Official Languages Committee on June 1st, 2017

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

A recorded division it will be, then.

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

Can we move in camera for five minutes, please?

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Just a minute. We have to finish the vote first.

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

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

We will now resume committee business.

Go ahead, Mr. Choquette.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

That wasn't necessary. We could've decided together to look at that next week. I was in favour of that, but it's no big deal.

Here is my last motion for the day:

That the Committee invite witnesses in order to assess Madeleine Meilleur's ability to perform the duties of Commissioner of Official Languages before it reports to the House on her appointment.

It has nothing to do with the process, simply Ms. Meilleur's ability.

I will give the motion to the clerk.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

The motion has been submitted to the clerk.

Would anyone like to comment on Mr. Choquette's latest motion?

Mr. Lefebvre, you may go ahead.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you.

I'd like to make two points. First of all, we spent an entire meeting with Ms. Meilleur to assess her ability. Everyone had an opportunity to speak. Second of all, the motion calls on the committee to invite witnesses, so the objective would be rather broad in scope.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Mr. Choquette, go ahead.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

The language for my motion was taken right from Standing Order 111(2), in chapter XIII on committees. The standing order requires us to examine “the qualifications and competence of the appointee or nominee to perform the duties of the post”.

I am going to repeat what I said earlier. Despite all her skills and her fine resume, Ms. Meilleur does not have the competence to perform the duties of the post. Why? It goes back to what Mr. Arseneault told the committee earlier, and it's extremely important. He referred to the provision in the Official Languages Act, pursuant to which, Ms. Meilleur, as commissioner, could recuse herself. Just think what would happen if she had to recuse herself every time a complaint was filed against the Privy Council Office, the Treasury Board Secretariat, the Department of Justice, or the Department of Canadian Heritage. When would she actually be on the job? Never. Therein lies the problem that we need to consider.

As for which witnesses we should invite, my first motion included an exhaustive list of potential witnesses. I realize you may say that we won't have enough time for all the people on the list, that there aren't enough people on the list, or that they aren't the ones you would like to hear from. I will leave that for the committee to decide. Together, we can decide who we would like to invite, and we can discuss it in camera this time. I already have some ideas.

We could therefore invite the people we think are the best-suited to help us determine Ms. Meilleur's ability to perform the duties of the post. Respectfully, I would say this is extremely important, considering that when Mr. Mulcair asked Ms. Meilleur about it, she said she didn't know. Hence, the need to assess her ability is even more pressing and worrisome than we might've thought. As a committee, that is our role, our duty, and our mission. This isn't something that should be taken lightly.

When we return the certificate of appointment, we must do so after exercising sound judgment in the full knowledge of the facts. To that end, we need to check certain things. As I said, groups who represent official languages minority communities are questioning Ms. Meilleur's ability to do the job. The committee should have the opportunity to hear what they have to say and understand their point of view. They are the reason we are here. Our job is to stand up for official languages minority communities.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you, Mr. Choquette.

Were you done, Mr. Lefebvre?

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

No. I move that we postpone the debate on the motion to Tuesday.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

That's fine with me.

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

Me too.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Is everyone okay with that?

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

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

We will therefore continue the discussion on Mr. Choquette's motion on Tuesday, at our next meeting.

Mr. Nater, did you have something to add?

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm simply giving notice that pursuant to Standing Order 122, I will be submitting to the chair a certificate for the request for evidence from certain witnesses. I will be submitting that following today's meeting.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

A certificate for...?

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

For requesting witnesses and additional information from them.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Okay.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

It's just giving notice.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Is it in connection with the motion?

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

No, no.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

It's a separate matter.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

It's separate, yes. I'll be submitting that through the chair after this meeting.