Evidence of meeting #5 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 video is available from Parliament.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Four names were mentioned. My turn came after Mrs. Lalonde's. You said so, Mr. Chair. I don't want to contradict you, but this comes as a surprise.
I cannot comment on what Mrs. Lalonde said before I analyze it.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
No. Actually, I don't want to comment on that right now.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
I just want to assure you that it is the right order, based on the way I saw the hands coming up. That's why earlier—
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
But I cannot comment on the amendment. I had asked for the right to speak before the amendment was moved.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
You wanted to speak on something other than the amendment.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
That's not what the Chair is saying, Mrs. Lalonde.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Mr. Godin, according to the Standing Orders, once the amendment is introduced, we have no choice but to discuss it.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Okay. I will discuss the amendment, Mr. Chair. I will follow the procedures.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
However, Mr. Chair, you will understand that I had asked for the right to speak before this subject was added.
In fact, I simply wanted to go back to the objective of my colleague Mr. Arseneault. We both agree that the process of awarding contracts to third parties must be evaluated. There is already an obligation in the act. So he and I have the same objective in terms of how it is applied, even if we don't go about it the same way because we don't come from the same place. I agree with my colleague.
Please understand: I do not want to go after WE Charity. Instead, we must use this situation to urgently consider how to adapt to it and how to equip ourselves to make the most of protecting the rights of both official languages.
I find it interesting to do so today after yesterday's release by the Office québécois de la langue française, which is worried about the survival of French. Even the Premier of Quebec was talking about it in a media scrum yesterday, saying that he is worried about the results that have been made public.
So I was going to move an amendment, but Mrs. Lalonde moved hers first. I have not analyzed it, but I am prepared to introduce my own.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Mr. Godin, unfortunately, we have to continue the discussion and complete our study of the amendment proposed by Mrs. Lalonde before moving on to another amendment.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Mr. Chair, thank you for giving me the right to speak; I will come back later.
1 p.m.
Liberal
1 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. There's never a dull moment. If I had known it was this much fun, I would have been here way earlier in the term.
I want the opportunity to respond to the amendment, because there's some really interesting language being used, both by the mover of the amendment and by previous speakers from the government side, and that's this language around a “contract”.
I would argue that had this been in an official contract, due diligence would have been in place and we wouldn't be in this situation. However, that's not what happened.
Let's be very clear about what happened. What happened was, as has been touted, there was a contribution agreement made that circumvented a lot of the basic practices and principles that have led to not just the language issue but a myriad of ethical issues that call into question the Conflict of Interest Act, call into question “gifts”, call into question all sorts of improprieties around this particular deal.
It was suggested that ministers in fact don't have to look at or do due diligence around this. That is, again, not the case. It is true that in testimony, Minister Chagger was very clear about what due diligence was done on the file and what wasn't.
1 p.m.
Liberal
