Official Languages Committee on Nov. 5th, 2020

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

I will slow down, and I can also turn off the video. I'm not even on a laptop, I'm on the Parliament's computer.

I was saying that, basically, if we don't want to waste time, instead of repeating the same arguments, we should proceed with the vote. Then we can move on. It's like the chicken or the egg. I have the impression that no matter what we say, the outcome of the vote will remain the same. It would be better to proceed with the vote now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you—

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

I apologize, Mr. Chair. I don't mean to cut you off.

In response to Ms. Lattanzio, the committee was already debating an almost identical motion on the WE Charity before Parliament was prorogued. With respect to the mandate of the Standing Committee on Official Languages, the objective was precisely to determine whether the WE Charity was capable of providing services in French in Quebec and in francophone and Acadian communities. I do not see why there should not be a debate on that.

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

A point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Yes, Ms. Lattanzio, you have the floor.

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

I understand that my colleague is referring to a few paragraphs of his motion. Am I to understand that we have to remove the paragraphs that have nothing to do with language, in terms of awarding the contract to the WE Charity? If that is the case—

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Ms. Lattanzio, I apologize, but this is more a matter of debate than a point of order, where one does not respond to another member.

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

Okay. I didn't want to turn it into a debate. I just wanted to understand. I have his answer now. I will talk more about it when it's my turn to speak.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Okay, thank you very much.

We will now go to Mrs. Lalonde.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I would like to clarify the request I made to Mr. Blaney. I had asked that the debate be adjourned. When members move to adjourn a debate, they wish to temporarily stop debate on a motion or a study in progress.

If the committee had agreed to the adjournment, we could have given the floor to our chair, who would have shared with us what was said at the subcommittee, which Mr. Arseneault talked to me about. We are responsible adults, and we desperately need to move the work of this committee forward. Once again, I’m really disappointed to have to discuss this issue with you.

That said, I want to say one thing. Mr. Beaulieu, your notice of motion was given on October 13, 2020. I have always had a great deal of respect for my colleagues on this committee, because I believe that we care about the French fact and about minority languages, which are in peril.

I’m not sure whether you know this, but before entering federal politics, I had the immense pleasure of representing the same riding of Orleans as a member of the provincial legislature. As a former Ontario Minister of Francophone Affairs, I was able to attend various meetings with Minister Joly. We talked together about education and the very worrisome danger facing our education system. I feel that this is why we unanimously adopted the motion by my colleague Ms. Lambropoulos in the previous session.

I’m not sure whether you remember the dark day in Ontario when Mr. Ford’s provincial government withdrew its funding from the proposed Université de l'Ontario français, a project that was close to my heart, to all our hearts, I believe. It was very disappointing, but I must say that the outpouring of love from all the provinces in support of that project was extraordinary. Once again, let me thank Quebec, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, British Columbia and all the countries, including France, that also took action to support this project. Education is the foundation of our language. I was extremely proud to see all that support, but it was a dark day.

The Ontario provincial budget was tabled today at 4:00 p.m. I very much look forward to hearing from Franco-Ontarian members about their expectations from this budget. I think there was some apprehension, once again. As I have said publicly, we need to thank the Liberal government, Minister Joly and all parliamentarians like you, because we were truly able to save the Université de l'Ontario français. We know that in education, thanks to the work of this committee and out of respect for the official languages, the federal government has a mandate to help us.

This evening, we spoke very briefly about the Campus Saint-Jean again. I also hope to have the support of my Conservative colleagues, who will be speaking with their good friend, Mr. O'Toole. When he spoke about COVID-19, he seemed very proud to talk about his commitment, his close relationship with Mr. Kenny and how well the latter was protecting his community from the virus.

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

A point of order, Mr. Chair.

Although I agree with what my colleague is saying, it is not related to the motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Mr. Beaulieu, I hear your point, but the motion itself is very broad. As long as a member is going to speak about the official languages, either French or English, the member can continue to comment.

Mrs. Lalonde, we are listening.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Perhaps I can refresh my colleague's memory.

So let me read your own motion again, Mr. Beaulieu. Its scope is very broad. However, let me make one comment first: the committee should be debating many things this evening other than this one. But this is the battle you chose. So let me read your motion again:

That the Standing Committee on Official Languages report to the House of Commons the following recommendation: That the Standing Committee on Official Languages recommend to the House the creation of a special committee to hold hearings to examine all aspects of the design and creation of the Canada Student Service Grant…

The motion says “student” and I am talking about teaching and education. So it is relevant. Let me continue.

…including those relating to the study to review the safeguards to prevent conflicts of interest in federal government expenditure policies;…

As you all know full well, dear friends, the program was unfortunately scrapped. With all the foofaraw they were trying to justify, some articles tried to make the point that Canadian charitable organizations were being put at risk. As for expenditures, there weren't any. Let me stop there and continue reading Mr. Beaulieu's motion:

…government spending, WE Charity and the Canada Student Service Grant; the government’s decision to select WE Charity, an anglophone organization, to implement the Canada Student Service Grant (CSSG); and the administration of the Canada Student Service Grant and WE Charity; 1. That the committee be composed of 11 members, of which five shall be government members, four shall be from the official opposition, one shall be from the Bloc Québécois and one from the New Democratic Party; 2. That changes in the membership of the committee shall be effective immediately after notification by the whip has been filed with the Clerk of the House; 3. That membership substitutions be permitted, if required, in the manner provided for in Standing Order 114(2); 4. That the members shall be named by their respective whip by depositing with the Clerk of the House the list of their members to serve on the committee no later than 3 days following the adoption of this motion by the House; 5. That the Clerk of the House shall convene an organization meeting of the said committee no later than 5 days following the adoption of this motion by the House; 6. That the committee be chaired by a member of the official opposition; 7. That notwithstanding Standing Order 106(2), in addition to the Chair, there be one vice-chair from the official opposition, one vice-chair from the Bloc Québécois and one vice-chair from the New Democratic Party; 8. That quorum of the committee be as provided for in Standing Order 118 and that the Chair be authorized to hold meetings to receive evidence and to have that evidence printed when a quorum is not present, provided that at least four members are present, including one member of the opposition and one member of the government; 9. That the committee be granted all of the powers of a standing committee, as provided in the Standing Orders, as well as the power to travel, accompanied by the necessary staff, inside and outside of Canada; 10. That the committee have the power to authorize video and audio broadcasting of any or all of its proceedings; 11. That the committee continue all of the business of the following committees: the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics; the Standing Committee on Finance; the Standing Committee on Official Languages; and the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates; and that…

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

A point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Go ahead, Mr. Dalton.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I wonder whether Mr. Beaulieu would agree to our suspending the debate for a few moments so that we can deal with the other motions. Then we could come back to this. Time is running out and we have other things to do. Would it be possible to suspend the debate, dispose of the motions and then come back to the debate, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you for that statement, Mr. Dalton.

The only way is to have Mr. Beaulieu request unanimous consent to withdraw his motion. Otherwise, we will have to continue hearing members speak to the motion. Mr. Beaulieu could raise a point of order if he wishes to speak. Mrs. Lalonde has the floor and, as I said, we must continue to hear what committee members have to say.

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

Thank you, Mr. Dalton, but I still have a lot more to say.

[Emmanuella Lambropoulos, Liberal, Saint-Laurent, QC]

Point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

You have the floor, Ms. Lambropoulos.

[Emmanuella Lambropoulos, Liberal, Saint-Laurent, QC]

I have a point of order, but first, I'd like to know whether it really is a point of order.

If we adjourn debate on the motion, it will only be for the day, right? It means that Mr. Beaulieu could present it again at an upcoming meeting. Adjournment would only apply to today, and we could work on the other motions. Is that correct?

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

If we have unanimous consent, we could adjourn debate on this motion and come back to it later. The motion will remain at the notice stage.

[Emmanuella Lambropoulos, Liberal, Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Blaney had asked whether adjourning the debate meant we could not come back to it. But we can. If we voted on the other motions today, we could begin the next meeting with Mr. Beaulieu's motion, right?

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

I did not understand the last part of your question. If we have unanimous consent, according to the clerk, we can adjourn debate and come back to the motion later.

[Emmanuella Lambropoulos, Liberal, Saint-Laurent, QC]

I thought that a majority vote would suffice.