Official Languages Committee on May 20th, 2024

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

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Mr. Godin, you have the floor.

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

My colleague isn't talking about the topic of the proposed motion. I would like him to get back on track. We must focus on this motion so that we can move on.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Mr. Godin. However, he's speaking directly about the topic of the motion and drawing parallels to make his point.

Again, I'll give the floor to the people who already raised their hands. I'll then rule on whether the motion is in order. Ms. Ashton is last on the list. We can then continue.

Mr. Serré, you have the floor.

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I understand why Mr. Godin is a bit annoyed, because it's hard to take. A Conservative member—

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

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

The floor is yours, Mr. Godin.

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

Mr. Chair, my colleague is trying to portray me as having certain emotions and reactions. I would like him to save his comments for the debate and to leave my reactions out of it. It isn't appropriate.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Mr. Godin, this isn't a point of order. This doesn't fall outside the scope of what we can hear here. I can't judge people's hypersensitivity. If Mr. Serré were out of line, I would have asked him to tone it down. I think that we can let him finish his remarks, just as we respected you and heard what you had to say.

Please continue, Mr. Serré.

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I can understand that this is a bit hard for Mr. Godin to hear. However, I would like to remind everyone here that, in a committee, Rachael Thomas told Ms. St‑Onge, the Minister of Canadian Heritage, not to speak French. Come on! She told her this in a parliamentary committee here in Ottawa. What did Ms. Thomas do after making these comments? She apologized.

This is directly related to today's discussion. She apologized only once, while Mr. Drouin has apologized five times. He even apologized to the committee here. In Ms. Thomas's case, the situation wasn't brought up in the House or anywhere else. There was no motion, no meeting called pursuant to Standing Order 106(4) and no waste of time as is the case again this evening. Right now, we aren't talking about the important topics. We should be continuing our work on regulations and various studies. We have a great deal of work to do.

I would like to remind you that Mr. Godin moved his motion before the committee last Thursday, when the minister was sitting here. We summoned him to discuss an important topic. Two opposition members even said today that underfunding was a real issue. The minister was in the room with us to talk about post‑secondary institutions. What did the opposition members do? They didn't even ask a question about post‑secondary education at all. They asked him only what he thought of the comment made by Mr. Drouin, who had just apologized. By the way, he apologized before that too.

We must watch what we say about lack of respect and procedure. The proposed motion cost us our hour with the minister.

Another motion on the same topic was then moved, pursuant to the procedure set out in Standing Order 106(4). Our parliamentary committee focuses on studies, not on expelling members of Parliament. This is totally out of order and outside the scope of the Standing Committee on Official Languages. The motion moved today is in part the same as the motion moved last Thursday, when the minister was here. The same topic is being brought up again today, with a request for this meeting pursuant to Standing Order 106(4).

The motion has two parts, (a) and (b). Part (a) asks “that the chief government whip and member of the Liberal leadership team immediately remove MP Francis Drouin from the committee.” I don't understand what procedure a committee would use to do this. I don't even understand how the motion could be in order and why we're discussing it. I look at my colleagues across the floor and sometimes wonder about their whips' decisions. I would love to discuss this, but I don't have the authority. A committee doesn't have the authority to tell the whips of the Conservative Party, the Bloc Québécois or the NDP which members to choose for committees. Since when can anyone do that?

I don't know what you have been thinking lately, but the topic has nothing to do with official languages. A committee can't choose to exclude one of its members. It's against the Standing Orders. If the Liberals and all of us had the right to move motions of that nature, I could personally put forward many names of Conservative members who made mistakes in the past. The Liberals have made mistakes too, as have members of the Bloc Québécois and the NDP. We've all made them. However, the whips make these decisions, not a committee. How does this relate to protecting the interests of minority communities in this country?

Part (b) of the motion asks “that MP Francis Drouin resign as the chair of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie.” Come on, since when can a committee do that?

I'm the chair of the Canadian section of ParlAmericas, just as Mr. Drouin is the international chair of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie. No committee here in Parliament can think of excluding anyone. No committee has that authority. Some committee members here aren't even members of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie. How can anyone decide that? It doesn't make sense.

Again, I don't understand why we're here this Monday evening. This is our third meeting on the same topic. The member has apologized. The government has already said that Mr. Drouin made a mistake. I've said it myself, and so have other members of Parliament and even the Prime Minister. Does he need absolution from the Pope? It's ridiculous.

Again, we need to look at the motions. I didn't even get to the substance of the debate, Mr. Beaulieu. I have articles here. I have a number of them, actually. I'll wait until later to talk about them, but I have here an article from Le Droit dated March 28, 1970. My father was a member of Parliament at the time. Former prime minister Trudeau asked the Liberal members who spoke French to go and promote French in CEGEPs. The heading of the article says that MP Serré is promoting Canadian unity. My father emphasized the importance of Canadian unity. It should be noted that the current environment is different from the 1950s and 1960s. Without delving into the details of the article, I'll just say that Mr. Serré spoke to students here in Ottawa at the meeting of members of the Fédération de la jeunesse franco‑ontarienne. He explained that, in the event of Quebec independence, the language rights of Franco‑Ontarians would be threatened.

That's part of history, Mr. Beaulieu. Those are my father's words. He believed that the government's ability would no longer be the same—

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

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

One moment, Mr. Serré.

Mr. Beaulieu, you have the floor.

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

I think that Mr. Serré is misleading us. He said that there were initiatives in CEGEPs, but there aren't any CEGEPs in Ontario.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Mr. Beaulieu, I'll stop you right there. That isn't a point of order.

All the members here could have said the same thing about your comments. Good or bad, we aren't criticizing that. This is Mr. Serré's position. In terms of whether the Quebec government is giving too much or too little funding to English‑language post‑secondary institutions—

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

No, that isn't the issue. He talked about CEGEPs, but there aren't any in Ontario.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Mr. Beaulieu, I'm going to cut you off.

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

I'll clarify—

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Wait a moment, I'm speaking.

Mr. Beaulieu, no one criticized what you said. Your comments, both positive and negative, concerned the motion. It's now Mr. Serré's turn to speak. Your comments don't constitute a point of order. If you wish to criticize Mr. Serré's comments on a statistical or scientific level, with supporting documents, you can do so at another time. Right now, Mr. Serré has the floor. Your proposal isn't a point of order.

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

However, I want to raise another point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Do you want to raise a point of order for something else?

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

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

You have the floor.

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

I asked for the floor earlier. Will you give me the floor, for my turn?

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

You're on the list, Mr. Beaulieu. Two of us are taking down the names.

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

Good.