Evidence of meeting #1 for Official Languages in the 43rd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
February 20th, 2020 / 3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
I am not currently thinking of anything specific, but I would perhaps add four other points. It may be sufficient to leave open the possibility of asking other questions. Oftentimes, certain answers lead us to other questions or to potential discussions.
I would not want the answers to be restricted and those people to tell us that they have unfortunately not prepared answers for the other questions.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
Okay. So we could talk about other issues related to the enumeration of rights holders.
Conservative
Liberal
Emmanuella Lambropoulos Liberal Saint-Laurent, QC
Regarding the point raised by Mr. Angus, I have prepared a motion I would like to present today to this committee. I would still like to have the opportunity to....
Liberal
Emmanuella Lambropoulos Liberal Saint-Laurent, QC
I know, but he mentioned putting forward...or at least considering not putting forward any motions, so I'm just speaking to that point, but I'd like to still bring forward the motion.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Mr. Chair, I agree with Mr. Généreux when it comes to openness, but as the parliamentary secretary mentioned earlier, Mr. Généreux and he are familiar with the file's background. However, a number of us are new members.
So I would add in the motion, parliamentary secretary, a description of the past situation, starting before the last census, and of the problem, so that we can understand what has happened with the solutions proposed and the tests carried out last summer. As we don't know what the source of the problem is, we cannot find a solution.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
May I respond to the concern that was just expressed, Mr. Chair?
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
The question is really important, and the answer is that rights holders were never counted in the past. There is no historical trend. Previously, people were asked whether their mother tongue was French or English. There was never a concerted, voluntary effort to enumerate the rights holders under section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Section 23 is a specific provision that concerns minority languages. Where the number justifies it, education can be provided in the language of the minority. The question was never asked that way. There is no historical trend. So we could never look at the past context. There has never been any. The census has existed for 35 years, with seven of them having been done, and rights holders under section 23 have never been enumerated. That is what this important request was about.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Yes, Mr. Chair.
I thank the parliamentary secretary for his answer. That said—and this may not be the fault of Statistics Canada—rights holders have been ignored. I would like to know what figures and data were used to enable minorities to have access to education in their language.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
Mr. Chair, perhaps I could partially answer my colleague.
We have already considered this issue. We could perhaps ask Ms. Lecomte to create a one-page document based on all the exchanges that have been held between the committee and Statistics Canada officials, including information they have submitted to us. When those people come meet with us, we could use that document as a starting point for the discussion.
I understand my colleague. When we invite witnesses, we must be at least somewhat prepared. I think that Ms. Lecomte can provide us with that data.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Ms. Lecomte tells me that a report on this issue was produced. She will provide us with information on it.
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
I would like to put a question to the clerk.
I am in favour of the proposal, I don't really have anything to say, but, normally, it seems to me that motions require a 24 hours' notice. If my understanding is correct, this is an exception because the issue has been discussed. I have seen it in the news.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Exactly.
This is not work we could start at the next meeting.
What must also be considered is that there is a possibility of amending the proposal that has been submitted. The clerk told me that we should perhaps discuss it now or keep a copy of it and, at the next meeting, debate it more extensively before adopting it.
Mr. Angus, do you want to say something?
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
I support the motion, but there is a problem. I feel that the committee has a dual role. It must invite officials to examine programs and services, but its role is also to give organizations and citizens an opportunity to raise issues.
So I would like to amend the motion to invite witnesses. I am not ready to propose witness names today, but we could perhaps do so at the next meeting in order to give organizations an opportunity to tell us if there is a problem. It is our role to hear both points of view.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
We usually work that way. We table a motion and invite everyone to suggest witnesses. We've worked that way since I've been here.
By the way, unless I'm mistaken, all the reports produced here over the past four years have been adopted unanimously. Bernard's memory may be better than mine.