Evidence of meeting #119 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 brock.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
I just want to check this with you. My colleague finished his speech, since he called for the vote.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
I was the one who assumed that he had finished his speech by calling for the vote. I then told him that I was unable to do so for reasons that everyone heard. He then went on to tell me that he wasn't finished and that he was going to finish his speech, that is, to continue speaking. I misinterpreted. I'm the one who said—
Liberal
Angelo Iacono Liberal Alfred-Pellan, QC
I have a point of order, Mr. Chair. I called the question, but you did not put the question. I still have the right to continue my speech.
Conservative
Liberal
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to understand better: Is calling for a vote not a signal that a member has finished his speech?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Not in this case, no. When someone calls for a vote on an issue that cannot be debated, that request effectively ends the speech. However, in this case, we are debating a motion and people whose names are on the list can speak.
I'm going to go back to my speaking list, and Mr. Iacono is going to finish. He'll be followed by Ms. Ashton, Mr. Godin, Mr. Serré, Ms. Gladu and Mr. Beaulieu.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
Mr. Chair, I would like to add to that.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Mr. Généreux, you are going to generously provide us with your views on the motion.
Carry on, Mr. Iacono. The floor is yours.
Liberal
Angelo Iacono Liberal Alfred-Pellan, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
First of all, before I continue, I'd like to apologize to Canadians who are watching, because we really are wasting time. This is something that can easily be resolved. Therefore, I apologize to Canadians, but I must continue the debate.
To put things in context, I'll summarize the facts. On Thursday, October 24, Conservative MP Larry Brock criticized Minister Duclosfor responding in French to a question he’d asked in English. Adding insult to injury, MP Brock said he made the comment because his earpiece was defective, and that prevented him from hearing the answer. The video recording of question period doesn't lie about genuine facts. At the 358th sitting of the House of Commons, held on October 24, 2024, at 3:03 p.m. and 54 seconds, the video clearly shows that MP Brock was not wearing his earpiece. Yet both Mr. Brock and his caucus continue to ignore the facts that are clearly illustrated by this video recording and insist that Mr. Brock was wearing a defective earpiece.
Since I spoke about it last week, I've received a number of comments from my constituents who watched the question period video of the 358th sitting. They're disgusted that a member of Parliament lied in the House of Commons. Those are the words of my constituents and I can repeat them. I'm not saying that Mr. Brock lied. I'm passing on my constituents' comments, so that Canadians can hear them and know what's going on, and so that my constituents know that I'm sharing their observations.
Why are Conservative members trying to misrepresent the facts? What do they have to gain by doing that? I don't know if they're going to answer that.
On Tuesday, October 29, I presented a motion on the subject to this committee. However, Conservative members of the committee chose to obstruct it with delaying tactics, instead of pulling their heads out of the sand, condemning their colleague's comments and agreeing to have him apologize for his lack of respect in the House of Commons, for Canada's francophones and for Minister Duclos. My colleague Mr. Beaulieu is still defending the French language, and that showed a lack of respect for the French language.
I remind my Conservative colleagues that the promotion of French is primarily a matter of respect here in Ottawa. So their fine words and grand speeches about French don't count if they gloss over the many times their Conservative colleagues have disparaged French and francophones. I counted not just one or two: there were three of them, and I listed their names last week. The Conservatives' inaction on October 24, like their leader's inaction, makes them complicit in their colleague's affronts to francophones. That shows a lack of respect for the French language.
Our colleagues opposite will surely make grand speeches and tell us that they're the great defenders of the French language. However, they're unable to tell their colleague, Larry Brock, today to stand up and apologize.
We spent almost all of last week's meetings being stonewalled by the Conservatives. They blame us, but they don't look at what they're doing. How much longer will the Conservatives put their friend's interests ahead of those of Canada's francophones? How much more time will they waste by refusing to comply with a simple request to apologize? It's time for the Conservatives to stop talking out of both sides of their mouths and take responsibility for their words.
Mr. Chair, I'd like to thank you for informing us of the letter that Mr. Brock sent to the committee asking you to convey his apologies to the minister. If I understand correctly, an MP who was disrespectful in the House of Commons sent you a letter, asking that you apologize on his behalf to a third party. I wonder where the Conservatives got that idea. It must be from the green book that my colleague opposite has on his desk. That book deals with procedure, and my colleague uses it very well. So Mr. Brock sent a letter to the committee asking the chair to convey his apology to the minister. He thinks the chair of the committee is a carrier pigeon. My simple answer is that Mr. Brock can read his letter to the House of Commons, it will only take a minute and everything will be settled. I learned all of this from reading the book on procedure, which I interpreted correctly. However, my colleague has trouble interpreting certain things. I don't know who got creative on the other side and who was able to tell Mr. Brock that all he had to do was send a letter of apology and that everything would be resolved.
It shows a lack of respect for French Canadians to ask a committee chair to act like a carrier pigeon to convey the apology of a Conservative member from Ontario. I'm ashamed of them. The Conservative members of this committee refuse to allow their colleague to apologize in the House of Commons for his lack of respect for francophones and especially for the French language. In fact, it's primarily a lack of respect for the French language. It's not, first of all, a lack of respect for Minister Duclos or Mr. Duclos, because that's secondary. The reason we want this apology is because he showed a lack of respect for the French language, for Canadian culture, and for Canada's official languages.
The habit of treating francophones as second-class Canadians is deeply rooted among Conservatives.
If that were not the case, the Quebec Conservatives would have stood up on the same day and said something. After Mr. Brock was called into the lobby to be told what to do, when he returned to the House of Commons, instead of making a formal apology, he simply said that his remarks were inappropriate and that everyone has the right to speak one of the two official languages in the House of Commons. I don't think that's a proper apology. That wasn't an apology, period.
If that were not the case, today, last week, and since October 24, the Conservatives would have called their offending colleague to order. They'd have demanded an apology in the right forum. Mr. Brock indeed did have an awakening and sent a letter to the committee chair. Fine. The Conservatives surely debated the issue by consulting the green book on procedure, and then decided to send a simple letter saying that it would settle the matter.
However, where did he show this lack of respect? In the House of Commons. It wasn't on the street, in a yard or park; it was in the House of Commons. Therefore, an apology should be made in the House of Commons. It shouldn't be done through social media, as he did. It should be done in the House of Commons. Where did he show this lack of respect? It was in the House of Commons. The apology should therefore be made in the House of Commons, in proper form. The book on procedure doesn't specify how an apology can be made. Everything that happens in the House of Commons must be settled in the House of Commons.
It's tit for tat.
That's enough: we've wasted the time of this committee and of Canadians for countless hours so that MP Larry Brock doesn't have to make a speech in the House that would last less than a minute. This is totally unacceptable.
After my speech, my Conservative colleagues will surely continue the debate. They'll make all kinds of arguments just to avoid having to apologize. They'll try to demonstrate that what the member for Brantford—Brantdid in the House of Commons was acceptable and respectable. I don't think so. This deserves a proper apology in the House of Commons.
Mr. Chair, again, I'm asking you to stop this and move to a vote. I want to do so in order to move the debate on the French language forward. I insist on it so that we can have more constructive debates instead of continuing to focus on the lack of respect of a member who doesn't even wear his earpiece to understand what his colleagues are saying when they speak French in the House of Commons. I think it's really a language issue—
Conservative
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
In fact, my colleague just mentioned a few things and passed judgment on parliamentarians who decide whether or not to wear an earpiece. We are way off topic. We should be careful when we accuse parliamentarians. It's not our place to judge the behaviour of parliamentarians in the House of Commons.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
I take it in the context of debate, because it is as if we hadn't adjourned the debate. There were comments suggesting that the member for Brantford—Brant did in fact wear his earpiece but that it was defective.
In that context, I think that's what Mr. Iacono is referring to. It's as though we hadn't stopped last week's meeting. In any case, that's how I see it. In that context, I think Mr. Iacono is responding to those comments, namely that it was suggested that Mr. Brock's excuse was that he wore his earpiece, which was defective. In any case, that's how I interpret that statement.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Mr. Chair, I understand what you're saying, and it's perfectly legitimate. I'd like to add something to what you just said. What Mr. Iacono said a few minutes ago, before my point of order, concerns members who don't use their earpiece to listen to the translation in order to understand the speakers or members who speak French. The latter are therefore not understood by anglophones.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
I think it's a good thing to remind our colleagues, but I can't stop a member who says that.
Liberal
Angelo Iacono Liberal Alfred-Pellan, QC
I wasn't talking about other colleagues. I was referring to the member in question. He's the one who didn't wear his earpiece. I wasn't talking about other members. While members are making their speeches in French, anglophone members aren't wearing their earpieces, so they aren't listening. I'm saying that MP Brock doesn't wear an earpiece when his francophone colleagues are speaking.
I'm going to continue a little because it's very interesting. We're debating a lack of respect for the French language and the word used by the member in question. What we have here is another debate on the manner that member chose to apologize and the reasons why he did so. The problem is with the earpiece. After I said that the member didn't wear an earpiece, no one on the Conservative side contradicted me.
Mr. Chair, I am asking you for the third time today to stop this debate. I see that my Conservative colleague is laughing, because he finds that amusing. I don't find that amusing. Let's call the question.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
I will repeat what I said earlier, Mr. Iacono, that I can't do so, because it's clearly stated in our rules of procedure, in Standing Order 116: Debate on the motion is ongoing.
Have you completed your remarks?
Liberal
Angelo Iacono Liberal Alfred-Pellan, QC
Yes, I'm done, but I want you to add me to the speaking list.
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and good morning, everyone.
I shared some of my thoughts with you at our meeting last week. I would like to reiterate that the members of my party hope that this situation will be resolved by a formal apology from Mr. Brock in the House, in connection with the comment he made and his response in the House, which showed flagrant disrespect for francophones and the place of French in our Parliament and in our country.
I'm disappointed with this filibuster, which is delaying our study. This is a very important study that I was very pleased to support, because I think it really targets the crisis in French-language and early childhood education in our country. Personally, I'm experiencing this crisis, not as an educator, but as a parent. We heard from representatives of my children's school, as well as organizations and school boards across the country, that our French-language schools and child care centres need immediate assistance and a substantial partnership with the federal government.
The shortage of staff in the early childhood field and the shortage of French-language teachers in the French as a first language education system and in French immersion programs are extremely obvious, particularly in western Canada. The waiting lists are long; parents obviously want to send their children to French-language day care centres, immersion schools or even francophone schools, if they're entitled to them. In fact, we don't have enough teachers or staff to provide French-language education to our children and help us raise our children in French. Several witnesses told us about the impact of this shortage on our ability to educate the next generation in French. That contributes to the decline of French, which is now an obvious fact in Canada.
In my opinion, our study is essential. We had some serious witnesses who took the time to come here, who came out of their classrooms and set aside their very important work to give us their advice and express their hope that we'd do something to help and support them, of course, to support our children who want to learn French, and parents who want their children to learn French. There are also francophone communities that want us to attack the decline of French.
I want to tell you that a few days ago, I met with representatives of Canadian Parents for French, which is doing incredible work across the country. I personally benefited from their work. Our community and the families of immersion students owe them a great deal. They were prepared to come before the committee and make important recommendations, but unfortunately they were unable to do so because of this ongoing filibuster. Because of what's happening and because of this waste of time, we're not listening to them. I think it's troubling that the committee is sending a signal that it would rather waste its time filibustering than solving the challenges targeted by the study.
I would like to remind you that an anglophone member made a comment in the House that showed a lack of respect for a francophone member and minister, as well as for the use of French in the House. It's one of our official languages here on Parliament Hill. It's troubling that a real apology wasn't made in the House, especially since this wasn't the first time such a situation occurred. Of course, we all heard, on another occasion, what a Conservative member of Parliament said to a minister. These are not isolated cases. In my opinion, this clearly shows a lack of respect for the French language and francophones in this country.
However, I would add that, in this committee, a number of Conservative members, some of whom are anglophones in particular, have clearly demonstrated that they are concerned about protecting French. I don't think we're questioning that at all. That said, I think it's crucial for a committee dedicated to official languages to hold to account an MP who showed a lack of respect for French and the francophonie in the House.
I think it points to a systemic problem. Canadians who are interested in the francophonie are currently observing this willingness to accept apologies expressed through social media rather than real apologies made in the House. Not only as parliamentarians, but also as parliamentarians who are interested in these issues, we have an obligation to take official language challenges seriously. We need a real apology in the House and a clear message that French is accepted on Parliament Hill and that it's unacceptable to deny MPs the right to express themselves in French or English. We must let Canadians know and acknowledge that a mistake was made in the House and that it's necessary to get to work to truly protect French, which is in decline in our country.
I want you to know that I want this filibuster to end so that we can vote. Finally, because this is the second time a Conservative has made such a comment, I hope that the Conservative Party will work to defend French. Such situations give us reason to have doubts. Since I was a member of Parliament during Mr. Harper's reign, I saw the cuts to the CBC, the end of the court challenges program and the cuts to funding for francophone organizations. His government didn't support the francophonie as it should have. He did not exercise leadership in francophone immigration. Francophone Canadians, particularly here in western Canada, are concerned because the Conservative leader will do what he will do as Prime Minister if he is elected.
I think we should call the question. The committee should make it clear that it expects a formal apology from the member in the House. Canada's francophones and Canadians who are interested in protecting French deserve it. I hope we can hear the member's apology as soon as possible.
Liberal
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Where should I start?
At the outset, I'll respond to Ms. Ashton's comments about my colleague Larry Brock's apology. I'm going to wonder out loud. Coming from a member who travelled to the Quebec Winter Carnival with her children during the holidays in 2023 and who didn't apologize—