Evidence of meeting #117 for Official Languages in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
My understanding is that Mr. Dalton is saying that he agrees with Mr. Iacono's motion, particularly its second half. That's the connection, and he's telling us why he wants the committee to accept this motion.
Conservative
Liberal
Angelo Iacono Liberal Alfred-Pellan, QC
I have a point of order, Mr. Chair, and I beg my colleagues' pardon.
Mr. Dalton, what you say is very interesting, but I'd like to get back to the second last paragraph and to stay on topic. You're discussing the Canadian identity, but the purpose of the matter before us isn't to define that identity. Instead it's to advance arguments concerning what happened in the House of Commons, by which I mean the disrespectful behaviour toward all parliamentarians and Canadians, especially old-stock francophones, when one member rose and told another that he wasn't satisfied with the answer he had received because it wasn't in English.
My motion doesn't address identity. I'm very sensitive to your remarks, but it's the actions taken and words spoken in the House of Commons that I consider relevant.
Mr. Chair, I know I'm the next speaker, and I will wait for you to give me the floor because I've listened to everything.
I just want to make a point. Many things are being said, but we're digressing from the facts and from what happened in the House. Canadians are watching us, and I believe they already know what the Canadian identity is. I think it's important to focus the debate back on what happened in the House and that we must discuss it. That's why I've introduced my motion.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
I understand, Mr. Iacono, but we are in the midst of a debate. Even though the connection between one speaker's remarks and the content of the motion before us is tenuous, it is traditional for us to allow him to continue. Since I've been chairing this committee, I've only once had to call a person to order and give the floor to the next speaker, and that was because the person had said the same thing three times when I had told him he had three strikes.
In this instance, Mr. Dalton is addressing a specific part of your motion. I'm listening to him, and he seems to be explaining why he supports the motion and how it all relates to the Canadian identity.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
I will therefore allow you to continue, Mr. Dalton, while reminding you that your colleagues Mr. Iacono, Mr. Godin and Ms. Gladu also wish to speak.
Conservative
Marc Dalton Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC
Yes, I'm discussing part of the motion. There are other parts, and I'm going to discuss them too. Mr. Iacono will have his turn. I thank him for his patience.
On my father's side, the Dalton name comes from the Métis side of his family, who lived near Saint-Albert, a francophone region. However, his father was born in Villeneuve, which is why he was named Pierre‑Arthur Villeneuve at birth. He has never discussed that name with me, but he comes from the former village of Villeneuve. He met my mother, who was a teacher, in Joussard, a small village near Slave Lake, and they married.
My father was in the Canadian Army for 36 years. He enlisted during the Korean War. Here I want to point out a significant connection with the national identity. He was stationed at Baden‑Soellingen, a former Canadian Army base at the time, where there was a very strong Canadian military presence, and that's where I was born, in West Germany, during the Cold War.
Conservative
Marc Dalton Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC
I'm talking about the Canadian Forces, about my history and my identity as a Canadian. Did you know that French is the first language I learned, Mr. Chair? I know that's not obvious now, but it's the language I spoke until I was three years old. I spoke neither German nor English.
I hope my colleagues are taking notes. I want to review the history of the Canadian Army, which isn't just English Canadian. It also includes French Canadians who were very brave. English and French Canadians fought in both world wars and died on the battlefields. A reminder that Remembrance Day is coming.
In short, I agree with Mr. Iacono's motion. The importance—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Just a moment, please, Mr. Dalton. We have to do a sound test with Ms. Ashton.
Go ahead, Ms. Ashton.
NDP
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
All right. Pardon me, I was speaking in my capacity as the NDP's heritage critic in the House and am now back with the committee.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
We can hear you loud and clear.
I'm going to let Mr. Dalton continue his excellent speech on Mr. Iacono's motion.
Conservative
Marc Dalton Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC
So we're talking about battlefields where English Canadians, French Canadians, indigenous people and Métis—of which I am one, as I told you—gave their lives for this country. They fought and gave their lives for values, including our linguistic duality, the fact that our country is anglophone and francophone and that it possesses two official languages and two cultures.
In 1759, James Wolfe won the Battle of the Plains of Abraham in Quebec City, and New France thus became a British possession. Don't forget, however, that the American Revolution occurred a little to the south a few years later, in 1776. The Americans offered to join forces with the former New France, which at the time was part of the United Kingdom, to drive the English out of the country.
What happened then? The francophone and Catholic communities realized that their rights, language and religion were better protected under the English regime than under the Americans. Great Britain granted them considerable freedom at the time. They had an opportunity to join the United States but chose to fight against the Americans. You can see the sites where the battles took place in the areas surrounding Montreal and Quebec City, and at many other locations.
Conservative
Marc Dalton Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC
Mr. Chair, I'm talking about the Canadian identity, which is really—
Conservative
Marc Dalton Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC
Mr. Chair, this has really been a fundamental part of our identity for hundreds of years. I'm trying to show that the Conservatives agree the French language is important. It's been said that we aren't in favour of the French language, but that's not true. It's as though they're saying we aren't Canadian. The French language is part of the Canadian identity, isn't it?
I was talking about Canadian military members, and we have regiments like the 22nd Regiment based in Quebec City.
My father was based in Quebec City and Chibougamau. When I was three years old, my family moved to the south, far from London, to Clinton to be more precise. My father began training at the radar stations. The children there spoke English and made fun of me because I couldn't understand them. I couldn't speak English. I remember my mother telling my father that they had to speak to me in English. My mother regretted her decision for many years because I lost my French, even though it's true that I now still speak a little.
So we went and lived on military bases in Alberta, north of Vancouver Island and in Chibougamau. We were living in Chibougamau when I was a teenager. My mother tried to force me to speak French, but I didn't want to do it. She sent me to live with relatives in Opasatika, not far from Kapuskasing. So I lived with members of my family who spoke only French. Personally, I still didn't want to speak French. I spoke to American tourists when I was at Opasatika Lake. My parents were angry with me because I didn't learn much French.
When I lived in Chibougamau, I attended an English Catholic school. My parents enrolled me in the French comprehensive school when it opened, but that only lasted a day or two. I wasn't happy and I went back to the anglophone school.
I was always very competitive at school. I always wanted to be the best in every subject. I competed with my sister Danielle, who's now a judge, but that's another story. I'll come back to it if I have time. It's unrelated to the motion for the moment. French was my worst subject; I even failed my French course. All the other kids in my class in Chibougamau spoke French, but I preferred to clown around.
Life went on: I earned my high school diploma and started travelling to Mexico, where I lived for a few months. So I had to speak Spanish. I started learning it, and that made me want to learn other languages. I thought it was really worthwhile to do it. So I decided to learn French and took correspondence courses. A few years later, I enrolled at Simon Fraser University and studied to become a teacher.
I became a history teacher, to the delight of my mother, a French second language teacher. Those poor kids! Anyway, I completed a master's degree and taught for many years, seven in primary school and another seven at the secondary level. I then became a provincial MLA, but wasn't re‑elected, then went back to the high school where I had taught 16 years earlier. I taught French second language to grade 8, 9 and 10 students for six years.
The most important thing for me was for them to have a positive experience. They often forgot how to conjugate various verbs, but I wanted to give them an opportunity to communicate, to enjoy themselves and to want to speak French. That's what I wanted. What we want here, as individuals and as a committee, is to make Canadians want to promote French. We don't just want to maintain French in its present position; we also want it to flourish. French is very important for us.
As a teacher, I also observed that many students were enrolled in immersion programs. I'd like to discuss the importance of immersion a little more in our current study because I think it's a missing piece of the puzzle. Much of the vitality of the francophonie outside Quebec is found in the schools. In a way, they've replaced churches as language transmission centres. That's one of the reasons why we're conducting this study on education from early childhood to the post-secondary level. It's a very important study, but I think we should also focus on immersion programs or else conduct another study.
I'm still talking about the Canadian identity here. In the immersion programs, there are nearly half a million….
Mr. Chair, at this point, with your permission, I'd like to yield to my friend and colleague Ms. Gladu because I'd like a glass of water.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
If you've finished, others have requested the floor before Ms. Gladu. First, there's Mr. Iacono. Then it will be Mr. Godin's turn and, lastly, that of Ms. Gladu.
Conservative
Liberal
Angelo Iacono Liberal Alfred-Pellan, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would like to clarify a few points because Canadians are watching us and some of them are no doubt trying to understand what's going on today.
I'm going to quote some of the comments that were made after the incident and that were reported on the CBC Lite website. They're unfortunately in English, but they'll nevertheless help clarify the exact words that my colleague used when he made his comments to the minister concerning the fact that the latter had answered him in French. They are as follows:
Actually, I'll start instead by citing the following remarks made by Mr. Duclos:
“What we just heard is an insult to all Francophone MPs in this House, including Conservative MPs,” Duclos said in French. He later called on Brock to apologize.
Rising on a point of order after question period, Brock said he wasn't able to hear Duclos's response “because of commotion in the House.”
“My volume wasn't working correctly on my headpiece. That's why I made the reference,” Brock said.
“Clearly I recognize that every member in this House is entitled to respond and ask questions in both official languages.”
Speaking to CBC News outside the House, Duclos said Brock's excuse was “very poor.”
This is what led me to bring this motion forward. I feel, based on what I'm going to be saying after this, that everything concludes to the conclusion that the francophones are not respected by the allophones in the House of Commons, especially from the opposition party. We have colleagues from the opposition party who pronounce and confirm that they're defending the rights of the French Canadians, yet at that present moment in the House of Commons on October 24—I'm sure Canadians can go back and watch the video of that exact episode—when the comments where made and when the minister got up and responded to him, not a single soul of a Conservative MP got up or made a comment.
That also goes for other members of other parties. I know that some of my colleagues across were present, and I know who wasn't present. However, today we are hearing from the ones who weren't present conclusions that their colleague Mr. Brock excused himself.
I'd like to let Canadians know that Mr. Brock never excused himself correctly in the House of Commons. He made allusions to remarks of excusing himself.
If I read a little further down, Mr. Duclos says:
“I regret to say it's contempt for the fundamental choice that we have as MPs, including Francophone MPs, to express ourselves in the language of our choosing—
As you can see, Mr. Chair, I have a big connection to what the motion is all about, so I will continue:
...In my case, my choice is French. I don't always have the words that come to me easily in English,” Duclos said.
“I think he should apologize. Maybe he said it without thinking. But it's up to him to say.”
Going forward, the article continues:
Later, on the social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, Brock apologized in both languages.
“I want to apologize to Minister Duclos and all my colleagues for my comments in question period today,” Brock posted.
“Every member of Parliament has the right to speak in the official language of their choice, my comment was inappropriate and I am sorry.”
That's beautiful, but let it be known to Canadians and let it be known in this committee room that an apology in person has yet to be made.
Mr. Chair, I have to say that, amongst the members who are here, there are two of us who are privileged. Do you know why? It's because the two of us were sitting just behind Minister Duclos. Therefore, we can see and hear, without our earpieces, what he says and what he responds. We're also even more privileged to say, Mr. Chair, that MP Lightbound and I, who sit two seats apart, were facing our esteemed colleague of the Conservative Party when he answered his question and when he responded ungraciously to the minister with his comments.
We saw his actions of wrongdoing and, to the greatest surprise—you've heard me cite this here before—he stated, “My volume was not working correctly on my earpiece. That is why I made the reference.” Wow. Do you want to know something, Mr. Chair? He wasn't wearing an earpiece when all this happened.
Every member in the House of Commons who has a problem with their earpiece, just like our colleague did before or like our other colleagues have done in the past, right away when they can't hear translation or they can't hear somebody speaking, makes a sign to the Speaker of the House. He wasn't wearing an earpiece, so how can he make such comments to the media? How can he get up in the House of Commons and conclude in front of Canadians that his earpiece was malfunctioning when he didn't have it to start with?
That's even more insulting to French-speaking people. Not only that, but somebody of his team came to get him and bring him into the lobby so he could come back calmly and make somewhat of an apology. There was no apology, Mr. Chair, because my esteemed colleague Joël and I were present in front of him. The apology was made in the air. It wasn't made to Mr. Duclos, and this is what the motion is talking about—that an apology should be made.
Conservative
