Evidence of meeting #25 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 subamendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Mr.Gourde, I apologize for interrupting, but Ms. Ashton has moved that paragraph d) be deleted.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lévis—Lotbinière, QC
That's great. I have no objection to that.
I'm reading my notes because I don't have the motion in front of me, so if we have similar proposals, so much the better.
I move that we delete all of paragraph e) and paragraph f) as well. As a result, there would be no immediate vote. In paragraph h), I propose “a minimum of 15 hours of study”.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Mr. Gourde, the clerk tells us we'll have Ms. Ashton's amendments in a moment. What you just said is important, but these are paragraphs that will be deleted under the proposed amendment. We'll come back to this if you have any questions, but, for the moment, I give Mr. Godin the floor.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Mr. Chair, I ask that we adjourn debate so we can hear witness testimony.
We've summoned witnesses, and we want to work on Bill C‑13.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
This motion isn't subject to debate, and we must vote immediately.
The vote is on adjournment of debate on the amendment.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Then we'll vote on adjournment of debate on the amendment.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
It's more a vote on adjournment of debate on the motion.
I'd like to state clearly for all those listening in, both virtually and in person, that Mr. Godin is requesting that we adjourn debate on Ms. Ashton's motion.
Madam Clerk, we may proceed with the vote.
(Motion negatived: nays 6; yeas 5)
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Now we will return to the amendments.
The next person wishing to speak is Mr. Généreux, and then it will be Mr. Beaulieu's turn.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
Mr. Chair. I'm extremely disappointed with what's happening today. This government has had an opportunity to introduce a reform of the Official Languages Act for the past six years, and we're still debating it nearly seven years later. We're trying to change an act that's been around for 50 years and will probably be in force for the next 50 years once it's been revised. It's also not just one act, but two. The second act hasn't been studied by anyone.
We clearly have a duty as parliamentarians to ensure we take the necessary time to study this bill and to hear the testimony of all stakeholders. I understand that associations will be represented in groups to save time. However, some associations want to make their voices heard. We should also be listening to the provinces about this bill, particularly Quebec.
Based on the witness list that was submitted by all parties, my impression is that we'll need more than 15 hours. I'm all for having the Liberals try to proceed more quickly with the assistance of all concerned. We're definitely ready to move forward, but let's be logical, and I'd like to ensure that everyone understands that we aren't involved in a partisan battle because we all agree we should pass this new act as soon as possible. The reality is that the math doesn't work.
Besides, we don't even know if we'll be sitting during the week of June 18 to 23. If we are, it'll be impossible. I wouldn't want Canadians watching us or the witnesses here today to think that, once again, one of us or another has spoiled the whole thing. I think it's important to work together on this 50‑year‑old bill in a friendly and respectful way. The new act will be in force for the next 50 years, perhaps more.
Unless Mr. Drouin tells me the bill will be revised starting next year because, once it's passed, it will have to be amended again, I think we really must do things properly. In the time allotted us until the end of the parliamentary session, it is mathematically impossible to pass this bill. So let's work immediately with the witnesses and move the bill forward as quickly as possible by the end of the session. We'll resume our work early in the fall, and we'll work in a friendly manner to ensure the bill is the best possible bill for everyone.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Thank you, Mr. Généreux.
I would like to point out for members of the committee that this debate concerns the amendment moved by Ms. Ashton.
Go ahead, Mr. Beaulieu.
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
I would amend paragraph c) to read as follows: “the clerk invite witnesses to appear during the meetings starting in the weeks of June 6, 2022, and June 13, 2022;” and I would delete paragraph h). I also think it's important for us to take the time it takes.
Each side can question the other's motives. In the past month, we've sensed a desire to bulldoze this through, to hurry, to conduct a pre-study and to pile on the studies.
I think the Official Languages Act has a major impact in Quebec and promotes anglicization. It's important to take the time to debate this in Quebec, and that hasn't yet been done.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Mr. Beaulieu, I'm going to repeat your subamendment so everyone clearly understands it.
In paragraph c) of the principal motion that Mr. Drouin has introduced, you move that the clerk invite witnesses to appear “starting on the weeks of June 6, 2022, and June 13, 2022”, and you propose to delete all of paragraph h).
So I will repeat the speaking order from the top on this subamendment.
Ms. Lattanzio, the floor is yours.
Liberal
Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Perhaps you didn't see me when I wanted to speak earlier. I wanted to ask that Ms. Ashton's amendments be distributed to us.
Would the clerk please send them to us or confirm that they've been sent to us in both official languages?
Liberal
Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
Do you want us to start with the amendment and then debate the subamendment, or the reverse?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
According to the rules of procedure, we must discuss the subamendment moved by Mr. Beaulieu now.
Liberal
Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
All right.
Would you please repeat it to us?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
If you have in front of you what the clerk sent out about a minute ago, you will see the amendment moved by Ms. Ashton, which appears in red. You can also see that Mr. Beaulieu proposes to amend paragraph c) as follows: “starting on the weeks of June 6, 2022, and June 13, 2022”. He also moves that all of paragraph h) be deleted.
Mr. Drouin, you now have the floor. Then, it will be Mr. Godin's turn.
Liberal
Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Mr. Beaulieu, I want to be sure I understand what you're saying about the subamendment. If I refer back to the June 1 meeting, you said we should take the time to study the bill properly.
Are you referring to calendar time or parliamentary time?
Parliamentary time is the only way we can move forward and gather testimony. By deleting paragraph h), you exclude parliamentary time. I don't think that makes any sense, and that's why I'm asking the question. Paragraph h) enabled us to bring in the whips, negotiate together and ensure we had more parliamentary time to examine the matter. Now you're depriving the committee of that option.
I'm trying to understand. Is it calendar time you want so we can take advantage of the summer?
Liberal
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Mr. Chair, thank you for following the procedure.
I'd like to move the following subamendment: “That, in relation to the consideration of Bill C‑13, the committee instruct the clerk and the—