Official Languages Committee on June 18th, 2013

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Today is Tuesday, June 18, 2013. Welcome to the 86th meeting of the Standing Committee on Official Languages.

We will be here for an hour to discuss three motions—two from Mr. Godin and one from Mr. Dionne Labelle.

I yield the floor to Mr. Godin.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Mr. Chair, I ask that we stop sitting in camera.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

We are not in camera.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Mr. Chair, I would like us to vote on the motion regarding the marine rescue sub-centre in Quebec City.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

First, you have to introduce your motion.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

I will do so, Mr. Chair. It reads as follows:

That the committee conducts a study on the closure of the marine rescue sub-centre in Quebec City before September 30, 2012.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

We have a motion before the committee. Would someone like to speak to it?

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Mr. Chair, as I have said before in this committee, I think this motion should rather be moved in the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. This is a matter of security, and nothing indicates that bilingualism is not respected in any rescue centres. The Quebec City centre has had the same staff for a number of years.

If my colleague opposite really has concerns about security, he could perhaps ask the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans to conduct a more comprehensive study on the issue. I don't know whether he wants to debate the matter, but I can continue to do so if he likes. I am just making a suggestion to Mr. Godin.

I am wondering if this is really a topic we should be studying. If Mr. Godin thinks that this is a matter of security, our committee should not be handling it. There is no evidence that a bilingualism issue currently exists. Nothing has changed recently. We studied the report of the Commissioner of Official Languages, and I think he did an excellent job. I don't know what you think. Could you elaborate, Mr. Godin?

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

I will yield the floor to Mr. Trottier, and then Mr. Godin can speak.

[Bernard Trottier, Conservative, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

I would like to support my colleague. I think that this kind of a study should rather be undertaken by the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans. I don't think this is just a matter of language. Many operational and security issues are also involved. It is a matter of equipment, staff and locations. It's not just a matter of linguistics. So I think it would be a good idea to refer to the mandates of the Standing Committee on Official Languages and the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans.

In the House of Commons, the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans always answers any questions related to this. The Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages does not deal with such issues. I think that the fisheries and oceans committee is in a better position to deal with this matter. Its members are familiar with the operations involved in fisheries and oceans. Rescue is a fairly important aspect for them.

We could ask the chair of that committee whether they would like to study this topic. As Mr. Gourde said, these operations are important. A connection should be established between operations and this official languages issue.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

If this is a study on the closing of the marine rescue sub-centre in Quebec City, and it has to do with issues related to the two official languages, it is our committee's responsibility. However, if this motion is adopted, it will be impossible for the chair to do what the motion asks for because it talks about 2012. We cannot produce a study before September 30, 2012.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Mr. Chair, I ask that we adopt an amendment, whereby the new date would be October 15, 2013. The amendment would read as follows:

That the motion be amended by replacing “September 30, 2012” with “October 15, 2013”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Okay.

We have to deal with an amendment. The date is now October 15, 2013.

Mr. Godin, go ahead.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

I ask that we vote on the amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Okay.

Would anyone like to speak to it?

Mr. Gourde, go ahead.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

As for my colleague's proposal to amend this motion....

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

A point of order, Mr. Chair.

When a vote is requested, doesn't it have to be held right away? He had not yet raised his hand.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

No. I can call a vote only if no committee members want to debate the amendment.

There is no time limit on a debate regarding an amendment or a motion.

Would any members of the committee like to debate Mr. Godin's amendment?

Mr. Gourde, go ahead.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Thank you for letting me speak, Mr. Chair.

Sorry, Mr. Godin. I know that you are concerned, but rules must apply to all members of the committee.

I understand that you want to make this amendment. We obviously cannot leave September 30, 2012 as the date, since that was last year. However, the motion put forward lapsed about seven or eight months ago. I thought that such a situation would simply require another motion. We cannot vote against an amendment that consists in changing a date, but if we are already opposed to the motion, there is a problem. In a way, you are putting us in a difficult position.

You should have simply proposed a new motion with a later date. That certainly would have been simpler for everyone. I think this is a difficult situation for us. We cannot reject your refusal, but we will probably vote against the amendment, and that will lead to a strange situation.

We have an opportunity to work together in this committee. It would be easier—for you and for us—if you proposed a new motion that complies with this committee's current rules.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Mr. Trottier, go ahead.

[Bernard Trottier, Conservative, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

So the amendment does change the date to October 15, 2013?

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Yes.

[Bernard Trottier, Conservative, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

As you know, we are currently conducting a study on immersion. So we would have to look at our schedule. I am wondering how many meetings we will need to carry out the study if we do decide to undertake it. We should nevertheless complete the immersion study. We still have a few meetings to hold on that topic.

Mr. Chair, could you tell us how many meetings we will need to complete the study on immersion?

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Yes. We have 11 witnesses to hear from. With three witnesses per meeting, I think we would need four meetings to complete this study.

[Bernard Trottier, Conservative, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Chair, in light of that, I don't think we could begin the study on the rescue centre. We will not be able to hold enough meetings. With four meetings starting in mid-September, we would complete the study in mid-October. I don't think that's feasible. We should perhaps propose a new amendment or a new date.