Official Languages Committee on Nov. 30th, 2017

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you.

We will end this round with Mr. Choquette.

You have the floor for three minutes.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to come back to the FCFA, which I started quoting earlier because I would like to honour them. Let me read the article:

For many organizations and institutions in our communities, it is the eleventh hour. If we want to give fresh impetus to the francophonie in minority settings, stop the decline in population and slow down assimilation, we need $575 million in additional investments for our communities in the next action plan for official languages...

That's what the FCFA said. Further on, the article states:

Francophone organizations and institutions received only $0.25 from each dollar invested in the Roadmap, and $0.07 from transfer payments...

Earlier, we talked about transfer payments under early childhood agreements, for example. This is an extremely serious situation.

My colleagues mentioned that your agreements do not have percentages, which is concerning to us. They also mentioned the importance of services managed by and for the people involved. In fact, it is important that the money be given to the organizations so that they invest it in the communities, rather than wasting money on administration. The organizations only received $0.25 and $0.07 from each dollar. It makes no sense.

What are you going to do to ensure that the money goes to agencies and institutions that directly provide early childhood services in the official language of the minority?

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec, QC]

First of all, I have already answered those questions at length when we talked about the action plans and the reports that will have to be made on the common indicators and the specific indicators for each province and territory.

Second, the $0.07 cannot be applied to previous Government of Canada investments in educational child care, since the Canadian government has never invested in educational child care services, and certainly not in support of francophone or anglophone communities in a minority language environment.

Third, it is precisely because the needs are so great that it is also important to have this type of action plan for educational child care services.

More generally speaking, since you are also quite rightly concerned about Ms. Joly's action plan, I think it would be important for her to come here to talk to you and to listen to you as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you very much.

That's the end of our discussion.

Thank you very much, Mr. Minister and Mr. Murphy. We were very pleased to welcome you this afternoon. A big thank you on behalf of everyone.

We will suspend for a few minutes to prepare for committee business in camera.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

We are resuming the meeting, which is now public, to discuss committee business.

We have some motions to address.

Mr. Arseneault, the floor is yours.

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

Mr. Chair, my motion is as follows:

That, pursuant to the Order of Reference of Thursday, November 30, 2017, and to Standing Order 111.1(1), Raymond Théberge, nominee for the position of Commissioner of Official Languages, be invited to appear on Tuesday, December 5, 2017, for one (1) hour in relation to his proposed appointment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Do you want to debate the motion?

Mr. Bernier, the floor is yours.

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

I am pleased that this motion has been moved, but given how important the official languages are, I wonder why you have not planned for two hours.

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

I suggested one hour, but if you want two hours, you can ask to amend the motion.

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Why not specify that, if two hours are necessary, we will use two hours?

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Okay.

If the motion proposes a maximum of two hours, it will remain open. If we have no more questions for Mr. Théberge before the end of the two hours, he can leave.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

So we are going to indicate that it will be for up to two hours instead of one hour.

Does everyone agree?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

(Amendment agreed to)

(Motion as amended agreed to)

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Mr. Choquette, go ahead.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Chair, I would like to come back to the motion I introduced with respect to subsection 49(1) of the Official Languages Act.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Can you read your motion again, Mr. Choquette?

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

I can't remember if I gave notice of this motion during the public meeting or in camera. Either way, the motion is as follows:

That the committee denounce the non-compliance with subsection 49(1) of the Official Languages Act regarding consultation with the official opposition leaders on the appointment of the new Commissioner of Official Languages; and that it report this to the House before the end of the year.

I'll explain the motion quickly, because we may have something else on the agenda.

As you know, we have already discussed it. This is subsection 49(1) of the Official Languages Act, which requires the government to consult the leaders of the opposition parties, not just to notify them. Several court decisions have made it clear that a consultation is not limited to a simple notice. We have to take the time to ask the leaders of the opposition parties what they think about it.

I learned that only one name had been given to the leaders of the opposition parties. They did not receive the names of the last successful candidates and therefore could not be consulted about these applications. So we are talking about a simple opinion and not a consultation. That is why I'm moving this motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Would one of you like to say something?

Mr. Bernier, you have the floor.

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

You argue that there was no consultation. You said that you were informed but that you were not consulted. I would like to know what your distinction is between being consulted and being informed.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

The court decisions on this issue do indicate that there is a distinction between notifying individuals that a particular candidate will be the next Commissioner of Official Languages and submitting to them the name of the selected candidates, giving them the name of the preferred one and then asking them what they think about it. That's the difference.

In the case of Supreme Court justices, for example, the three successful candidates are presented, the favoured one is indicated and people are asked what they think. We should use the same process for the Commissioner of Official Languages. The Prime Minister should call the leaders of the opposition parties to tell them the names of the successful candidates, tell them which he favours and ask them what they think. Then we'd be talking about a consultation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Mr. Généreux, you have the floor.

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

Mr. Chair, what I know is that the leader of the opposition was informed of the name of the next person who was going to be the commissioner. I have to agree with Mr. Choquette: there is a distinction between someone informing another person and someone consulting another person. There is a fundamental difference between the two.

This time again, as we experienced in the spring in the case of Ms. Meilleur, there was no consultation. Based on what I knew, our leader was informed of the name of the future commissioner; he was not consulted.

Mr. Choquette, you will be able to fill me in on this, but I wonder if there isn't a meeting scheduled between the various party leaders to discuss the issue. Doesn't the act set out that a discussion must take place? I'll remind you that the concept of consultation implies that there is an exchange, and there has not been one this time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Does anyone else have anything to say about this?

Mr. Choquette, you have the floor.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

I absolutely agree with Mr. Généreux. When we talk about consultation, it means that we ask for an opinion and that there is an exchange. We expect at least a phone call, rather than just receiving a letter presenting the person who has been chosen as Commissioner of Official Languages.

No doubt I will have to once again file a complaint with the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages regarding this lack of consultation, which is happening again. The Office of the Commissioner will have to deal with this issue and settle this matter. In the meantime, I wondered whether the committee could not adopt a clear position on the issue.