Earlier, Mr. Chair, the member was saying that it's important for the Standing Committee on Official Languages to hear from witnesses for its education continuum study. Obviously, we are all parliamentarians, politicians, and we engage in politics.
However, Mr. Iacono's motion victimizes organizations that work tirelessly, day in and day out, to teach young people French, and I think they deserve to be heard. He knew full well the consequences of proposing his motion, and I think he's playing a very partisan game. Unfortunately, the debate on the French language is turning into a game of partisan politics, and that is not in the interest of francophones.
Now, Mr. Chair, I want to go over the sequence of events, as my fellow member did earlier, because he said things that were not true, in my opinion. On October 24, 2024, Mr. Brock turned to the Speaker of the House of Commons and said this:
Mr. Speaker, after nine years of the NDP-Liberals, taxes are up, costs are up, crime is up, time is up and now corruption is up. GC Strategies, a two-person company working from a basement, started scooping up government contracts like candy just weeks after the Prime Minister took office: $20 million for doing nothing on the failed arrive scam and $100 million in total in government contracts. If that does not scream corruption, I do not know what does. Will the Liberals get our money back?
My fellow member Mr. Iacono said that Mr. Brock was addressing Mr. Duclos, the Minister of Public Services and Procurement, which is false. He was addressing the Prime Minister, but Mr. Duclos rose to answer. So far, so good.
Then the Speaker, Mr. Fergus, recognized Mr. Duclos, who said this:
Mr. Speaker, you also could have said it in French, because I am going to say something in French that my colleague has already heard several times in English. He knows perfectly well that the Auditor General is independent, that the RCMP is also independent, that both of those organizations are doing their job, and that we will always be there to help them do it.
That brings us to the crux of the matter, when Mr. Brock said, “Mr. Speaker, my question is in English, but I digress.” Never did he clearly or specifically ask the honourable member Mr. Duclos to answer in French. What he said was neither appropriate nor necessary. It was unacceptable. Like my colleagues, I've already said that, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Brock proceeded to make the following statement:
Mr. Speaker, Liberal corruption is on rinse and repeat. The Auditor General is investigating $100 million in contracts awarded to GC Strategies, a two-person IT company that did no IT work….
Some heckling ensued in the House of Commons, and the Speaker of the House stepped in to call the members to order. He then pointed out that questions can be asked in English or in French and that questions can be answered in English or in French. He then asked the member to start from the top, but he did not ask the member to apologize.
Later, at about 3:15 p.m., Mr. Boissonnault said, “Mr. Speaker, I think that it is very important to note that we have seen a blatant lack of respect in the House for our—” It was presumably a point of order. Heckling again ensued. The Speaker of the House, Mr. Fergus, rose and called to order all the members in the House, saying that he had already made a statement on the matter during question period. The Speaker did not ask Mr. Brock to rise.
That tells me that the matter is settled.
I don't want to impute motives to Mr. Brock, but he probably realized that he had made a mistake. That is what I gathered. He rose and humbly said this: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, in relation to the introduction of my second question, the question was originally in English. I was unable to hear the minister's response because of commotion in the House. My volume was not working correctly on my earpiece. That is why I made the reference. Clearly, I recognize that every member in this House is entitled to ask questions and respond to questions in both official languages.
That last sentence is, I think, the one that matters most to us.
The Speaker of the House said that the matter was settled. He intervened, he did not ask anyone to apologize, and Mr. Brock rose and, in my opinion, humbly apologized. That's how I took it.
The Speaker stood again and said:The hon. member for Brantford—Brant raises a very interesting point, which is that when people take the floor, referring to the conversation that is happening right now between the member for Pickering—Uxbridge and the member for Lakeland, we cannot hear what is going on if there is too much ambient noise caused by people speaking out of turn. This is a very important point.
The member for Louis‑Hébert and my riding neighbour, Mr. Lightbound, then rose and made the following remark: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. The member for Brantford—Brant is clearly trying to deny what he did, but everyone in the House knew what he was trying to do. He intimated that the member for Québec should not answer in French. He should apologize. That is the kind of condescension that—
The comment ends there. That was the honourable member's assessment. I cannot say whether it's right or wrong, but I had a different take.
The Speaker of the House, Mr. Fergus, responded to Mr. Lightbound's comment as follows: “The Chair has heard enough on this matter.” The issue was therefore settled.
As far as I'm concerned, the Speaker clearly saw what happened in the House. That is his role, and he enforced the rules. What's more, despite the obvious attempts by the party across the way to get an apology, the Speaker ruled. He refused to ask the member to apologize. He said that the matter was settled and that it was time to move on.
I would like to point out that, from time to time, the Speaker considers it necessary to ask a parliamentarian to apologize. If the Speaker does not ask the member to apologize, it means that the Speaker does not consider an apology to be warranted.
I would like to go back to January 30, 2024. That was the day when yours truly rose and asked the following question:Mr. Speaker, again, this government is spreading disinformation.The member for Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine is also misleading the House. She should worry about her own region. The Gaspé and the Magdalen Islands are grappling with an unprecedented housing crisis. Members do not have to take my word for it. This is coming from Ambroise Henry, the director general of the Groupe ressource en logements collectifs, the communal housing resource group in the Gaspé and the Magdalen Islands.What is she actually doing to help the people of the Magdalen Islands find a solution for housing?
The Speaker, Mr. Fergus, then rose and said: I often have a hard time hearing the members on the far side of the room. I would ask the member for Lac-Saint-Jean to be quiet when members are asking and answering questions. The hon. Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard.
Ms. Lebouthillier then rose and gave the following response:Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned yesterday, I would say to my colleague across the way, who tells us to get off our islands, that we have indeed left our Magdalen Islands and that Magdalen Islanders have gone all over Canada. These are people who are involved in their community. If he has a backbone, he will stand up and apologize to Magdalen Islanders.
I didn't understand her answer, but that's personal. In the House, the member asked me to apologize—