Evidence of meeting #118 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
I call the meeting back to order.
I'm ready to rule, but before I do, I'm going to accept a final comment on Ms. Gladu's amendment.
You have the floor, Mr. Godin.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Before we go any further, I think we need to clarify things. We recognize that the member should not have made that kind of statement, which sowed doubt.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Mr. Godin, I am currently receiving comments on Ms. Gladu's amendment. I'm prepared to rule on that.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Very well, Mr. Chair. I'll continue on that subject.
I think my colleague's amendment is reasonable. We are trying to find common ground to provide our colleague with an honourable way out of this impasse.
As my colleague Mr. Lightbound mentioned, “Silence implies consent.” We experienced that last spring. That is why I began my remarks by acknowledging the facts and reiterating that the member apologized on social media—and less explicitly, in the House of Commons. To me, that is equally significant.
It's time to move on, accept my colleague's amendment and return to the study on the minority-language education continuum.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
I currently have both amendments before me—that is to say Mr. Godin's, which the committee rejected, and Ms. Gladu's.
The only difference between the two amendments is that, instead of completely deleting the first paragraph, Ms. Gladu is proposing to simply remove the reference to the Conservatives in the plural. It's as if Mr. Iacono's initial motion should pertain only to the persons named, not all Conservatives. The other proposed amendments share precisely the same goal, though they are worded differently.
That's why I think this is essentially the same amendment as the one proposed and rejected by the committee.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Before giving you the floor, Mr. Godin, I'm going to finish my obiter dictum.
I reject Ms. Gladu's amendment, although I understand that the first paragraph is worded differently. I think it's perfectly legitimate. However, in my opinion, it is out of order, given that, in the other two paragraphs, exactly the same thing is being requested as what was proposed in the amendment that was defeated.
That said, the rules give the chair a great deal of latitude in making decisions. For the reasons I mentioned, however, I find the amendment out of order. Two out of three paragraphs are similar, which has influenced my reasoning.
Therefore, I rule the amendment out of order.
Mr. Godin, you have the floor.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Mr. Chair, I would like to interpret your ruling. It's important to understand that the nuance is—
Liberal
Conservative
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
I do challenge your ruling, Mr. Chair, and call for a vote.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Madam Clerk, please call the vote.
The vote will be on whether the ruling of the chair shall be sustained.
(Ruling of the chair sustained: yeas 7; nays 4)
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
We're back to debating the main motion, the only one that still stands. It is now Mr. Dalton's turn. He will be followed by Mr. Lightbound.
Mr. Dalton, you have the floor.
October 31st, 2024 / 12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Marc Dalton Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC
Good afternoon.
It's unfortunate that we didn't go with Ms. Gladu's amendment. It was quite reasonable, and this is unacceptable for Ms. Gladu. We are therefore obliged to continue speaking to the motion.
I'm going to speak to the part of the motion with which I agree. If that part had been the entire motion, I think it would have been unanimous.
The passage in question reads as follows:
That the committee recognize that French is just as important to Canada's bilingual status as the English language and that French is indispensable to Canada's identity;
I completely agree with that proposal.
During the break, we talked about Lucky Luke and the Daltons. I read that comic strip as a child. I also used it in my classes, because students liked it. The Daltons mean a lot to me. I identified the most with Joe, because he's the smallest. The Daltons were villains, though.
Canada's identity is important. We see it across Canada and around the world—
Liberal
Marc Serré Liberal Nickel Belt, ON
Mr. Chair, I would like to speak.
How are these remarks relevant to the motion? We're talking about Mr. Brock.
Liberal
Conservative
Marc Dalton Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC
Mr. Chair, this is part of who we are as Canadians.
When I was young, I spoke more English, but I made the effort to read those cartoons, including Astérix, in French. They interested me a great deal.
During the break, I did a bit of research. The Lucky Luke cartoon was created in 1946 by a Belgian author, Mr. Morris. It's a western comic strip that was originally designed in French but is now available in 30 languages. There are 82 volumes of Lucky Luke. Movies were also made featuring this character. So this is something that will—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Mr. Dalton, I have to inform you that we're straying from the motion.