Official Languages Committee on June 10th, 2008

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

Mr. Chairman, I often hear people say that we cannot discuss an issue because it is before the courts. That is certainly not the case here.

Let's take a step back, Mr. Chairman. A call for tenders was issued and a consortium won. The Standing Committee on Official Languages asked a number of questions. CBC/Radio-Canada lost and is not in the picture; it refused outright. When the CTV, TQS and RDS networks won the call for tenders, they asked Radio-Canada to cover certain regions. But the corporation refused saying that if it did not obtain the entire contract, the undertaking would not be profitable and it was not at all interested.

We met with Radio-Canada and I met with the president of RDS at the time, and that is the end of it. A consortium won the bid and we must deal with that consortium, regardless of the decision that would be brought down. We will see what follow-up is required. We must ask questions and we cannot wait to see what is going to happen. We have no control over the legal process, and we do not know how long that will take.

Let's call the members of the consortium before the committee. Mr. Lemieux is right. It does not deal with the negotiations or anything else, but it is a matter of determining how the consortium will deliver services in French in all regions of the country.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you.

Mr. D'Amours.

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

Mr. Chairman, let's not get caught up in details. The consortium has decided to sign agreements with television stations. The consortium was my plan B. If something were to happen to TSQ, for example, what would the consortium's plan B be? Once it has appeared before our committee to share with us its intentions, the consortium will also have to tell us what its plan B is. A consortium of that size is surely aware of its plan B, in the event of a crisis.

That way, we would have guarantees. If ever they did not respect their promises, we would have good arguments. Let's not worry about what the Superior Court will decide. The consortium must tell us what it intends to do. Then it will have to keep its promises.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. D'Amours.

Mr. Nadeau.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

The bulk of the topic has been covered, Mr. Chairman. A contract was in fact awarded. The situation TQS ends up in is not what we want to talk about, regardless of whether it is before the Quebec Superior Court or the CRTC. The consortium includes a number of television stations. A contract was signed. As for us, we want to ensure that the broadcast in French will cover 100% of the country, so that all French-speaking citizens, in Quebec, in Acadia or elsewhere, have access to it in their own language.

The issue of Radio-Canada/CBC is different. I think we should judge the outcome of the meeting that we will have, the discussions that we will have. If we decide that we are not satisfied with plan B, we may want to know where the evaluation is at as regards the news, the way the news will be reported at CBC, since there will be coverage, I assume. That is another important aspect, but the main issue is the Olympic Games as such, and the broadcasting of the Games by the consortium. I do not think we need to concern ourselves with the situation at TQS, which is a separate issue.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

You have the last word, Mr. Lebel.

[Denis Lebel, Conservative, Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I agree with Mr. Lemieux and Mr. Rodriguez. I would just like to add a short comment. We must ensure that both official languages are available in the country for all Canadians who want to have access to the Olympic Games. I understand that Mr. Nadeau is talking about the French fact, but as the Committee on Official Languages, that is our duty. If anglophones in Quebec also want access to the Olympic Games, they must be able to have access to them. That is our role.

Mr. Nadeau just said that our role was to ensure that francophones have access to the broadcasts. That is accurate, so I agree. It is all up to the consortium, and it is the consortium that will have to hold negotiations to meet the objective we all agree on.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Lebel.

Mr. Godin.

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

We do have guarantees that CTV will transmit the broadcast by cable, satellite, and there will be transmissions by antenna. So that covers all of Canada. That is perhaps why Mr. Nadeau raised the issue, as we are always inclined to talk about francophones, but in this case, the Olympic Games are already completely covered. The issue is whether or not francophones will have access to broadcasts in French. There would appear to be some 40 000 homes that are not covered by CTV and the group that was selected.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

If committee members are ready, we could vote on the motion.

(Motion agreed to unanimously)

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

We will now suspend the meeting for a few moments to go in camera and to give Mr. Nadeau some time to present his motion on a topic that will be dealt with in camera.

[Proceedings continue in camera]

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

The meeting is once again public.

Mr. Nadeau, could you please read your motion?

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

With pleasure, Mr. Chairman.

That the Standing Committee on Official Languages write to the Minister of Canadian Heritage, the Status of Women and Official Languages and Minister for La Francophonie, Josée Verner, to inquire as to how her department intends to use the $30 million announced in the March 2007 budget to help official language minority communities.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you.

Are there any questions or comments on the motion?

Mr. Lemieux.

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

I don't have a problem with the motion, but I would like to ask some questions on the process that was followed.

The subcommittee discusses many things, but it cannot make decisions for the committee. Proposals from meetings of the subcommittee must be presented to members of our committee, who accept or reject them. Each member must have an opportunity to discuss a report from the subcommittee. If we adopt it, we can continue our work, and the clerk can do his work. I missed a few meetings, and I would like to know if the committee discussed this initiative from the subcommittee.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

This is the first time the motion has been discussed in the presence of all committee members, Mr. Lemieux.

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

But I don't know how the idea came about within the subcommittee. Was it seen as a motion, or simply an idea? An initiative cannot be undertaken directly without prior approval of the full committee.

Normally, when the subcommittee holds a meeting and prepares a report, motions or key information are presented to members of the committee, who then have an opportunity to adopt or reject the report. As I said, I don't have a problem with the motion, but I would like to ensure that the required process is followed and that the subcommittee is not making decisions without the full committee being aware of them.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Your point is well taken. The clerk will validate the process, to ensure decisions of the committee are ratified by all committee members. That seems logical to me, in principle.

Are there any questions or comments on the motion or the procedures? I have Mr. Nadeau and Mr. Godin on my list.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

The list of fundamentals can be verified. And the motion was publicly tabled in the proper manner in today's committee meeting. Things are crystal clear, in my opinion. So all that remains to be done is to vote for or against the proposal. The proposal was explained in an in-camera meeting and has now been made public.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you.

Mr. Godin.

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

Various issues like this one can be discussed by the steering committee. The motion in question was discussed. I agree with Mr. Lemieux when he says that the full committee needs to reach a decision. And that is exactly what we are going to do. Mr. Nadeau did not come here and say that a decision was reached regarding his motion and that it was now time to move it. The majority of members of this committee will need to make a decision. I think that the rules have been followed to the letter here.

Quite often in the past we've seen steering committees where parties move motions in public while others do so in camera. In this particular case, we're prepared to do so in public. A decision will be reached and everyone will have an opportunity to express a preference. Nothing has been done behind the committee's back and the steering committee has not made any decision. We are going to agree to, or defeat, a motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you.

The clerk has just informed me that the subcommittee is only empowered to do what the standing committee authorizes it to do.

The subcommittee, which was struck by the standing committee is the steering committee. The steering committee deals with planning and the direction the standing committee may wish to take, but these decisions have to be approved by the standing committee.

Mr. Lemieux.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We will certainly vote on the motion. Having said that, I would like to point out that the proper procedure has not been followed. In fact, Mr. Nadeau indicated that we wanted to send a letter, but that it was not sent. We expected the letter to be sent, but the full committee didn't reach a decision on that.

Now, there is a motion and we're going to vote on this motion, that is not a problem. However, I would like to be sure that the correct procedure is being followed. I would also like to point out that it was not followed in this case because there was a decision to send the letter without the committee's knowledge.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much, Mr. Lemieux.

Are we ready to vote on the motion?

[Motion carried unanimously.]

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you. We really have an excellent committee, the best on the Hill.

I'll give you the floor, Mr. Nadeau, but first we will suspend the meeting, so we can get back to the report.