Official Languages Committee on Nov. 24th, 2022

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

That's correct.

Yes, we're talking about December 6, which is a little later than December 1.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

We are talking about the start of clause-by-clause consideration. We are far from—

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

My argument doesn't just concern the fact that we should have until December 6. It's more about the reason why we should have two complete meetings. Unanimous consent on the matter has just been denied on the ground that we're filibustering. Who's filibustering?

I think it's more serious to impose a gag order than to filibuster because it limits democratic debate. I also think it's essential that we able to question the ministers. We said we'd allow two hours for each minister, and now we want to allow only one hour.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

I'm going to stop you, Mr. Beaulieu, because we've already discussed that. That was the first amendment.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

That's right. We just gave—

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

I want to remind you that we are discussing Ms. Ashton's third sub-amendment.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

That's right, it states that clause-by-clause consideration—

Wait a minute, I'm just going to look at the document again.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

I'm going to state it for you as I understand it: the committee proceed with clause-by-clause consideration of the bill no later than Tuesday, December 6, 2022 at 11:00 a.m. ET.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Mr. Chair, it's not "no later than". Ms. Ashton has suggested that the words "no later than" be deleted and replaced by the word "commence". That's what I understood.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

No, we didn't have unanimous consent. That was part—

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

The unanimous consent concerned the meetings, not the substitution of "commence" for "no later than".

I'd ask you to check with Ms. Ashton.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

I'm going to check right away because you may be right, Mr. Gordon.

Mr. Gordon, I'm told that we did have unanimous consent on that point. However, we're honestly a hair's breadth away from saying the same thing.

Go ahead, Mr. Beaulieu. Then it will be Mr. Dalton's turn.

Your name is on my list, Mr. Dalton. Don't worry, I haven't forgotten you.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

I would first like to commend Ms. Ashton for agreeing to our holding two meetings to hear the ministers. However, I want to point out that, if her objective was really to hold two meetings, perhaps it would have been better if she had voted against her sub-amendment. We'll see what happens.

Furthermore, if we agree on the date of December 6, the appearance of the ministers could well be compromised. Then we might have to proceed with clause-by-clause consideration without even being able to hear them.

As this is a public meeting, I want the people from Quebec to be able to see that an effort is really being made to muzzle us. I want them to be aware that Quebec is in the minority in Canada, that it isn't being given a chance to really express its point of view and that increasingly restrictive limits are about to be set.

I don't know why it's so important to limit debate if not to prevent people from becoming aware of what the Official Languages Act is. I'm asking Quebeckers to monitor what happens in the media. The Official Languages Act is the main factor in the anglicization of Quebec. It gives free reign to the assimilation of francophones everywhere. There's a lack of political will to fight it. We can see it in the act and in what goes on every day.

I hope we can make sure we have more time. The more we advance, the less time we have to debate and express our views.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Go ahead, Mr. Dalton.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Thank you.

I see it's nearly time to stop. So I'm going to yield the floor to my colleague Mr. Godin.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Mr. Godin, I wouldn't want to limit your speaking time, but before we go any further, I want to remind you, as we discussed at the start, that when we are forced to suspend a meeting for technical reasons, is that what you wanted to talk about?

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

No, Mr. Chair.

I wanted to make a suggestion, and you may not have to explain yourself. We'll see.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

You have the floor and are still in the debate.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Once again, the Liberals are showing us that they aren't in good faith.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Can you speak to the sub-amendment?

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Yes, that's what I'm getting ready to do.

We are now at the point of deciding on the sub-amendment of Ms. Ashton, who has expressed her point of view and demonstrated her willingness to find a solution. As for the Liberals, they have unfortunately demonstrated that they weren't in good faith and didn't have the same objective as the other three parties by deciding not to give unanimous consent. I sensed that the NDP was moving closer to the position of the opposition parties, and I appreciate that.

I want to do this publicly: thank you, Ms. Ashton.

In a similar vein, I have a suggestion to make because, like all my colleagues, I want to resolve this issue. Since November 1, we've held and wasted six meetings debating Bill C‑13. I therefore suggest that the next meeting be held by the subcommittee. The Liberals, the NDP, the Bloc Québécois and the Conservatives must try to find common ground and stop bogging down in procedural matters. That's my suggestion.

I would like you to check with the other members to see if they agree and, of course, to tell us whether you agree as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

I understand, Mr. Godin.

We can definitely do that as a subcommittee. For the moment, however, we have to deal with a sub-amendment.

You're asking us to gag—

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

That's quite a slip of the tongue!

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

I was saying that you wanted us to conclude our present proceeding regarding Ms. Ashton's sub-amendment. Is that correct?

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

No, I was suggesting that we be able to dispose of Ms. Ashton's sub-amendment. Then I'll present my proposal.