Evidence of meeting #42 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 languages.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
You mentioned the parliamentary secretary.
Members on this committee have various contributions to make to the official languages committee. Some members on this committee are perfectly bilingual.
Liberal
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Yes, you can.
I just want to make a point. Some members are perfectly bilingual, some members are unilingual, and every member has a role to contribute.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
I just want to make the point that if you want to ask a question of general import, I'll allow it.
Liberal
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
But please do not reference a specific member.
Mr. Dion, you have the floor.
Liberal
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
I will allow you your full time. This will not take up any of your time.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
Mr. Chair, with all due respect, Mr. Dion did not mention the committee member. He did not name the committee member or speak about a committee member. He spoke about the government's parliamentary secretary and his duties, which, in particular, are to meet with people in the communities. We are not talking about here, in committee. Here we have never asked whether people must be bilingual or not. We have translation and all that. We are talking about the duties of the parliamentary secretary. The Commissioner of Official Languages can answer on that basis. Would it be normal to have a minister of official languages who does not speak both languages? Is it normal for the parliamentary secretary not to speak both languages?
In 2006, Ted Menzies, who had been appointed parliamentary secretary, was withdrawn from the position when the question was raised. The parliamentary secretary, without naming names, could be assigned to another department, to work elsewhere. Here this is the Standing Committee on Official Languages. We are talking about the parliamentary secretary, and I believe that question is admissible.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Thank you, Mr. Godin.
I think it's too fine a point. The title of the member was mentioned, which in effect is the same thing.
As I said before, I'll allow questions of general import, but not questions that reference a specific member's language abilities.
Mr. Dion, you have the floor.
Liberal
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
Thank you.
Your point is well taken, so let me try again.
You mentioned that agents of Parliament must be bilingual because of their function. There are two questions.
First, do you think the parliamentary secretary for official languages, whoever he or she is, must, generally speaking, be bilingual because of their responsibilities?
Second, if your answer is that there is no obligation that this person must be bilingual, should this person be ready to meet all official language communities, even though the language barrier must be handled with more difficulties in these circumstances?
Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages
First of all, Parliament and parliamentarians are exempt from the application of the Official Languages Act. If I were to receive a formal complaint, it would not be a receivable complaint.
Secondly, throughout my time as commissioner, when I have dealt with issues concerning positions and roles, I have taken real care not to personalize them and mention any individuals.
Third, unlike the other roles that have been a matter of public discussion, I don't know what the formal responsibilities of a parliamentary secretary are. Informally, my understanding is that some parliamentary secretaries play virtually shadow roles to ministers, and others play very minor roles. It's really up to the minister to decide what role a parliamentary secretary plays. So it is impossible for me to have a clear sense of exactly what any parliamentary secretary's role is because it is such an informal designation.
That being said, one of the things that has struck me about this incident is that it comes from a minority community that feels particularly marginalized. The English community in Quebec is not even recognized by the Quebec government as a minority. It is increasingly in a situation where its aging population is not getting the same kind of access to health care that was available to it in the past. It is increasingly being demonized by various elements of the media.
It is a community that feels insecure and does not have the same recognition by Canadian Heritage as the francophone minority communities, which are recognized as a national minority. Because the English community in Quebec is by definition only within one province, it doesn't have the same access to Canadian Heritage at the same level of the bureaucracy.
I heard this expression as a cry of frustration from a community that feels frustrated, marginalized, vulnerable, and on the defensive from a whole variety of forces.
The question I have is, how is the government responding to this fragile, vulnerable, frustrated community?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Thank you, Mr. Fraser. Thank you, Mr. Dion.
Mr. Williamson, go ahead, please.
Conservative
John Williamson Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
This is a difficult topic. Bilingualism should be something that unites this country and doesn't divide it. I come from a province that is bilingual, but it also has a political history that when language politics emerge, they can be very divisive.
I think the worst thing we could do as legislators, members of Parliament, officers of Parliament, is to ever suggest there are two classes of Canadians in this country, one class that is fluently bilingual and a secondary class that is unilingual.
Members from across this country were elected to this Parliament. Some couldn't even speak the language of the men and women they were elected to represent. That is up to those constituencies, those voters, to decide if that is appropriate, and apparently they thought it was.
The same thing goes for committees as well. I just worry that if this line of questioning continues, not only do we begin to question the language proficiency of every single member on this committee, but then to suggest....
And here is where I think you made an error, sir, and I'd appreciate a clarification. You basically suggested that if a member of the executive, perhaps even a member of this committee, was not fluent in both languages, they could have a title, they could have a role, but it's clear it might not be an important one. They would, in fact, be a place holder. At least, that's what I took from your comment when you said that you weren't clear on the roles. But if it wasn't an important role, then language wouldn't matter.
So I would ask you to clarify it a little bit, because that's what I took away from it.
Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages
I don't think I said that. What I said was that I don't know what the role is, and my understanding is that a parliamentary secretary carries out the responsibilities the minister assigns to a parliamentary secretary and it is up to each minister to decide what those are. So how can I evaluate whether it's appropriate for a parliamentary secretary to master whatever skill when I don't know what the job description is? The reason I don't know what the job description is, is that as far as I know, there is none. It is at the discretion of the minister how he uses the parliamentary secretary.
The question I would like to focus on, which I think is the important question, is does the English minority in Quebec get the same level of service from this government and from this minister that francophone minority communities do across the country, because they don't feel they do for a whole bundle of reasons? They don't get the same level of financing, they don't get the same level of access to Canadian Heritage, and they don't feel they have the same access to the minister's entourage, describe it how you will.
I'm not in the business of deciding what the responsibilities of a parliamentary secretary are, but I am in the business of monitoring, keeping in touch with, and defending the interests of minority language communities.
Conservative
John Williamson Conservative New Brunswick Southwest, NB
Thank you. That's a good answer.
You would agree, then, I suspect.... In parts of the country there is a view that minority language groups already receive too much. I'm not saying I agree with that; it's just that it is a view. You would agree with me, I think, that when we politicize this issue like this, and we make personal attacks on the members who have been elected to this House, we're actually doing relations between the two language communities a disservice.
Just listen to how the temperature has gone up in this room in the last 15 minutes when the competence of the person we shall not name was raised. It has gone through the roof here. I find it completely unacceptable, this line of attack, and I think we should focus on the issue at hand, which is to provide the services to both linguistic groups across the country and not engage in partisan political attacks.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Thank you very much, Mr. Williamson.
We're going to finish with your intervention.
There are only five minutes left.
The commissioner has proposed expenditures of $20,611,000 for this fiscal year.
Of that amount, $2.25 million is the statutory amount that does not require further approval. So the remaining amount the committee is being asked to approve today is $18,361,000.
I'm going to put two questions.
Go ahead, Monsieur Godin.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
I would like to ask a question about that amount.
You referred to $18,358,000, but, in the commissioner's testimony, when we look at the total estimates, which were $20,659,000—