Evidence of meeting #4 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 report.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
So you are telling me that only the motions we have discussed with government members will stand a chance of being passed. That is my understanding. But the motion I am introducing today has already been passed by the committee. Some members of the committee who were on the government side at the time voted for the motion, but they are against it today. Why? What is different? Is it because the government has a majority now? That is the only thing that seems to be different. I am starting to ask myself some serious questions.
Conservative
Conservative
Guy Lauzon Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Almost all the members of the committee have spoken in French until now. This being a committee that deals with the two official languages and given that I am more comfortable speaking in English, my comments will be in English.
You know, I think we're in danger here. Many of the members have talked about how well this committee gets along, etc., and I subscribe to that theory, but we have to be careful not to get too much into partisanship. On May 2 we had an election and our government was elected by the Canadian public with a majority government. The NDP was elected as the official opposition. The platform we ran on was jobs and the economy.
I think we've proven our mettle in the last six years we've been in government as to how much official languages mean to our party and to our government. There has been no question about it. We've advanced that agenda tremendously. We've put more financial resources and more human resources into official languages than ever before. I don't think that's in question, so I hope nobody is thinking that there's any doubt about our commitment to official languages.
But let's do the business. We have a very heavy fall agenda. We went to the Canadian public with our agenda and it was endorsed by the electorate. You see what's being tabled in the House. I think we should continue that. There's a time and a place for suggestions like this, and I think that when the time comes, you won't have to worry. We're very committed to official languages. We'll make sure that mandate is carried out to its fullest extent.
As a result, I'll be voting against this, because I think we can depend on our government to carry out the mandate of both official languages.
Merci.
Conservative
Costas Menegakis Conservative Richmond Hill, ON
I would very much like to keep the partisan politics and the pointing of fingers on what the governing party will do or what the opposition party will do when a motion is presented.... On this side, that's not the purpose of the committee, and I don't think we'll get anywhere if we continue down that road.
The fact of the matter is that Commissioner Fraser submitted a report last week. The ministry is considering the report. An integral part of the report is the protection of the language rights of the travelling public. Our government has demonstrated repeatedly and consistently over its mandates, including this one, that it respects and promotes the protection of both official languages in this country. It respects that.
I think it's premature right now to invite the minister, not having given him the opportunity to study the report. His findings may very well be in agreement with what the members opposite are saying at this time. Because of that, I'll be voting against this motion.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Before I give the floor to Monsieur Godin, it doesn't appear we have a consensus on this third motion of study for the committee. It would be helpful if government members would propose some areas of study.
So if we don't come forward with a plan of study for what to do in the coming weeks, it looks like we'll devote next week's Tuesday meeting to discussing what we're going to do for the fall session. On my calculation, if we spend next Tuesday discussing what we're going to do for the fall, that leaves us with 19 meetings in September, October, November, and December to occupy our time with.
If all members could come forward with suggestions as to what we're going to study, suggestions that have some sort of consensus on the committee, the clerk and I can plan out the fall session, but perhaps we'll get some agreement before 10:45.
I'll give the floor to Monsieur Godin.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
Mr. Chair, Mr. Lauzon has just said that we shouldn't get into partisanship. I'm sorry, but we are in politics, and that's what we do in politics. Let's stop making a big deal out of it. There will be partisanship. I really don't like hearing people say that we shouldn't get into partisanship. Then what are we doing here? Come on.
We are told not to get into partisanship, but we are reminded that the government received a majority and that we must remember that it is a majority government—in other words, that we are now going to have to listen to it.
Mr. Chair, with all due respect, I think that, if we want to move forward, we need to know what is on the government's agenda. If there is no partisanship, we should be able to know what is on the agenda of all members of Parliament and make suggestions. Let us hope that we won't end up in some dark corner or that we will have to go out for a beer to find a topic of discussion for the committee. That's almost what this is all about.
We might think that it is not even worth raising questions that will not get these people's approval because they are likely to do what they did this morning; three topics were proposed, and all three were refused.
Is that what the new Conservative majority government is all about? Is that what you are going to do?
Conservative
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
No, but someone talked for the government, Mr. Chair. Someone said that Canadians gave the government a majority. Under our system, the majority actually goes to a political party. But 60% of people were still not happy. I can tell you one thing. We are talking about official languages. These people want to brag about not being partisan and say that the government gave everything to the two communities, that it is a decent government, and so on. So it is strange that I have received calls from communities whose program was cancelled right at the ministerial level in July, although it had been approved by the departments. These people praise the government and say that it has done everything for francophones, but let me tell you that, when it was in a minority position, it voted against the bilingualism of Supreme Court judges.
People have to stop hiding things and saying that we are not partisan. In that case, they should not talk about those things and they should stop praising the government. The same goes for both sides. It has to be clear. I expect the Conservatives to praise their government and us to praise our party. That will happen. That's what politics is about. We are in Ottawa, inside the Parliament of Canada. We are in a democracy.
Whatever, we must conduct studies and advance the cause of communities. So far this morning, three motions have been defeated. So I am going to suggest that a steering committee be formed to brainstorm ideas and then bring them before the standing committee.
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
After this discussion, we are going to talk about what we are going to do next week. It doesn't matter whether the planning is eventually going to be done by the full committee or a steering committee, we are now going to deal with this motion.
Mr. Harris, the floor is yours.
NDP
Dan Harris NDP Scarborough Southwest, ON
I am going to yield the floor to someone else. I wouldn't be able to come up with something better than what Mr. Godin said.
September 22nd, 2011 / 10:05 a.m.
Conservative
Conservative
John Weston Conservative West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would like to thank Mr. Bélanger for presenting this motion. This is the first time that I have clearly understood the history of Canada in terms of the official languages.
Unlike Mr. Godin, I feel that one of the values of this committee is debating and learning about the official languages. I feel that it is very valuable to understand all those things, even though I do not agree, either personally or as a member of the government, that this committee should be setting priorities for the Department of Transport.
We have just received this report. I read it very quickly, but I do not see a recommendation like the one my colleague Mr. Bélanger made. As to setting priorities, I think that this is neither the time nor the place.
But we are still dealing with the two languages, and I feel that it is very important to have that kind of debate.
I am grateful to Mr. Bélanger, but I am not going to support the motion.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Thank you.
We will hear from Mr. Gourde now, then from Mr. Trottier.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
I am one of the last to speak in this debate. Mr. Godin can surely see that, by and large, I have given everyone the chance to speak. Sometimes he seems concerned that I am monopolizing the floor, but I have not done that. Since everything has been said on this matter, I am calling for the vote.
Conservative
Conservative
Bernard Trottier Conservative Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON
I have just one thought on that. I have briefly read the report, and there are 12 concrete recommendations for Air Canada, which already has a mandate and a certain set of laws with respect to official languages. It's really up to Air Canada now to take this report into consideration with respect to its own internal policies, rather than dictate that the Minister of Transport propose a bill to debate in the House of Commons. I think Air Canada, as a good corporate citizen, will be acting on these recommendations. I think it's not useful for this committee or the transport minister to invest time interfering in that. I think Air Canada and the Commissioner of Official Languages have made some good progress in advancing this file already.