My question is for Mr. Quell or Mr. Newman.
Are the existing laws—both in Quebec, like Bill 101, Bill 96, and in Canada, including the bill we are now debating—not already specific enough?
I agree with Mr. Beaulieu, and we have talked about this on several occasions during the analysis and the design of this bill: the decline of French is a reality that no longer needs to be proved. We have to do everything in our power to halt that decline and improve the presence of French in North America, particularly in Quebec, but also everywhere in Canada where French is in the minority.
You talked about signage laws in Quebec. To my knowledge, they are quite clear, and even if we add this section, its objective is to halt the decline of French and take into account certain factors specific to Quebec.
I would refer to what we experienced last week. I don't want to start the debate over again, but Mr. Housefather and Mr. Garneau raised points that I considered to be legitimate and very interesting. Essentially, however, if we all say that French is in danger, we have to adopt provisions like that in the Official Languages Act to make sure that the decline of French is taken into account and the deterioration if French is stopped.