Official Languages Committee on June 11th, 2018

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Mr. Samson, do you have a comment?

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Yes.

At the last meeting I attended, we said we would develop an action plan for our committee in September.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

That's it, an action plan.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Consequently, it's a subject that we could isolate.

We have work to do. No one at this table disagrees with the idea of conducting this study on the Official Languages Act. Even the Prime Minister said it last week. So there's no doubt, and I don't see why it's necessary to vote on a motion when we'll have to establish an action plan for the year and do the work in September.

We all want to achieve an objective. What is that objective? It's to contribute to the thinking of the present government, or of the one that succeeds it, on a new official languages act, which will put us in another action mode for addressing problems. We have identified a lot since 2015.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you, Mr. Samson.

Ms. Boucher, do you want to add a comment?

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

I'm going to say it frankly: we don't want to engage in partisanship here. This is important; this is a very important decision.

As the saying goes, "Words fly away, writings remain." That proverb is very important to me. It's all well and good to say what we want willy-nilly and that we can wait and wait some more. We've been saying for a year that we're going to work on the subject, and we've done nothing yet. If we set the words down in a motion, and if we are all in agreement, then I repeat the proverb, "Words fly away, writings remain."

That's all I wanted to say.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Mr. Arseneault, what do you think?

[René Arseneault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

I agree on the subject of the motion and everything that's been said around the table. I suggest this: that we develop an action plan in September.

If you draw a parallel with the study the Senate is conducting, you can see that senators have divided the amendment into several components. If this question is to constitute a component in itself, and if it's the first one, then I don't see a problem, but we agree we won't have time to work on it between now and the end of the session.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

No, we wouldn't have the time.

[René Arseneault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

I also suggest that it be the first item on the agenda in September so that it's completed in 2018.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Exactly.

[René Arseneault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Are we all saying the same thing?

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

What do you say, Mr. Clarke?

[Alupa Clarke, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

I'm going to let Ms. Lapointe speak, and then I can conclude with a vote in favour.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Ms. Lapointe, do you want to add a comment?

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

To follow on what Mr. Arseneault said, I agree we should address this subject.

Should it be the first subject? In September, when we come back from summer vacation, I think we should hold the first meeting to develop our plan for the fall, and that can be our priority.

With respect to September, we clearly can't decide today, in five minutes, what we're all going to prepare for the fall. I see no problem if we can give this issue priority.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you, Ms. Lapointe.

Mr. Clarke, you have the floor.

[Alupa Clarke, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you, everyone, for your comments, suggestions, and criticisms.

The argument I've heard most often from you is that we can work on this matter between now and September, that there's no hurry. On the contrary, we are in a hurry. The election will be held in a year and a half, and we started talking about a study on modernization of the act last September. I've been telling you for a year now that we have to do something, that we have to move forward.

I'm the only one here who was gone to see the senators in the other chamber to determine what we might do with them. Seriously, I've been proactive.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

I've done it too, and others have as well.

[Alupa Clarke, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

It's unfortunate, but there's been no result. Every time I talked about it, it didn't look like things were advancing much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

All right.

[Alupa Clarke, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Mr. Chair, I would like to stop giving my opinion, please.

Personally, I want us to vote on this today because we have to act. If we vote to go ahead on this, there's nothing preventing us from developing an action plan in September.

In any case, everyone I've spoken to until now in the groups we've received in recent months agrees that this precisely targets the current problems instead of falling into something very vague, as is currently the case with the Senate committee.

It's direct and specific, and it responds to a judgment that was rendered not long ago. I think we have to act.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Unlike the Senate, we are free to do what we want.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

You all have Mr. Clarke's motion before you, to which we would add, "That the Committee table its report by the end of 2018."

Mr. Choquette's amendment is accepted by Mr. Clarke.

Is there a consensus on adoption or not?

[René Arseneault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

No, not as far as I'm concerned. For the reasons I've just explained, I won't vote in favour of this motion until the committee resumes in September.