Evidence of meeting #40 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 ashton.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
I pointed it out to you. At the last meeting, we just said it had been checked by senior authorities and that it was in order. I would've liked you to give us the details on that.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
I will let the clerk tell you about that at the proper time. The office did the research, and it's entirely feasible.
We will continue the meeting.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.
Pardon me. I don't want to be a party pooper.
Can someone tell us where we stand? You're giving the floor to Ms. Ashton, who apparently intends to introduce a sub-amendment.
Where do we stand right now? There was Mr. Beaulieu's amendment, Mr. Beaulieu's sub-amendment, my four amendments and Mr. Serré's motion. Now Ms. Ashton wants to speak. I just want to know where I stand so we're all on the same page.
Conservative
Liberal
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
Thank you.
I'm proposing something so we can move forward efficiently and be able to—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Would you please turn up your volume a little? We are having trouble hearing in the room.
Is your headset selected, Ms. Ashton?
We seem to be hearing you more clearly. That seems perfect.
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
All right, that's good.
In order to expedite our work by doing what has to be done to improve the bill before us and to ensure that we do so efficiently, I would like to propose a few amendments. I know they have to be introduced one by one.
My first amendment is as follows:
that the Minister of Official Languages, the President of the Treasury Board, the Minister of Canadian Heritage and the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, as well as their department officials, be invited to appear for one hour, instead of two, per minister, in separate meetings, no later than Thursday, December 1, 2022.
I'd like to add that we would all like those persons to appear for two hours. However, I believe we must make an important compromise to ensure we move forward so we can improve the bill before us and provide tools to francophones across the country. We must move forward and do the work that has to be done.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Thank you, Ms. Ashton.
Before giving you the floor, Mr. Beaulieu, I'd like to know if the sub-amendment to Mr. Godin's amendment and Ms. Ashton's sub-amendment are clear in everyone's mind. Yes?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Instead of saying "for two hours per minister, in separate meetings, no later than Thursday, November 24, 2022", it would read, "for one hour per minister, in separate meetings, no later than Thursday, December 1, 2022".
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
Did Ms. Ashton state December 1? Does she agree? Stating November 24 would be illogical, since that's today.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
That's correct. Ms. Ashton's sub-amendment would amend Mr. Godin's first amendment in two places to read "one hour per minister" instead of "two hours per minister" and "no later than December 1, 2022" instead of "no later than November 24, 2022".
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
If it were December 1, there would be two meetings and one hour per minister. Is that correct?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
We will proceed in orderly fashion.
Ms. Ashton, do you wish to add something?
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
Yes. I'd like to move sub-amendments to the second and fourth amendments to change the dates so we can work on a realistic timeline. Many meetings have already been wasted.
In accordance with the procedure, could I introduce those two sub-amendments so we can get a realistic idea of the timeline I'm proposing?
Liberal
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Mr. Chair, with all due respect to my NDP colleague, Ms. Ashton, I would like to recall that, last week, she invited us to follow the procedures. However, it was decided that we would proceed point by point. It was the committee that decided that, not me. I therefore object to the idea of dealing with her amendments together, as is being proposed.
On many occasions, I have reached out to committee members who are members of the party in power, the Liberal Party. I have reached out and said I was prepared to withdraw my amendment if Mr. Serré would withdraw his entire motion and if we could restart the process.
Ms. Ashton was correct when she made her presentation just a moment ago. We aim for efficiency here. Do you know how many meetings have been wasted since the Liberal Party's motion was introduced? It's been six meetings, which I consider unacceptable. I reached out, I am reaching out again, and I'm receptive. I want to move matters forward and to defend the French language. Consequently, we must not be accused of being in bad faith. You know that, if anyone can be accused of that, it's the individuals with whom you have a certain relationship, a certain coalition.
Mr. Chair, I won't change my position on this.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Are there any other questions?
Ms. Ashton, I'm going to answer the question that you put to the chair.
We will proceed as we did in Mr. Beaulieu's case. Once we have considered and voted to adopt that amendment, we will have to vote on the sub-amendment. If it amends the amendment, we will have to vote on the amended amendment. Then we'll come back to you first for the other amendments, since you say you want to group them together.
Does that suit you, Ms. Ashton?
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
Yes, and I'd like to state that the purpose of the remaining proposals is to establish realistic dates for the work we have to do.