Evidence of meeting #46 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 amendment.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Julie Boyer  Assistant Deputy Minister, Official Languages, Heritage and Regions, Department of Canadian Heritage
Clerk of the Committee  Ms. Michelle Legault
Alain Desruisseaux  Director General, Francophone Immigration Policy and Official Languages Division, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal René Arseneault

Let us now return to the main amendment, BQ‑1.1.

You have the floor, Mr. Housefather.

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I am very much against this large and very wide-scoping subamendment.

First of all, it will stop other different, better amendments on French immigration from even being heard. Secondly, it changes the entire way we look at the Official Languages Act from a substantive equality approach to one which, essentially, no longer values the obligation of the federal government to support the vitality and development of the English-speaking community in Quebec.

If you were to incorporate this into the preamble, the preamble would no longer reflect what is now in the bill, and the scope would be completely different from what's in the act.

I have a few questions for the officials, if you will allow me, Mr. Chair.

I know this is an interpretation, rather than something you might be able to give a clear answer to. Would you agree with that commentary? If we change the preamble, according to the way Bloc 1.1 is amended, it would amend the preamble so that it is no longer in line with what's currently in Bill C-13.

4:35 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Official Languages, Heritage and Regions, Department of Canadian Heritage

Julie Boyer

I would say that's correct. It's what's currently.... Again, though, with this process, Bill C-13 can change and evolve.

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC

Of course, but it would mean that we are changing it to do something that I think would be devastating to official languages in Canada. We would be accepting the Bloc Quebecois' approach to official languages, as opposed to the historical, traditional approach that all of the other parties have always supported. It would be a sea change in Canadian history.

I have one other question, related to the change to including that French is the “common language of Quebec”. I believe and recognize that French is the official language of Quebec.

Has there ever been anything in federal law that has recognized that French is the common language of Quebec or that English is the common language of any other province?

4:35 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Official Languages, Heritage and Regions, Department of Canadian Heritage

Julie Boyer

Not to my knowledge. No.

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC

Do we have any idea how the courts would use that change should we include it in the act? Assuming we're putting it in the preamble, it will also be amended in the act.

How would the courts interpret that with respect to the linguistic rights of the English-speaking minority in Quebec?

4:35 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Official Languages, Heritage and Regions, Department of Canadian Heritage

Julie Boyer

I'm not sure how it would be interpreted by the courts. However, in the preamble here, it describes what the Charter of the French language says. It's more of a descriptor of the charter, which says that it is the official and common language in Quebec.

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC

As opposed to using words when we're making a speech, when we're using words in law, they have a different context. The courts will say, when they're interpreting the rights of the English-speaking minority in Quebec, that the law has introduced a new word. The legislator has a purpose or an intent of saying that French is the common language of Quebec. As such, I cannot imagine the courts would give it no significance.

For example, when an English-speaking Quebecker goes to court and argues that.... For example, a company has set up a rule that you can only speak French in the company. If two English-speaking Quebeckers want to speak English, they would say it's blocking their freedom of expression. The court—especially if it was in the government, and if it was the government that passed that law—may interpret that by saying, “But French is the common language”.

When you look at the right to speak English, we balance that with French being the common language of Quebec. This assumes that two Quebeckers, even if they're two English-speaking people, should be speaking French to each other in a public setting. At least, that's how I would see it.

I also wonder if this could not also affect indigenous languages in Quebec. If we say that French is the common language of Quebec, what about on indigenous reserves? What about in indigenous communities? I would have a concern that the court would believe that the legislator has now changed its philosophy and wants the court to look at something new when they're balancing the rights of French, English and indigenous languages.

Would that be a fair assumption, even though we have no idea how it will eventually turn out?

4:40 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Official Languages, Heritage and Regions, Department of Canadian Heritage

Julie Boyer

I think any assumption is good at this point, because we don't know how the courts would treat this. Obviously, when you put it in legislation, it could influence the interpretation.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC

Thank you so much.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal René Arseneault

You have the floor, Mr. Garneau.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

Marc Garneau Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC

I would like to pick up on what my colleague just said about the term “common language”.

I am not a lawyer, but I wonder why the word “common” is needed. French is the official language, and I think that adding the word “common” could entail obligations, depending on how it is interpreted. So I do not think that word should be there.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal René Arseneault

Mr. Beaulieu, you have the floor.

4:40 p.m.

Bloc

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

The common language is the ultimate objective. In the rest of Canada, English is the common language. In places other than Quebec, when people who speak different languages want to talk to each other, they speak English.

The objective for Quebec is for French to be the language that brings people of all origins together, regardless of their first language, so they can have a shared public space and so we can have a cohesive society.

I do not see the problem with the term “common language”. That said, I do not wish to drag out the debate needlessly.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal René Arseneault

Mr. Beaulieu, if you came to our part of the country, I am not sure you would say that English is the common language outside Quebec. It depends on the language of the majority.

4:40 p.m.

Bloc

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

Ideally, in the Acadian peninsula or in areas where there are Acadians...

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal René Arseneault

I am not from the Acadian peninsula, but I can tell you that there is a difference. As to terminology, I think the question is common language versus majority language. People are suggesting there is a difference between common language and majority language.

4:40 p.m.

Bloc

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

If French were the common language in Acadie, people of essentially all origins, regardless of their first language, would speak to each other in French. Yet that is not what I see.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal René Arseneault

I was simply noting what I think I heard and suggesting a nuance. I do not want to argue about that.

Ms. Lattanzio, you have the floor.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC

I have another question with regard to the common language.

In my reading of this, throughout this whole exercise where we've been trying to reform the Official Languages Act, there's never been a discussion with regard to the inclusion of “common language”. Here we are at the very tail end and now we're introducing, it seems to me, a new motion. It's not defined anywhere.

Would that pose a problem, according to you?

4:40 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Official Languages, Heritage and Regions, Department of Canadian Heritage

Julie Boyer

I'm not sure if it would cause a problem. It does introduce a new term into the legislation, but it is a descriptive term that is used in the Charter of the French language of Quebec.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC

We keep coming back to that notion of trying to take words from the Quebec charter and introduce them into this federal law.

4:40 p.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Official Languages, Heritage and Regions, Department of Canadian Heritage

Julie Boyer

That's correct.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal René Arseneault

Mr. Housefather, you have the floor.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC

I have a lot of respect for Mr. Beaulieu.

I am opposed to saying that English is the common language in Ontario, Manitoba or any other province.

Mr. Chair, you are from New Brunswick. I do not think that the Acadians of your province would like people saying that English is the common language of New Brunswick, even if it is the language of the majority, which makes up 60% of the population.

For my part, I live in a part of Quebec where English is the language of the majority. In various regions of the province, all Quebeckers should speak to each other in French. Currently, 94% of Quebec's population speaks French. Everyone should speak French. As to the common language, there is an important difference between what I say in a speech and what I say with friends. We are talking now about including this concept in legislation, although the legal context has never been examined by the courts. The committee has not heard from legal experts who have examined the issue of a common language because it is not in the act.

I do not think it would be advisable to include such a provision in the act because the majority language is something different.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.