Evidence of meeting #1 for Official Languages in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney
I take it that you wish to amend the motion. In order to do that, you are moving the amendment that you are distributing to us. That will be the basis for our discussion, which will enable us to move forward.
Would you like to explain your amendment?
Conservative
Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB
On the first round, all parties would be allowed to take the floor and to ask questions.
On the second round, it would continue—
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney
Excuse me. Do you want us to suspend the meeting for five minutes? Committee members are talking and there is a lot of—
I would ask committee members to pay attention to the discussion we're having. If the committee wishes to suspend the meeting for five minutes in order to discuss things, that can be done. Otherwise, I would encourage you to pay attention to the comments.
Mrs. Glover, you have the floor.
Conservative
Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB
Thank you very much. On the first round, all parties would have a chance to speak. On the second round also. According to what we are presenting, all other committee members present will have a chance to ask one question. Then, we will go to the third round. You can see that all parties would again have a chance to take the floor.
I'm sorry, on the second round, it's so everyone will have a chance to take the floor. On the third round, all parties would have the chance to speak.
I discussed this with someone who told me it was rare for there to be a fourth round. I'm just putting this out for discussion.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney
According to your amendment, Mrs. Glover, on the first round, all four political parties would have a turn. On the second round, you are proposing that all committee members be given a chance to take the floor.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney
Three members of this committee are from the Liberal Party. Two are from the Bloc, and there is one member from the NDP. So, in the first two rounds, all members would have a turn.
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney
On the third round, it would alternate between opposition parties and the government, starting with the Official Opposition.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney
You are making this an amendment to the motion.
I am now willing to entertain comments on this amendment.
Mr. Rodriguez, you have the floor.
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
With all due respect, I don't think we'll get very far with this because there are eight opportunities to speak. It's as if the committee were to become the Standing Conservative Committee on Official Languages. You have eight opportunities to speak. As I said before, it's not by individual, it's by party. I would really like everyone to have a chance to speak, but... Perhaps we can find a compromise, but in this case, I don't see how this would be possible, because we do have to be realistic. Despite the number of members who make up the minority, the government is still a minority. That has to be reflected within this committee.
I think this would give the Conservatives a huge predominance, with eight opportunities to speak in three rounds. In my opinion, that's unacceptable. I don't think we can agree to that, Mr. Chairman. We're sorry. We'll have to look for some other way of doing things.
Bloc
Richard Nadeau Bloc Gatineau, QC
For all the same reasons, we are going to vote against this amendment, Mr. Chairman.
NDP
Conservative
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
We've had this discussion before, especially on the Official Languages Committee. True, there are other committees with different procedures, but on the Official Languages Committee, we're talking about our language rights in Canada. I think the participation of political parties is good. In the past, it was good. We had some bad experiences last year or two years ago, but I think it worked. There has always been some flexibility when the Conservative government came and asked, if we should happen not to make it to the end... Normally we make it to the end, if you will recall. But when we were asked if a member could ask a question, we always did our best to allow that to happen.
I am going to vote against this amendment. Even when we had a majority government, the procedure of the Official Languages Committee has always been the same.
Thank you.
Conservative
Daniel Petit Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Under the former procedure, which I believe we followed, the Conservative Party often didn't get a chance to talk. Under the former procedure, it's one, two, three, four. We're repeating that procedure, one, two, three, four. That way, there will always be two Conservatives who won't get a chance to speak, because we all know the time is limited. That's why I would ask everyone to think this over carefully. We are the party that makes up a minority government, that is true, but we are here all the same. The true opposition is the Liberals, followed by the second and third largest opposition parties. I understand what Mr. Godin wants, I know he's a pillar of this committee, he's a feature of the committee. He is very hard-working and I admire his work, but we're talking here about my right to speak.
The last time I attended a committee meeting, in the last session, I was almost never able to speak. Why? Because I was always the fourth. That doesn't work. It cannot work any longer. We have to find a compromise. The proposed compromise respects the true opposition and us. If they want to trade their speaking time with other opposition parties, that's their business, but what we're trying to get across is that they are the true opposition. They represent the most Canadians, so they are the true opposition. That is what I wanted to say. If we keep the old procedure, two committee members, in this case us, we'll not be allowed to speak.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney
This morning, you're not the fourth, you're the fifth. Thank you, Mr. Petit, for your intervention.
Mrs. Boucher.
Conservative
Sylvie Boucher Conservative Beauport—Limoilou, QC
You all know that as usual, I will be quite honest with you. I remember how difficult I found this committee when I was Parliamentary Secretary for Official Languages, because there was a lot of partisanship on all sides. I didn't say there was more on one side then on the other; it came from all parties. On the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, despite some divisions, we tried to work together to create a committee that, without being apolitical, got along well. I do understand that she is a new member of Parliament and would like everyone to be able to speak. And that's understandable, because this is a very emotional file. It is extremely emotional, Yvon, you know it, on all sides. Personally, I want things to work well on this committee. I didn't experience it last year, but I did get some unofficial feedback from here and there, from all parties. I think we need to set this up all together so that everyone has an opportunity to speak, out of respect for individuals and for the French language. We are all fighting for the same thing here.
If we can manage to do that, I hope it goes well. We are adults advocating for Canadians and Quebeckers. We are advocating on behalf of the French language. I want this to be done respectfully, because I sat on this committee for a year and never wanted to come back. Now, I'm back, so I want things to go smoothly.
February 5th, 2009 / 9:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney
Thank you, Mrs. Boucher.
I already note some changes. I am going to hear a few more comments on this to see if there is any movement.
Mr. Godin.