Official Languages Committee on Feb. 10th, 2023

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Things are moving quickly and I am trying to follow the thread. Forgive me if it takes me a bit of time, but I want to do my job properly.

Amendment CPC-14 proposes that Bill C-13 be amended by adding, after line 12 on page 8, the following new clause:

Paragraph 32(2)(c) of the Act is replaced by the following: (c) any other factors that the Governor in Council considers appropriate, including the minority situation of the French language in Canada due to the predominant use of English and the linguistic specificity of Quebec.

In fact, I am moving this amendment in order to have reminders of the linguistic specificity of Quebec all through the act, in a situation where English is predominant in North America and Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Mr. Godin.

Are there any questions?

Mr. Serré, you have the floor.

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to ask the experts here for a clarification.

If I understand correctly, what is being proposed here applies only in Quebec. There is nothing about outside Quebec.

What does an amendment like this involve?

[Julie Boyer]

Thank you, Mr. Serré.

This amendment relates to a part of the act where the factors for the Governor in Council to consider in making regulations are defined. The purpose of the amendment is to give the Governor in Council the flexibility needed for adding a factor that might be important, including as regards the minority situation of the French language in Canada, due to the predominant use of English, and the linguistic specificity of Quebec. So it gives the Governor in Council permission to add specific factors that would advance that objective.

Mr. Newman will undoubtedly be able to add some clarifications on this point.

[Warren Newman]

Again, I think the provisions proposed in the preamble to the Official Languages Act, the proposed provisions to clarify the purpose of the act, and the proposed interpretation provisions take that adequately into account.

Here, this is an enabling provision, and we also do not want to move away from the objective of the substantive equality of French and English.

As I was just saying, the purpose of Part IV is to implement the act in relatively concrete ways, including by the use of regulations. This part indicates, in concrete terms, how the services will be offered in French and English. So using interpretation factors like this is not the way to give more clarification about this implementation.

The Governor in Council may already take into account the specificity of minority communities. That is already included in the factors.

It is hard to see how such provisions could help the Governor in Council provide for the implementation of communications and services in both official languages equally.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Mr. Newman.

Mr. Beaulieu, the floor is yours.

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

I think it is important to specify this, because it mostly happens in English. In Quebec, it is essential.

This is a proposal from the Government of Quebec, like the one that was presented before and was not accepted. The objective is to strengthen French, which is in decline and is in the minority in Canada and in North America as a whole.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Mr. Godin, the floor is yours.

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

Mr. Chair, I would like Mr. Newman to explain the negative effects that the wording of this amendment might have.

[Warren Newman]

Here, it is proposed to add language concerning the situation of the French language and the specificity of Quebec, while Part IV of the Official Languages Act is about implementing the constitutional obligation described in section 20 of the Charter. First, that section provides that the public has the right to communicate with, and to receive services from, any head or central office of federal institutions in English or French. The same right applies to the offices of federal institutions if the criteria set out in section 20 are met: there must be significant demand or the nature of the office must require it.

There already are interpretation principles. As well, this is not about formal equality, it is about substantive equality. Given that, we do not see how referring to only one language and only one province, that being Quebec, as we are well aware, could make implementing Part IV of the act and the constitutional obligation already set out in section 20 of the Charter more effective.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Mr. Beaulieu, the floor is yours.

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

When you talk about substantive equality, are you talking about equal access to services or also to substantive equality of status for French and English.

[Warren Newman]

Ms. Boyer can surely assist you on that, but the term "égalité réelle" is translated in English as "substantive equality". First, it concerns access to services. Part IV concerns access to services in practice or in practical terms, as I said. Substantive equality also includes equality of status, and sometimes equality of status also calls for formal equality, for example by enacting laws. Sometimes, too, there must be a degree of formality.

So formal equality does not necessarily rule out substantive equality right away when it comes to the status of the language.

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

In your view, when someone says they want to maintain the demographic weight of francophones in Quebec, does that advance the objective of substantive equality?

[Warren Newman]

I would say that substantive equality can take into account the objective of maintaining the demographic weight of francophones in Quebec. However, as I said, Part IV is about services to the public, and nothing more.

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

But it still has an impact.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Mr. Quell, do you want to add something?

[Carsten Quell]

Yes, I would like to give an example.

We talk about the principle that minority official language communities be guaranteed comparable treatment from one region to another. I spoke to you earlier about changes made to our regulations. They now provide that federal offices located near a minority language school must offer services in both official languages. The proposed wording might lead us to wonder whether members of the anglophone minority would have access to fewer federal services near their schools, as compared to members of the francophone minority. That is the type of question we would have to ask if we adopt this provision.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Mr. Godin, the floor is yours.

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

Excellent, Mr. Chair.

I want to comment on your answer, Mr. Quell, and then I will come back to Mr. Newman.

Forgive me, I have lost my train of thought. I think that happens to everyone.

Mr. Newman, in fact, I asked you earlier what negative impact this amendment would have...

Put that question on hold; my comment has just come back to me.

Mr. Quell, we have to understand that this is another factor, it is one factor among many others. We simply want people to keep this situation, this reality, in mind. When we talk about substantive equality, we have to refresh people's memories and repeat the message. That is why we want this to be in the act. It is also why I do not really agree with your comment.

Mr. Newman, I am going to ask you the question again: would adding paragraph 32(2)(c) have a negative impact?

[Warren Newman]

I don't think it's my place to answer that question, apart from the legal aspect.

As I have already pointed out, section 20 of the Charter provides for services to be offered and communications to be available, that is, the opportunity to communicate in French and English, based on the criteria established by the constitution. Part IV of the act as a whole is about implementing this, for both anglophones and francophones, for both majority communities and minority communities.

The question is maybe not whether it is harmful, but whether it is relevant in the context of Part IV.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

I do not see anyone else wishing to speak.

I call the question on amendment CPC-14.

(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5.)

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Because amendment CPC-14 has been rejected, amendment BQ-12 may not be presented, as I said earlier.

(Clause 13)

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

So this brings us to clause 13.

The first amendment concerning clause 13 is amendment BQ-13.

Mr. Beaulieu, you have the floor.

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

We are withdrawing our amendment.