Evidence of meeting #74 for Official Languages in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site.) The winning word was amendment.
A video is available from Parliament.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
Yes, they are free, but I'm free to say that I expect that he will be at least a bit polite with his colleagues and explain why the work they have done in putting in this clause is not something that he's willing to support. It's a minimum. I would like to hear what he has to say.
If he doesn't want to do this, I will conclude that
basic politeness is not his strong suit.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
There's no.... I'm going to call the vote.
I just want to explain to everybody what we're going to do. I'm going to pass the floor to the clerk, and she's going to record the division.
The question is whether clause 3 shall carry or whether clause 3 shall be negatived. If you're in favour of clause 3, please indicate yea. If you're not in favour of clause 3 and you wish to see it negatived, please indicate nay.
5:25 p.m.
NDP
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
There is no amendment. The question is on the clause.
To the clerk's call, if you say “nay” you are negativing the clause. If you say “yea” you are indicating that you wish the clause to remain.
5:25 p.m.
NDP
Tyrone Benskin NDP Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
Thank you.
(Clause 3 negatived: nays 6; yeas 5)
(On clause 4—Interim appointment)
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
5:25 p.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
As regards clause 4, Mr. Chair, I thought the matter was clear. A person who does not meet the requirements of the act cannot be appointed on an interim basis. The commissioner was clear on that point; there was no ambiguity. Others may say that the matter may proceed in such and such a manner. No, no. A lawyer cannot be replaced by someone who is not a lawyer. A person who occupies that kind of position cannot be replaced by a person who is not qualified. He was clear on that point.
The FCFA was clear: either a person is qualified or he or she is not. The representatives of the QCGN, who speak on behalf of Quebec anglophones, were clear. The question was put to them and they were very clear. There can be no half-measures: either you are qualified or you are not.
With regard to this clause, Mr. Chair, I cannot understand how the government can even dare ask to strike this condition for individuals occupying an office on an interim basis. People should not suffer from a lack of bilingualism even for a brief period of time. I cannot believe that the government, which claims to be so interested in bilingualism, requires it of the incumbents of some 10 offices but agrees to do without it for 6 months. Come on.
In those jobs, the second in command is bilingual. That is a person who...
We will end on that note, Mr. Chair, even though I am not done. We will have to come back to it on Thursday.
5:25 p.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
This is unacceptable, really unacceptable. I do not see what the government wants in this case. Later on we will see that it even wants to strike the preamble.
What is the problem? The commissioner was clear on this point. He said he wanted this to be clear. I appreciate the amendment made to clause 2 to provide that a person must be able to speak and understand clearly both languages.
Why would that not be clear here?
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
5:25 p.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
We included that so that the act would be complied with in full. If a person who occupies the office is replaced, there is no justification for replacing that person with someone who is not bilingual. If we accept the principle of the act, we can solve the problem of the 10 agents of Parliament, that is to say the 8 agents and the other 2. My colleague Mr. Chisu may say that those two persons are not agents of Parliament, since we are talking about the Senate, but that is what the bill states. The government wants to strike that, but that will result in ambiguity.
Your government may have no intention of toying with that, but other governments may want to do so.
How long is the interim period: six months, a year, two years?
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Mr. Godin, we are out of time.
We're in our last minute of the meeting and we have bells.
We will cancel Thursday's meeting for the immersion study, and on Thursday we will continue consideration of this bill so that we can get it reported back to the House.
Mr. Gourde, please.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
With the committee's consent, could we continue the meeting for another half hour in view of the—
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
No, we have to go and vote.
We are going to adjourn the meeting. We will continue our clause-by-clause consideration on Thursday at 3:30 p.m.
This meeting is adjourned.
