Evidence of meeting #18 for Official Languages in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was bilingual.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Jean-Claude D'Amours Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
That means that in the first few years, the money that was budgeted may not have been completely spent.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic Policy, Planning and Corporate Affairs, Department of Canadian Heritage
No, that is not the case. We knew we would not receive approval in time, so the money was spread over the four following years.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic Policy, Planning and Corporate Affairs, Department of Canadian Heritage
Yes.
Liberal
Jean-Claude D'Amours Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
As you mentioned, Mr. Sobrino, it took a certain amount of time to receive the necessary approvals. This question should perhaps be addressed to you, Minister, or to Cabinet. Since it was known that the Dion plan on official languages would be terminated after five years and would need to be renewed, why did it take so long to move ahead with the specific programs and projects needed in official language minority communities? For several years, you boasted about the fact that you were going to bring someone in to carry out needs assessments behind close doors all across the country. And yet when the time came to inject that funding for the year in question, it was impossible to obtain the necessary approvals, which meant that the money had to be carried over into the future. I understand that this money may be available in future, but the money was not actually available when it was needed.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
The money was available, but as you know, this is a five-year commitment. We held consultations and added new money. Our commitment to official languages was enhanced by more than 20%. The money was spent.
Therefore, we increased funding for education, compared to what was provided for under your plan. It budgeted $381 million, whereas we actually invested $429 million.
Liberal
Jean-Claude D'Amours Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
Minister, would you like us to list the budgets that were cut or no longer exist?
Liberal
Jean-Claude D'Amours Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
It would be interesting to make that comparison.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
They were not cut. There was a renewal. We also added more than 20% to Canada's official languages budget. In addition, we began acting on those commitments immediately.
Liberal
Liberal
Jean-Claude D'Amours Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
--and it then went down to $182 million, that is a net decrease, Minister. It is not a 20% increase.
Conservative
Conservative
Sylvie Boucher Conservative Beauport—Limoilou, QC
Good morning, Minister. I would like to wish everyone a good morning and welcome you all to this great Committee.
We have talked about a lot of things. In your opening statement, Minister, you said that culture plays a very important role in supporting the vitality of official language minority communities. You also mentioned the economic side of culture.
I would like to hear more from you on that and what culture represents, in economic terms, for the official language minority communities.
Conservative
James Moore Conservative Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC
Culture is a key component for these communities. As you know, the Vancouver 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games were a great moment for the Francophone communities in my province of British Columbia. For them, it was an opportunity to underscore the fact that there is a truly vibrant and proud Francophone community in British Columbia. We invested in developing the Place de la Francophonie for the duration of the Vancouver Olympic Games. It was something very special. There were Francophone artists there from every region of Canada. There were Franco-Ontarians, artists from Quebec, Acadians, and so on. People from across the country were there to celebrate the Francophone fact in Canada.
I would just like to say that there were a number of demonstrations during the last election campaign and tell you where the money was reinvested. There were ineffective programs that were not helping the artists and were not helping us keep our promises, in terms of meeting the needs of Francophone artists and communities across the country. So, what exactly did we do about that? Well, we did not reduce funding for the arts in Canada by even a single penny. We reinvested that money in programming that would guarantee that the arts and culture are well respected and positioned for the future. One form of support was the creation of the Place de la Francophonie during the Vancouver Olympic and Paralympic Games.
I know that Bloc MPs were in attendance during the Olympic Games and were singing and dancing in the streets during Yann Perreau's show. The federal government invested money so that Yann Perreau could be in Vancouver and so that Bloc members of Parliament could dance in the streets to the sounds of Francophone music in Vancouver. They spoke out against that investment during the election campaign, but there you have the results. We respected our artists, our commitments and the Francophone fact across the country.
That is very important. When I convene meetings in the regions of Canada, the importance of the arts and culture is very evident. It is closely connected to the official languages, because this is not only a way of protecting and speaking French; it is also a way of celebrating and talking about our heritage, about the future and the difficulties of the past, and of adding some energy to the historic importance of the official languages of Canada in the regions. That is why we are investing in arts and culture at a level never seen before in this country.
As I said previously, the Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality has a new component. There is cultural content now that did not exist under the Culture Development Fund. Mr. Dion's old plan did not earmark a penny for it, whereas our government is now investing $14 million in book translation. We are talking about books in our libraries and in the schools. We are talking about the importance of schools. I am sure that Mr. Gravelle can see that in his own region. It is essential that books that are part of the new Francophone literature be available, so that young people can learn French. We have a new $5 million program in place, whereas Mr. Dion's old program did not budget anything for that.
These are key components when it comes to protecting, respecting and properly celebrating Canada's official languages.
Conservative
Sylvie Boucher Conservative Beauport—Limoilou, QC
Thank you very much, Minister.
Coming from Quebec, we hear very little about Francophone artists outside Quebec. So, I think it is very important to showcase them. Indeed, there are some very good ones in New Brunswick and in Saskatchewan as well.
Conservative
Sylvie Boucher Conservative Beauport—Limoilou, QC
There is Wilfred Le Bouthillier. And it is a well-known fact that Roch Voisine is not a Quebecker.
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney
Thank you, Ms. Boucher.
We are going to complete our third round with Mr. Dorion.
Welcome to the Committee.
Bloc
Jean Dorion Bloc Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Minister, thank you for being here today.
I would like to come back to comments you made previously in front of this Committee, and which were reported to me, regarding the bill that aims to ensure that all Supreme Court justices can speak both official languages, French and English. We have already begun to study it in the House and we will be continuing to do so later. In your opinion, legislation such as this would divide the country.
Others have raised the objection that this bill would prevent some extremely well-qualified candidates from ever being appointed to the Supreme Court.
Of course, the possibility of people acceding to senior positions may be an important point, but do you not think that litigants should take priority? When someone is making his case in front of a court and the judge requires simultaneous translation, or when a lawyer is arguing an extremely subtle and complex case in front of a judge who is unable to grasp all the subtleties of the written arguments presented to him, do you not see that as a very major handicap for a litigant?
We know that the unequal treatment—as is the case here and everywhere—is always in the same direction—in other words, it is always Anglophones who do not know French, because usually, Francophones know English and are able to read complex material in English.
Do you not think that the interests of litigants should take priority?
