turn. Mr. Bélanger, do you wish to debate the motion?

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Chairman, I have a suggestion. In order to make up for the time we lost on Tuesday, I would invite you to organize an extra meeting, if that is the will of the committee. You can check with your colleagues. As for us, we certainly want to make up for that lost meeting.

Regarding the motion to ensure that all invitations are sent out in both official languages, it is before you. I would be pleased to move the motion for a vote and then we can immediately proceed with hearing this morning's witness.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Bélanger. I have taken note of your suggestion.

As for the motion, it reads as follows:

That all written correspondence from the Standing Committee on Official Languages, including requests to appear, be written in the language of the recipient and, in case of doubt, in both languages.

Are there any questions or comments with regard to the motion?

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

Yes, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Mr. Harvey, we are listening.

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

I was on the list of speakers before we held the first vote. I had things to say about that. But you went ahead with the vote and now we have moved on to another issue which has nothing to do with what we were discussing before. What's going on?

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

I received unanimous consent to put the first motion to a vote. On my list I have the names of Mr. Harvey, Mr. Lemieux and Mr. Nadeau. If committee members wish, I can follow the list of speakers.

Go ahead, Mr. Harvey, you're up next on the list. Your timing is good.

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

Our colleagues said something about matters which happened in camera, and then people started speaking freely about what had been said in camera. Are we saying things about some people? They seem to have a selective memory with regard to what was said behind closed doors: when what they said behind closed doors is repeated, they don't quite see things the same way. So it seems there is a double standard. I will respect what was said in camera and will not repeat the dumb things the opposition parties said.

Further, you may remember that at our last meeting, we discussed procedure at length and the fact that we could not change or upset a schedule which had been published and agreed to by all parties—

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

I have a point of order, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

One moment, Mr. Harvey.

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

This won't be a point of order, it will just be another thing to discuss.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Mr. Godin would like to make a point of order.

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

I would respectfully like to make a point of order. We have just agreed to debate a motion requiring that correspondence be sent in both languages. If we are to have a discussion, it must be on the motion. We cannot be seized of a motion and then talk about other vague issues. I believe we should debate the motion. If anyone would like to speak on anything else, they can do so after.

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

But I had raised my hand long before that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

I accept your point of order. Indeed, we are discussing the motion. The three points on the agenda are the following: the motion on Mr. Lord, the motion on the language of correspondence, which we are discussing now, and then we will move on to committee business and the suggested agenda.

Mr. Harvey, would you like to conclude by speaking to the motion?