This amendment would at least correct the motion so that it is no longer a lie. It takes away the fact that there is no presence in Quebec, when we've already stated that there is proof that there is a presence in Quebec. It states that, again, it's an anglophone organization.
We know that it has delivered conferences in French prior to the pandemic, which means prior to any decisions being made, prior to hiring National. Not only that, but their website has been in French since 2017. This is an organization.... Maybe the chairperson of the organization is an anglophone, but that doesn't mean the organization does not provide services in French; it does. It is clear. Anybody can go look up the website. Anybody can look up their Facebook page and see clearly that WE Montreal is solely in French.
I'm not sure how much clearer it could be that, as the motion was originally, it is just a lie. We're basically assuming that they would not have been able to do what we wanted them to do in both official languages. Before we even get to a motion like this, we have to study whether or not they would have been able to accomplish this goal. I don't understand why we have a problem with the amendment when it just corrects the facts. It just makes it a motion that isn't a lie. It makes it so that we can study whether or not WE had the capacity to deliver these services in both official languages.