Evidence of meeting #6 for Official Languages in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5 p.m.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
I tend to agree with my colleague. If Mr. Duguid wishes to invite the author of this report as a witness, we would be pleased to hear him out. We need to be decide on witnesses and on when they are going to appear before the committee. We are not here today to read reports, but to determine what we are going to do over the next few days and the next few weeks. We don't need to hear all that. We already know that it's a problem. We want to settle it and hear the witnesses who are going to come and speak to us about it.
5 p.m.
Liberal
Terry Duguid Liberal Winnipeg South, MB
What I have been talking about is very relevant to the discussion—to the number of meetings and to the kinds of witnesses we are going to call—and again, that was not a point of order.
Where was I? I don't want to repeat and waste the committee's time.
For the Francophone communities, a 2001 study by the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada, the FCFA, which has been referenced today, showed that access to health services in English was three to five times higher than access to health services in French throughout the country. Data from this non-scientific study was compiled following 300 interviews and group sessions with Francophones working in the health care sectors selected from 71 communities.
Mr. Chair, I think you get the picture. This study is extremely important. Communication is absolutely vital to providing quality health services, particularly in a pandemic. This is why this study is important. It's really important that by the end of this meeting, we settle on a group of witnesses, we settle on the number of meetings, and we proceed.
As a number of members have raised today.... The phrase doesn't quite work in English. “Laying an egg” has a different meaning in English, as far as I know.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
5:05 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
For everyone watching the meeting right now, it is clear that the Liberals are once again engaging in parliamentary obstruction.
I made a proposal and we made compromises. We included anglophones, and francophone and Acadian communities. We want to discuss the impact of this study on the modernization of the Official Languages Act.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Excuse me Mr. Beaulieu, but Mr. Arseneault has raised a point of order.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
I would like to thank my colleague Mr. Beaulieu for his comments, but are we not discussing the order in which things are to be done and Ms. Lattanzio's motion? Isn't that what we ought to be talking about? If so, I am prepared to submit an amendment, if my colleagues are willing to hear it.
5:05 p.m.
Bloc
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
5:05 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
My proposal would, for the first time in the history of the Standing Committee on Official Languages, make it possible to study the status of French in Quebec. We know that our Liberal friends definitely do not want to do so. They are speaking out of both sides of their mouths. In the House, they tell us that they support French and Bill 101, but their actions prove otherwise. It was nothing more than a smokescreen.
I will not speak for too long, except to point out that it is clear that what we have here is parliamentary obstruction. The only aim of this proposal is to add five meetings. The bare minimum of respect would allow all the committee members to submit their proposals, and then to determine their order. We could then assign priority to whichever one we had agreed upon in an informal subcommittee.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
Mr. Chair, I would like to reiterate that this is inadmissible.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
As I pointed out at the last meeting, we are not speaking about subcommittee meetings. It's as if we weretechnical problems In the midst of our discussion.
We are having discussions among ourselves, but let's concentrate on the motion that suggests five meetings. Once again, there is nothing to indicate that it's the schedule. If this motion were adopted, we would then have to discuss which motion we would be using for our studies.
Mr. Arsenault is next.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
If I have understood correctly, at issue is the matter of the five meetings. I suggest that we discuss the amendment to Ms. Lattanzio's motion. That is what we are talking about. We are in the middle of the pandemic. That is the motion we adopted unanimously.
Let's move forward and get going on the five meetings remaining before the end of 2020. That is what I propose as an amendment to the motion. I propose that we hold five meetings as soon as possible.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Can you finish up again? What you wanted to tell us wasn't clear.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
We were talking about five meetings, but if I have understood correctly, the motion has not yet been officially amended to say so…
5:10 p.m.
A voice
Inaudible
5:10 p.m.
René Arsenault
Sorry?
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
