Official Languages Committee on June 10th, 2008

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Good morning and welcome to this 38^th meeting of the Standing Committee on Official Languages. Today is Tuesday, June 10. On the agenda, we have committee business, namely the consideration of two motions, followed by consideration of our draft report.

I'd like to inform you of the result of the request that had been made by members of the committee concerning the appearance of representatives of the Privy Council Office. A resolution to that effect had been adopted earlier. An invitation was sent to the Clerk of the Privy Council indicating that we wished to have him appear as part of our study of the language skills of exempted managers. Mr. Kevin Lynch informed us that he has a very heavy schedule and that the President of the Public Service Commission could come in his place. According to him and members of the Privy Council, she would be in a position to answer questions from members of this committee.

Mr. Rodriguez.

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

Mr. Chairman, I never heard a heavy schedule being used as an excuse. Anybody can claim to have a heavy schedule. There are ministers who are probably just as busy, or even more so. So that excuse seems to me a bit weak. I would repeat our invitation. We all have a heavy schedule; as you certainly must have, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you.

Mr. D'Amours.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

At other times, we even told certain witnesses that we were prepared to adapt to their schedule to facilitate things. If it's too complicated for him to appear during the committee's sitting hours, namely on a Tuesday or a Thursday, we could be flexible in order to allow him to appear. I think we'll be as flexible as need be so that people can come and appear before us as witnesses.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Mr. Nadeau.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

That Ms. Barrados appear is one thing, but it's not Ms. Barrados that we want to meet, although we always appreciate seeing her when that's on the schedule. We want to meet with the Privy Council; we're not talking about the same things. I reiterate the request and I agree that we should attempt to find a time that suits everyone.

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

I'd like to salute all our Conservative colleagues. Good morning.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you. I'll take that as a personal remark, Mr. Rodriguez.

The other point I'd like to inform you about is that, as you will recall, we also sent an invitation to Ministers Verner and Emerson to appear jointly in order to discuss the Olympic Games. We got the same response. In June, this will be difficult given the small number of meetings we have left before the summer adjournment. However, both ministers would like to appear before the committee in September.

Since some members of the committee have just joined us, let me repeat that with regard to the study on the language skills of exempted managers, we had called upon Mr. Lynch to appear. He has stated that he would prefer that we call upon a member of the Public Service Commission. I'd like to know the position of the two other political parties on this matter so that we can close that discussion.

In conclusion, it's been proposed that we repeat the invitation to the Clerk of the Privy Council in the framework of our study on exempted managers and indicate that we would be flexible with regard to scheduling. That's what's been proposed.

Mr. Godin.

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

I agree that the invitation be directed to Mr. Lynch. That's my position.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you.

Mr. Rodriguez.

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

A point of information, please, Mr. Chairman. What's been planned for the next two or three meetings?

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

I'll tell you quite candidly that we only have consideration of the draft report at this point.

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

That's all. Next week, we don't run the risk of... That's fine.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Are there any other questions or comments? If not, we will do what members of the committee have proposed. We will repeat our invitation to the clerk of the Privy Council to appear in the framework of our study on the language skills of exempted managers, and express that we are willing to be flexible in terms of scheduling. Thank you.

Now we could go on to the first motion which is being moved by Mr. Jean-Claude D'Amours.

Mr. D'Amours.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

As I have indicated during the last meeting of the Standing Committee on Official Languages, I'm moving a motion which is quite clear, generally speaking. Given everything that's going on right now among television broadcasters, we note that some of them are not in a position to offer French language services in all regions of the country. We also know that some television networks are also in a precarious financial situation. Therefore, I believe it would be appropriate to invite the consortium that will be presenting the Olympics on television to come and explain their plan of action clearly, mainly with regard to minority communities throughout the country. We'd like to know what their plan B is. I have asked this question in the past, mainly, in the event that TQS's situation is even more precarious in 2010 than it is today, what is the consortium's plan B to offer more? Right now, we see that there are players missing and even more to be missing in the future. I think it's important for them to come and present, explain and clarify their future plan in the event that there are additional problems.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you.

Are there any questions or comments on the motion?

Mr. Godin.

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

I agree with this proposal, but I think that we should go even further. I'd like to propose an amendment to this motion and add that Radio-Canada should be invited afterwards. Otherwise, if we wait until we've met with this group, and once we've heard what they have to say, we could... I think we should meet them before we meet the two ministers, because they don't seem in any hurry to come here. Similarly, perhaps we should meet CTV, which obtained the contract, and then decide whether we should meet Radio-Canada/CBC before meeting the ministers. That would close the loop. We would have met with people from the media and we could ask the ministers what they're going to do if the Games are not broadcast in certain regions of the country, and ask them what the government's responsibility is in this regard. That's why I support Mr. D'Amours's motion. We would thus have a complete portrait of everything that happened. We've already met the IOC, we're meeting with the broadcasters' group and then we could meet with the ministers so that they can explain what they're going to do.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Godin.

Mr. Lemieux.

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

I think that Mr. D'Amours' motion is certainly a good one, because we received the VANOC which clearly explained not being in charge of the contract. The IOC is completely in charge of the contract. I would like to invite the key stakeholders and focus on the issue which is to find out what they are going to do. They got the contract. What will they do to make sure that the broadcasting really extends to francophones everywhere in Canada?

I do not want to adopt this amendment, because the CBC and Radio-Canada have nothing to do with it, they did not get the contract, and that will be their alibi. Mr. Godin put many questions to VANOC and to someone else—I do not remember exactly who it was—but they explained that this was not their contract and that they could not do anything because the contract was concluded by the IOC. Consequently, if the committee meets the people from the CBC to put some pressure on them, they will want to know what it is that we do not understand. They did not get the contract, therefore they have no responsibility for broadcasting the Olympic Games in French. Therefore, in my opinion, we would do better to focus on the crucial issue, by asking the companies that got the contract what they will do to make sure that the Games will be properly broadcast for francophones everywhere in Canada. The CBC is not involved, as its representatives will tell us.

Therefore, I support the motion but I oppose the amendment.

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

I thought about tabling an amendment, but I have not yet done so officially.

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

Excuse me, Mr. Godin.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Mr. Godin, this helps me understand what you mean. You are raising this as a point of discussion at this point in time.

We will continue in the same order with Mr. Petit, Mr. Rodriguez and Mr. D'Amours.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. D'Amours tabled a good motion. We should congratulate them from time to time, because they do a good job. However, there is a potential problem. TQS is now before Quebec's Superior Court to define whether it will offer news services, etc. I agree that we should invite representatives from TQS, but we should know what the Superior Court's decision will be, when the station will be redefined. If we had received representatives from TQS in a much stabler period of time, we could have simply ask them questions about how they intend to broadcast the 2010 Olympic Games, etc. However, if the Superior Court rejects TQS's requests, the network will no longer exist. The questioning would have to be haphazard, if not non existent, because we will not have anything more to do with TQS.

I would support Mr. Godin's favourable amendment, although it has not yet been tabled, because Mr. Godin is an expert in official languages. Once we have the Superior Court's decision, if TQS no longer exists, it would be interesting to invite Radio-Canada. It might be the only company that can replace TQS at a moment's notice, because it is not an easy thing to do. Perhaps we should play with what Mr. Godin said and make it an amendment. However, I would not separate the issues. First, I would make sure that we find out the date on which the TQS decision will be handed down. If the Remstar group cannot keep TQS, under the Bankruptcy Act, there will be a legal void. We will be in a bad situation. Then, we should also have an opportunity to ask them questions and see whether Mr. Godin's proposal could be considered, thus allowing Radio-Canada to intervene. This is an excellent proposal, but we should find the right timing and not go against court decisions. If we did this, it would be an infringement of the legislative branch on the legal branch. However, our system does not allow this kind of infringement.

This is a problem that could well arise. I would not want to hold a meeting for nothing. Mr. D'Amours's time is precious as is mine. I would like things to go smoothly.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Petit.

Mr. Rodriguez.