I agree with Mr. Beaulieu that we didn't wait or take the time to have a discussion with our witnesses, which I think could have been very important.
However, coming back to the motion, the member in question clearly apologized in the House of Commons. Just as you have already dealt with the motion concerning Mr. Drouin, the committee doesn't have the power to compel a member to apologize to the House of Commons. So it's clear.
However, the motion reads as follows: That the Committee recognises that French is just as important to Canada’s bilingual status as English, and that French is indispensable to the Canadian identity;
I totally agree. This is important. We're not talking about culture, but about the French language. It's really important for us as a country to determine who we are, and to me it's very personal. I make every effort in the House of Commons to answer, and even ask questions, in French. I encourage my colleagues to speak French, as well as those who are learning the language. I think that's crucial.
I can't say that I'm embarrassed, but it's a bit of an affront to hear that we, the Conservatives, are against the French language and that this is proof of that here, with this person who apologized. I really don't think that's the case. I know that my colleague and many members of Parliament, if not the majority, are learning French and making an effort. We think it's important to do that.
The passage I quoted refers to “essential to the Canadian identity”. That's true. Even the word “canadien” is French. So that's part of our identity. That's why I oppose the Bloc Québécois when it says “we are a nation”. Canada is a nation that includes Quebec and francophones.
I'll take my time to explain—