Official Languages Committee on June 1st, 2017

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you, Mr. Arseneault.

Mrs. Boucher, go ahead.

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

I'm fascinated as I listen to my colleagues across the way. Either they're new to politics, or they're trying to take us for a ride, but we are not getting in. When you've been around the political block—what I'm about to say is serious, indeed, quite serious—and when you've spent 10 years in purgatory precisely because of ties like these, you would think the Liberal Party of Canada had learned its lesson by now.

Mr. Arseneault, I'll believe that you're a lawyer—I have no problem on that front—but this is actual politics, and when someone is affiliated with a political party, it looks bad. The Liberal Party has called for the heads of ministers for as little as a $16 glass of orange juice. Just ask Bev Oda.

You're trying to convince us that you don't see a problem, but it's as plain as the nose on your face. That's how obvious what you're doing is. At some point, though, you have to be independent. We weren't the ones who said that. In the House yesterday, the minister said our committee was independent. There is no independence today, however. We've always had confidence in one another.

If Ms. Meilleur were to appear before the committee, I wouldn't have any confidence in her. That has nothing to do with her qualifications. Other candidates were equally as qualified, but they didn't have ties to your party. That is the problem, right there.

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

We don't know that.

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

If there were others, that's even worse.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Please.

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

There is no denying that Graham Fraser demonstrated integrity and independence. He wasn't affiliated with any political party.

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

His independence—

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

Because of his independence, he took the Conservative Party to task a number of times. I have seen things, but this is something we absolutely have to discuss: an appointment like this has to have unanimous support. It doesn't, end of story. The only people on this committee who support this appointment belong to the Liberal Party of Canada.

How are you going to convince the opposition that Ms. Meilleur is the best person for the job?

We don't believe that.

How can we put her to work?

How can we sit here, across from her, without holding her political allegiance against her every time she appears before the committee?

Aside from her resume, too many aspects of this nomination make us question the process that your party, not ours, put in place. She has ties to the party, and the deeper we go, the more we find out.

I understand that you are defending your political party. We all do that. I know first-hand that one doesn't always agree with one's party. From 2006 to 2011, there were certain things I was forced to swallow. I didn't always agree with my party, but it was necessary to keep pushing on. However, when it came to defending the indefensible, I was able to stand up to my leader and say that I would be sick and simply not vote, and that's what I did. Mr. Harper would tell you as much if he were here. I was a bit rogue that way.

Likewise, I am going to stand up today against this appointment. If your party allows it to go ahead, you are going to end up with a problem on your hands. You can be sure that we will keep digging, and the more we do, the more you will be discredited. That isn't what we want to do, because we like you. We have tremendous respect for you, but this appointment today is hurting our committee's integrity. That's something I will never tolerate because our committee has always demonstrated integrity. This appointment will tarnish our committee's name and make it very difficult to do our work from here on out.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you.

On that loving note, we now move on to Mr. Samson.

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

Thank you.

Frankly, I don't have much to add. I will say that I can't recall appointments to this position ever being open or transparent. We should therefore be proud, because up to this point, the decision has always been the result of whispered discussions in the backroom.

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

That's not true!

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

Prove it, then. As far as I know, the appointment process has never been open or transparent. Any Canadian couldn't just apply, so we should be proud of the progress we've made towards transparency. That's all I have to say.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you.

Mr. Choquette, it's your turn.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

I just wanted to say that we are ready to vote, I think. I would like a recorded division.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Mr. Généreux still has a turn.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

No, that's okay. I've heard enough.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Everyone is ready to vote, then.

Mr. Choquette asked for a recorded division. Isn't that right?

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

I will now put the question on the motion as amended.

(Motion negatived: nays 5; yeas 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Mr. Choquette, you may go ahead.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to move the following motion:

That the Committee ask Madeleine Meilleur for her language skills qualifications as required by the Language Skills Act.

Would you would like me to explain my rationale?

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Yes, please.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Standing Order 111(2) reads as follows:

(2) The committee, if it should call an appointee or nominee to appear pursuant to section (1) of this Standing Order, shall examine the qualifications and competence of the appointee or nominee to perform the duties of the post to which he or she has been appointed or nominated.

Naturally, Ms. Meilleur sent us her resume, which she would typically be required to do.

Now we have a new statute, the Language Skills Act, pursuant to which, the individuals appointed to 10 specific offices must meet language requirements. The act stipulates that appointees be able to speak and understand clearly both English and French. The Commissioner of Official languages is one of the positions to which the act applies.

The committee therefore has a duty to examine Ms. Meilleur's qualifications and competence, under Standing Order 111(2). The chair, in fact, addressed the standing order. Consequently, we must assess Ms. Meilleur's qualifications and competence to perform the duties of the post.

We already have her resume, if I'm not mistaken. The clerk can confirm that for us. We should have her resume, but we should also have her language skills qualifications, further to the Language Skills Act requirement. We should examine her language skills.

It's simply a formality, if you ask me, Mr. Chair. We don't question her skills in that regard; it's required by law. It's just a formality.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Does anyone care to comment?

Mr. Arseneault, you may go ahead.

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

Which act are you referring to, Mr. Choquette?