Official Languages Committee on Aug. 12th, 2020

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

I've been wanting to speak for a long time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

For now, here's the list of the next speakers: Ms. Lattanzio, Mr. Beaulieu, Ms. Lalonde and Mr. Godin.

Ms. Lattanzio, you have the floor.

[Patricia Lattanzio, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon, dear colleagues. I'm glad to see you back here today.

I would like to respond to a few comments that were made by my two colleagues, including those of Mr. Beaulieu, first of all, concerning the WE Charity headquarters in Montreal, Quebec. It's on Saint-Hubert Street. Minimal research shows that the head office is still there. This company hasn't been closed; it continues to operate.

If you unfortunately didn't get an answer the day you chose to knock on its door, Mr. Beaulieu, it may be, as my colleague said, because people aren't answering the door right now, as many of us in our constituency offices. To my knowledge, the head office of this company is still on Saint-Hubert Street, as mentioned on the WE Charity website.

Before going any further, I'd like to respond to the comments of my colleague Mr. Green.

Saying that it has no presence in Quebec is not only false, but we should also raise the argument that if we follow this logic, an organization that is only headquartered in Quebec could never run any national program no matter what and whom they partnered with. That, being a Quebecker, would sadden me, to say the least.

With regard to the question of due diligence raised by my colleague Matthew Green in relation to the language, it would not be the ministers who would want to answer these questions with regard to due diligence, but actually the staff of the ESDC, because we have a contract. I dug up the contract and I have it here before me. I don't know if my colleague took the pain of looking up the contract, but the contract is in both French and English, and I have both copies here. I'm going to draw your attention to section 37 of that contract.

I'm going to cite section 37.1 for the benefit of our members here today.

Where the Project is to be delivered to members of either language community, the Recipient shall:

(a) make Project-related documentation and announcements (for the public and prospective Project Participants, if any) in both official languages where applicable;

(b) actively offer and provide in both official languages any Project-related services to be provided or made available to members of the public, where applicable; and,

(c) organize activities and provide its services, where appropriate, in such a manner as to address the needs of both official language communities.

It is in black and white. It is crystal clear. On the contract that was signed, both the participants knew full well that the services that needed to be delivered needed to be in French and in English. Further, I draw your attention to some of the activities that needed to be done in both official languages. I'm going to give you, as they say in French,

—an overview.

We can find some of those activities or some of those projects that needed to be done in both languages throughout the contract, and more specifically in clauses that pertain to such activities. I'm going to draw your attention to some of those

I don't mean to be wasting anybody's time, Mr. Chair, but I just want to be thorough. They appear in schedule A.

When we look at the activities in schedule A, we see that:

The specific objectives of the project are to:

Place up to 40,000 students in WE volunteer service opportunities across Canada, including those from vulnerable [and] underrepresented groups and official language minority communities....through the ‘I Want to Help’ platform;

It continues:

Ongoing from May to September 2020:

Validate and post volunteer service opportunities in bilingual format from Not-for-Profits partners and other Not-for-Profits through web-based input module and electronic feed to ESDC’s ‘I Want to Help’ platform;

and further on:

Provide bilingual supports to Not-for-Profit partners to ensure they have the capacity to train and safely onboard volunteers to WE service opportunities;

Provide bilingual supports, youth skills training, and COVID-19 training to volunteers in WE service opportunities;

We can go on and on. For instance, under “June 2020”, we see “Launch a bilingual online WE Platform to register and intake volunteers for WE opportunities”.

Therefore, to say here or to have a premise in this committee that when this contract was contracted, no due diligence was done with regard to ensuring that the programs and projects would be done in both official languages is, I think, very far from the truth. I think there were documents that were legally binding to such an effect. If we're going to have that conversation here in this committee, I think we need to move beyond the scope of just this organization and make it broader, as my colleague MP Arseneault has mentioned. I welcome the extension of the olive branch from our colleague MP Généreux, because I think the mandate of this committee is to ensure that, be it this organization or any organization that contracts with the government, both French-language and English-language minorities receive the services they so deserve.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Ms. Lattanzio.

I'll now give the floor to Mr. Beaulieu.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

On the one hand, I don't want to talk too much about content, but I want to correct some information. Yesterday, someone went to 3736 Saint-Hubert Street. We found the location, even though it isn't mentioned on every platform. When he knocked on the door, there was no answer. A man was waiting in front of the door and said he was the owner. According to the information we have so far, it isn't that the company has closed its doors and the employees are teleworking, but rather that the company has broken the lease. We'll be able to do further checks.

On the other hand, if WE Charity had also hired English-language communications firms, I don't think it would be to help it communicate in English or because people in the organization have difficulty speaking English. In the case of NATIONAL, it seems that it was explicitly to help the organization contact francophones, among other things.

Many Liberals seem to be very close to WE Charity and very familiar with its activities. I've checked around and nobody knew about it; nobody had heard of the organization. It seems to be a fairly small network.

This is an important example. We've seen a number of indications, including the issue of product labelling. Initially, it wasn't considered important for francophones to be able to read the safety instructions on health products. There were all kinds of easy measures, which were finally taken. The government revised its position and said that it would have been very simple to require companies that order these products to label them in French once the products arrived. There are all kinds of ways to do this.

There are a whole host of examples that show that it is a bit of a facade of bilingualism. Services in French are often inadequate. We saw this week that Fisheries and Oceans Canada didn't send out all its calls for tenders in French. We could list a number of examples where even government agencies flout the Official Languages Act.

This is a good example to get to the bottom of the issue and see what action has been taken. Then we'll be able to generalize and see what measures are taken to ensure that programs are always accessible in French. I won't do that, but if there were an amendment to be made, it would simply be to add the word “presumably” before the phrase “unilingual anglophone”. In any case, it's important to get to the bottom of this issue.

It's one thing for WE Charity to be able to organize events where there are talks in French, but it's another thing to have people within the organization who can respond in French and who can really provide services in French, not just at a talk at a given time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu.

Mrs. Lalonde, the floor is yours.

[Marie-France Lalonde, Liberal, Orléans, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I very much appreciate the conversation we are having today.

I really liked what my colleague said about the contract that was signed in terms of the federal government's commitment and its obligation regarding official languages. If you are at all familiar with my background at the provincial level, you know how important I see bilingualism, here in Canada and particularly outside Quebec.

Someone talked about seizing the opportunity. I would like to try to start a conversation with a view to improving the original Conservative Party motion.

Mr. Chair, if I may propose an amendment to the initial motion by my colleague Mr. Godin, for whom I have a great deal of respect, perhaps that will provide Mr. Green with an answer. We have not really had a chance to talk to each other because of COVID-19. Furthermore, I am new to the federal government.

I will read the amendment in both official languages.

Madam Clerk, I would like to submit copies.

Mr. Chair, may I read the amendment I am proposing?

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Yes, Mrs. Lalonde.

[Marie-France Lalonde, Liberal, Orléans, ON]

We would improve the initial motion by adding a context for Mr. Godin's motion. The motion would begin as follows:

That the Committee wishes to ensure that both the due diligence and contractual obligations are sufficient to ensure that any outsourcing of Federal Government programs or services requires delivery of programs in both official languages to the same level as if the Government had delivered the programs and services itself.

That the Committee study the language requirements associated with the outsourcing of federal government responsibilities and hold at least 4 meetings on the subject and hear from relevant witnesses and report back to the House on the issue.

I would like to continue by reading my colleague's motion.

Would you like me to read it in English, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Wait a moment, please, Mrs. Lalonde.

I would just like to make sure that this amendment is in order.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Where is the amendment added?

[Marie-France Lalonde, Liberal, Orléans, ON]

It would be added at the beginning, and the rest of the motion would follow.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

I would like a clarification, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Go ahead, Mr. Deltell.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Did Mrs. Lalonde say that we would start with this addition and that it would be followed by our motion, word for word?

[Marie-France Lalonde, Liberal, Orléans, ON]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Mrs. Lalonde, as presented, this amendment is actually in order, but I see a number of hands raised.

I would ask you not only to read the amendment, but also to specify where it would be placed in the motion, so that we can clearly understand.

[Marie-France Lalonde, Liberal, Orléans, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I apologize to my colleagues for this misunderstanding.

The initial motion would begin with the amendment I am proposing. Then it would read:

“That the Committee undertake a study on the government's decision”.

Everything else would follow.

That is what I propose as context. We have talked about diligence and the idea of seizing the opportunity to study not only an organization, but also how the government is holding its own with respect to official languages.

We have talked about the importance of bilingualism in Canada and the role of the government in awarding contracts. We have talked about section 37, but the Standing Committee on Official Languages should also look at the issue a little more generally at the same time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Mrs. Lalonde.

Next on the list are Mr. Godin, Mr. Green, and Ms. Lambropoulos.

The discussion is now on the amendment.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Mr. Chair, I had asked to speak before Mrs. Lalonde made her presentation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

No, no, no.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Yes, yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

No. When hands are raised, I check, I look, I write it down, and I verify it as well.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

You mentioned my name when you made a series of—

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Yes.