Evidence of meeting #134 for Official Languages in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was quebec.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Rachel Hunting  Executive Director, Townshippers' Association
Geoffrey Chambers  President, Quebec Community Groups Network
Sylvia Martin-Laforge  Director General, Quebec Community Groups Network
Emmanuella Lambropoulos  Saint-Laurent, Lib.
Mona Fortier  Ottawa—Vanier, Lib.

12:55 p.m.

NDP

François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC

As a first point, I really like your idea of creating a new division within the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. I think it's a great idea. It's wise. I think we need to take a look at that as a committee.

Second, we didn't talk about the census, the enumeration of rights holders. Do you think it should be inserted in the Official Languages Act?

12:55 p.m.

Director General, Quebec Community Groups Network

Sylvia Martin-Laforge

Yes. I think we've been quite forceful on that. We have followed our Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada folks. We've had many discussions on this and our director of policy is on top of it.

12:55 p.m.

NDP

François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC

Excellent.

The last question is about the famous summit of the Prime Minister. Do you remember when the Prime Minister and the federal, provincial and territorial ministers met? It was an agenda about the official languages. Do you remember when it was, the last time?

12:55 p.m.

President, Quebec Community Groups Network

Geoffrey Chambers

You're right. It's deep in history.

12:55 p.m.

Director General, Quebec Community Groups Network

12:55 p.m.

NDP

François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC

Or woman!

February 26th, 2019 / 12:55 p.m.

President, Quebec Community Groups Network

Geoffrey Chambers

It's overdue. The fact that you're raising it gives me the opportunity to say that it would be a very welcome event. Speaking for the constituencies that we represent and understand, I think it would be very positively received. It wouldn't be an occasion for friction, blame and tension. I don't say that no one brings that spirit to the table, but I don't think the francophones of Quebec would and I don't think we would.

I also think the majority of the population of Quebec, if it were presented right, would be quite enabled by it. It's talking about strengthening the French fact and it would be talking, partly, about the French fact in Canada, which has to be a popular thing in Quebec.

12:55 p.m.

NDP

François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC

Do I still have time, Mr. Chair?

12:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Vice-Chair Conservative Alupa Clarke

You have 35 seconds left. If you don't use them, I'm going to ask a question.

12:55 p.m.

NDP

François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC

Thank you very much.

I'll let Mr. Clarke ask his question.

12:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Vice-Chair Conservative Alupa Clarke

I have a question I would like you to answer in writing, because you won't have enough time to answer it now.

Touching on what Bernard said, that a positive measure can be seen as positive by some and negative by others, I think all of us around this table unanimously want to make part VII stronger.

If we were to exchange the word “can” in part VII with the word “must”, it would enable the government to make sure that if there were a precarious situation, like, for example, what happened in British Columbia—and when we say “precarious”, that's my subjective opinion.... What do you think would be the objective factors to make a rough analysis of the situation?

If the minister must introduce a positive measure, we would still need to address it as a government body in terms of objectivity. As the judges confirmed in 1983 when they interpreted the first article of the charter, they had to find a way to interpret it in an objective way.

To summarize my question, let's say that in one year's time, part VII has the word “must”, there's a crisis and the minister has to introduce a measure. It's not his or her own choice. He has to. What would be the criteria, objectively, of knowing for sure that the community is in danger? They can say they're in danger, but it might not be true.

Please send us your ideas as to what those criteria would be. It's immensely important to us.

12:55 p.m.

President, Quebec Community Groups Network

Geoffrey Chambers

We have given some thought to that. We appreciate your asking us for our opinion and we will provide it to you in detail.

12:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Vice-Chair Conservative Alupa Clarke

Thank you, sir.

Rachel Hunting from the Townshippers' Association, thank you for your time, as well as the Quebec Community Groups Network, Mr. Chambers and Madame Martin-Laforge.

If you have any supplementary information, you can always send it to the clerk.

Thank you very much.

The meeting is adjourned.