Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I just wanted to make a comment.
I'd like to speak to the comments made earlier by my colleague across the way.
All of the issues that were mentioned by Mr. Chong are already being studied by three different committees. That's not why we're here today. Today we're here because we are trying to make sure that organizations serve Canadians in both English and French all across the country.
The reason I have a problem with the motion, just as my colleague said, is that I don't think it's true. We're basing it on an assumption that it is not present in Quebec and is only offered to English speakers.
I worked in a school in Quebec where my students benefited from WE, so I cannot sit here and say that this isn't a lie or that it is not a false assumption. I have first-hand experience with this organization in my school in Quebec. I don't understand how much clearer I can get on that.
There are 400 schools in Quebec that are with WE and have somehow taken advantage of programs offered by WE. There are 948 teachers in Quebec who have worked with WE. They have worked with their students in leadership to bring kids to countries to build wells and help with international development, so I have a problem with this.
Every single person watching this committee today, and every single person on this committee, can go on WE's French Facebook page, UNIS, to see a three-hour conference taking place in French, with four French speakers, four Montreal French youth. These are the people benefiting from this organization. About 115,000 young people in Quebec benefit from WE, whether they are French or English, and not one English person at that conference would have understood what was being said, because it was all in French.
That's fine. They're across the country and they offer services in both languages. We cannot sit here and put a motion forward, or vote on a motion, that is a literal lie, and in my view it is, because I know the facts.