Official Languages Committee on May 25th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Dorion.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

But--

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Please be brief, Minister.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

It's not impossible to impose this bill that Monsieur Godin has put forward, but let me just say this, and it's an important point. I tried to explain as well as I could in French, but I might have a little more luck in English.

This way of selecting Supreme Court judges, by having a filter of language on it, is something that does bother and concern me. As someone who strives to be as bilingual as I can be--I'm not perfectly bilingual. As you've said, you struggle in English; from time to time I struggle in French as well. But the idea of having nominees for the Supreme Court come before the justice committee to talk about their possible role on the Supreme Court, and having members of the committee saying to a possible nominee to the Supreme Court, in quite an Americanized fashion, by the way, “Say a little something in French”, and then listening to them and saying, “Not enough; you can't be on the Supreme Court”--that is not what Canada is supposed to be about. That is not why we have an Official Languages Act and that's not what the process should be about.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Having this filter where you have individual members of Parliament poking fun at or having some kind of angle where you would try to criticize people based on their capacity to speak English or French is divisive, it's not in the best interests of this country, and it will pit one part of this country against the other, based on language. I suspect that's exactly why it has the full-throated support of the Bloc québécois.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much, Mr. Dorion.

We will now begin our fifth and final round. Everyone will have three minutes.

Mr. Coderre, could you begin the final round?

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

The Minister is lucky that I only have three minutes.

Mr. Chairman, I am not a sovereignist. I am bilingual and proud of it. I just heard the Minister of Canadian Heritage talk about discrimination and division, which is not worthy of the office he holds. I couldn't care less whether the NDP wants to win more seats in Montreal. However, I do not want a Francophone who comes before the Supreme Court, the highest court in the land, not to be entitled to natural justice, because of a language and comprehension problem. If that were the case, there would be a problem in this country. You say that the system has worked well for 143 years. If that is so, one may wonder why the Official Languages Act was passed 40 years go. It is exactly the same philosophy. Minister, I find it quite unpleasant to hear this kind of argument—that the sovereignists are trying to divide the country and that we should not support this bill for that reason.

Prior to prorogation, I tabled a private member's bill aimed at ensuring that judges would be able to understand the two official languages. I have been fighting for my country for 25 years now and, as a Quebecker, working to be respected as a Francophone for 25 years.

It seems to me that you are showing the same sensitivity on official language matters as you did when you said that the Vancouver Canucks were the only hockey team that could represent Canada.

But seriously, I note that there is a consensus in the National Assembly. We should also consider what Justice Claire L'Heureux-Dubé said. You talked a lot about John Major, but why not talk about Claire L'Heureux-Dubé, who is apolitical, and who was an extraordinary lady at the Supreme Court. She knows that when judges are deliberating on a case, there is no translation; the discussion occurs among judges alone. And if a judge does not have the sensitivity or technical ability to defend the viewpoint of a Francophone, for example, we will not meet the goal of ensuring that justice is done when a Francophone comes before the Supreme Court.

Do you not think that, rather than talking about discrimination and division, we should be making a distinction between someone who can understand the two official languages and the idea of requiring that a person be able to express himself in both official languages? There is a very important difference between the two, which means that Francophones will not feel like second-class citizens.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

No one should feel like a second-class citizen. Everyone must be respected at the Supreme Court, including Beverley McLachlin, who, if this bill were to pass--

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

She speaks very good French now.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

She is bilingual now, but she would not have been appointed to the Supreme Court in 1989 had this bill passed previously, something that would not have been in the best interests of Canada—there is no doubt about that.

When you were in office for 13 years, you never proposed legislation like this, because you knew full well that it was not in Canada's interests.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

The changes that have occurred in Canada are such that there is a need to ensure that Francophones have rights that are equivalent to those of Anglophones. It is perfectly natural for change to occur and that is the reason why the Official Languages Act was passed 40 years ago.

At that time, we could have said that for 100 years, the system had worked well. In that case, we should not have passed the Official Languages Act.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

I would just like to say, Mr. Coderre--

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Excuse me, Minister--

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

We are both federalists. Look at the energy and negativity between you and me, two federalists who are in favour of Canada's official languages and of bilingual institutions. That is the game Thomas Mulcair is playing with the Bloc Québécois.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Forget about Thomas Mulcair. The NDP won't win more seats in Montreal; that's where I'm from.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

If we want to stay within the two-hour limit for the meeting, we will have to try and keep everyone to three minutes.

Mr. Dorion, would you like to add something? You have three minutes.

[Jean Dorion, Bloc, Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC]

Yes, of course. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Minister, in the final analysis, by admitting that Canadian society is not capable of providing Supreme Court justices that all speak French—in practice, that is what you are saying—are you not acknowledging that Canada's evolution is always against French?

In other words, we have Supreme Court justices who all speak English and who are all able to understand arguments in English, but some of them are not able to understand the subtleties of arguments made in French. The result, obviously—as we can easily surmise—is that the Court generally operates in English and that there are two official languages according to the way things usually work—the Canadian way, which means that we have English and simultaneous translation. Are we not talking about a situation which, in actual fact, is unlikely to improve? At the time of Confederation, more than one third of Canada's population was French-speaking, whereas now it is 22% and is declining more quickly—indeed, at an ever-increasing rate for several decades now.

If, with a Francophone population of 22%—which is already not that high—we are unable to have judges at the Supreme Court who speak French, I doubt that 5, 10 or 20 years from now, when the Francophone population has declined to 15% or 18%, we will be able to introduce a similar requirement.

Does that mean that we, Quebeckers, will forever more be second-class citizens, as other members of this Committee have already said? Do you not think that a Quebec that had its own government and its own courts could better serve its citizens in their mother tongue? In that scenario, all judges, up to the very highest level, would speak fluent French.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

I think we should be addressing these concerns the other way around. We should be helping organizations on the ground, helping new Canadians learn Canada's two official languages and helping our young people. We should not be starting with a bill like this which, in my opinion, is extremely divisive. I note that every newspaper in the country is saying that it is not in the interests either of the institution, or of official languages, to pass a bill like this.

There should never be a country where people have the sense that their mother tongue makes them second-class citizens. We should never reach that point. That is why our government has made a commitment, through the Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality, to help grassroots organizations, help young people, help our schools and celebrate Francophone culture and the French fact across the country. That is why we are making these commitments.

It is certainly not in the best interests of Francophones; there are more than 2 million Francophones outside Quebec--

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

--and it is certainly not in their interests that Quebec be an independent republic in Canada.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

It is in the interest of all Canadians and all Francophones in Canada that we remain united.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much, Mr. Dorion.

We will move on now to Mr. Gravelle.

[Claude Gravelle, NDP, Nickel Belt, ON]

Minister, you referred to a lot of English-language newspapers.

Are you prepared to name some French-language newspapers? I have read the French-language newspapers and I do not see the same sort of thing as in the English-language papers? Have you read the French-language papers?