Official Languages Committee on Dec. 11th, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Please keep the BlackBerry away from the sound system.

Mr. Rodriguez.

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

Mr. Chairman, beside my colleagues most eloquent arguments, we must note that Mr. Harvey made a false statement. The motion is based on false premises. I know that the word “lying” is not allowed in this place, but he made a false statement. According to him, the committee is asking the government not to table a report. However, the committee never said that. It simply did not request a report. That is not the same. Do you understand the nuance?

[A member]

I do not understand it.

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

The committee did not ask the government to table a report, but it never said that it did not want the government to present one. This is a basic nuance. To uphold the contrary will almost amount to lying, even if I cannot use this term.

[Raymond Gravel, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Nevertheless, it is a very subtle nuance.

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

No, it is not. There is a basic difference. It is based on false premises. It is not true.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Rodriguez.

Mr. Petit, do you have any comments about this? Afterward, we will break for a few minutes.

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

I would simply like to clarify this point. Perhaps you can do it during the break.

As the Chair, you quoted section 109, which states the following:

109. within 120 days of the presentation of a report from a standing or special committee, the government shall, upon the request of the committee, table a comprehensive response thereto, and when such a response has been requested, no motion for the concurrence in the report may be proposed [...]

Did we not adopt the report earlier? Do we have to speak before the House? I want to know whether the 120 day timeline applies to the committee or to Parliament. I would like a clarification. I do not understand why Mr. Godin, who has been here since 1999, is incapable of advising us. He sat on many committees. I am trying to follow him, but I cannot. If he is confused, imagine how confused we must be, as we have been sitting only for a few years. He is a full member of the committee, he should help us.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Your question is relevant, sir.

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

We are just part-time members, that is all.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Your question is relevant, Mr. Petit. I will ask the clerk to clarify this point for the committee.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Mr. Graeme Truelove]

If the committee wants a response from the government, it means that the report cannot be adopted by the House before the expiration of the 120 day period. However, this does not mean that the committee cannot adopt it, because it is already done.

Was that your question? Perhaps I did not understand it properly.

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

Do the words “no motion” apply to us, or to Parliament? This is not clear. I just want some clarification.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Mr. Petit, as I understand it this morning, it means that if the government is asked to respond, the House cannot adopt the report before the government has received its response.

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Please tell me the difference between tabling a report and adopting a report. I think that this is the point that Mr. Petit wants clarified.

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

I follow you. It was up to Mr. Godin to tell us that. He has been here since 1999.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

All right.

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

He is just a part of the furniture.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Let us break for a few minutes.

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

I am sorry, but I told you that. [Editor's Note: technical difficulty]

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Did you get your clarification?

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

Yes, it is all right. Mr. Godin, who is our expert and the senior member of our Official Languages committee—he has been here since 1999—explained it to me.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

All right, let us try to carry on with our work. The first motion made this morning, and which the committee rejected, wanted to find out whether the committee agreed to ask for a report.

Let me explain why, in my opinion, the motion is in order. It is in order because it is an addendum to the report. Thus, instead of asking the government for a response, the motion asks the committee to append an addendum stating that it is not asking the government for a response. Therefore, the motion is in order. I am ready to hear comments, if there are any. Otherwise, we can call a division.

Mr. Nadeau.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

I want a point of information. To reopen the report...

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

We are not reopening the report. Let me make this clear: we are not touching the content of the report. It has been adopted. This is an addendum, similar to one which consists in asking the government to respond. Here, we are simply saying that we are not asking the government to respond. We would append this to the report.