Evidence of meeting #1 for Official Languages in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
Royal Galipeau Conservative Ottawa—Orléans, ON
Nothing stops them from coming. That was the principle.
9:30 a.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
If that's the principle, are you ready to have zero members from the government? The purpose of having a member from the government was to prevent the meeting from being cancelled. It has always been like that, not just in a minority government. It has been like that for years. You can ask the researchers to check.
9:30 a.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
I would just like to finish what I was saying. When we say “member of the government”, does that mean “member of the government party” and does it include “the chair”?
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
Guy Lauzon Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
I would like to discuss the point raised by Mr. Godin. He does not want to give us the power to cancel the meeting, but he wants to have that power himself. If you don't appear, it will be the same thing for you. You can cancel the meeting.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
9:30 a.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
Mr. Lauzon, in case you are not aware, I would like to tell you that the chair is on your side and he can cancel the meeting. You know how it works, you have already done that.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
Guy Lauzon Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
If we decide to hold a meeting or if the chair calls us to a meeting and your members don't show up, the meeting will be cancelled.
9:30 a.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
That's exactly why. The idea is that the government cannot call a meeting without the opposition. We cannot have a meeting if the members of the opposition are not present.
Mr. Galipeau's motion protects both sides. If there is a meeting, there must be a member of the opposition and a member of the government party. Also, the chair must be there. Both sides are covered.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
Royal Galipeau Conservative Ottawa—Orléans, ON
Are you in favour of that, Mr. Godin?
Let's run with it, guys.
9:30 a.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
Mr. Chair, I congratulate my colleague for agreeing with my suggestion.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Seeing no further debate, I will put the question on the amendment moved by Monsieur Galipeau.
(Amendment agreed to)
We're now back to the main motion, as amended, concerning this routine motion. Is there any debate on the main motion as amended? Seeing none, we'll go to the vote.
(Motion as amended agreed to)
Thank you very much.
We are now going to the distribution of documents.
Mr. Bélanger, go ahead.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Okay.
The motion has been moved by Monsieur Bélanger. I'll read it:
That the Clerk of the Committee be authorized to distribute documents to members of the Committee only when they exist in both official languages, and that no document provided by a witness be distributed without the Clerk's authorization and, since the documents must be in both official languages in order to be distributed, that the Clerk advises the witnesses of the availability of a translation service.
Is there debate on this motion?
Mr. Weston.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
John Weston Conservative West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would like to move a few amendments.
First, I feel it is obvious that the clerk can distribute the documents. But I think it should be the clerk and only the clerk.
Second, I think that it is very important to let the witnesses know, before they come here, that they have to distribute the documents in both official languages.
Third, regarding the documents that can be distributed, I think that we have to emphasize that the documents include the motions.
So I am going to suggest the following new wording:
that only the clerk of the committee be authorized to distribute to the members of the committee any documents, including motions, and that all documents that are to be distributed among the committee members must be in both official languages. The clerk shall advise all witnesses appearing before committee of this requirement.
During the last session, I was on the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. Some witnesses had great texts, but they were written in only one official language. It was a shame not to be able to hear them.
Do you want me to read it again?
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Yes, for clarification, and then we're going to go to Monsieur Galipeau.
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
John Weston Conservative West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
It states that only the clerk of the committee be authorized to distribute to the members of the committee any documents, including motions, and that all documents that are to be distributed among the committee members must be in both official languages. The clerk shall advise all witnesses appearing before committee of this requirement.
It should say “shall advise all witnesses in advance” of this requirement.
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Thank you, Mr. Weston.
We have on the floor an amendment to the motion moved by Monsieur Bélanger.
I'll go to Monsieur Galipeau.
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
Royal Galipeau Conservative Ottawa—Orléans, ON
I'd like to square this with the Official Languages Act. The act imposes obligations on the government and on Parliament to serve Canadians in both languages, so that Canadians can be served in either of the two official languages as they prefer. The onus is on the government--not on Canadians--in the two-way communications.
The government has an obligation to communicate with Canadians in the language of choice of Canadians. But witnesses appearing here are the Canadians; they are the Canadians and they are the ones coming here to communicate with us. They should be able to do that in either of the two languages, as they choose. I don't see where we are in a position to impose on them the same obligation that the law imposes on us. Some of them may not have the resources to communicate with us in both official languages. Provided they communicate with us in the language of their choice....
I understand the spirit, and it's certainly more convenient for us that they communicate in both languages, but we're now imposing on Canadians the obligation that we should assume.
9:40 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Just to clarify what Mr. Weston has proposed here, he is not proposing that witnesses translate the documents or come to the committee with the documents in both official languages. He is saying that any documents to be distributed to this committee need to be in both official languages.
Now, if the organization appearing has the resources to translate those documents on their own, those documents will then be distributed by the clerk. If the organization does not have those resources, they have two options. They can come here with a unilingual copy of those documents, at which point, if this amendment is adopted, I will not allow the documents to be distributed until the clerk has had a chance to take them to translation services and have them translated, after which they will be distributed, probably a week after the meeting has occurred.
The other option is that they send them to the clerk a week in advance and have translation services translate them for them so that when they arrive here we can distribute them in both official languages. Nobody suggests--