Official Languages Committee on Feb. 14th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

I call the meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting No. 50 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Official Languages.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Monday, May 30, 2022, the committee resumed its study of Bill C-13, An Act to amend the Official Languages Act, to enact the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act and to make related amendments to other Acts.

Pursuant to our routine motion, I am informing the committee that all members have carried out the connection tests required prior to the meeting.

I would once again like to thank the officials who have come to support the committee by answering technical questions. Their presence is extremely helpful to us. I therefore welcome Ms. Julie Boyer, Mr. Marcel Fallu and Ms. Chantal Terrien, from the Department of Canadian Heritage, as well as Mr. Warren Newman, from the Department of Justice and Mr. Carsten Quell, from the Treasury Board Secretariat.

We are today resuming our clause-by-clause study of Bill C-13. We had begun debate on amendment CPC-15. At the end of the last meeting I noted that Mr. Beaulieu and Mr. Serré had asked to speak.

Mr. Beaulieu, you have the floor. Do you have anything to add?

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

No.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Mr. Drouin, do you have anything to add?

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

I'd like to speak, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Go ahead, Mr. Godin.

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

I understood from Ms. Boyer's clarification that my amendment was not necessary, because there is already protection in the preamble. I am therefore requesting unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Is there unanimous consent for Mr. Godin to withdraw amendment CPC-15?

Since no one has opposed it, there is unanimous consent.

(The amendment is withdrawn.)

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Do you all remember the comment I made before Mr. Godin introduced his amendment at the last meeting, to the effect that if amendment CPC-15 were adopted, amendment BQ-14 could not be put forward because of a line conflict. Now that amendment CPC-15 has been withdrawn, amendment BQ-14 may now be presented.

Mr.Beaulieu, would you like to present amendment BQ-14, on page 45 of the package of amendments?

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

Instead of presenting amendment BQ-14 as it stands in the package, we are going to amend it and send you the revised version immediately.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

I am accordingly suspending the meeting for a few minutes so that everyone can familiarize themselves with it.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

The meeting resumed.

Everyone has had the opportunity to look at amendment BQ-14, at the end of which is added that the proposed section in the Official Languages Act would not limit services already available in anglophone and francophone communities.

Mr. Beaulieu, you have the floor.

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

Let's do a brief recap of what we've done so far. We have studied 13 of the 71 clauses in Bill C-13. We have debated and voted on 32 amendments. We have got to page 44 out of the 229 pages of the package of amendments. Other amendments and sub- amendments might well be added if we want to do the work properly.

There are only four meetings left on the schedule for a clause-by-clause study. I would therefore like to point out that we may need to add some meetings if we are to be able to study all the amendments.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Are you going to present your amendment?

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

Yes, I'm going to do that.

That Bill C-13, in Clause 13, be amended by adding after line 26 on page 8 the following:(2) Section 33 of the Act is renumbered as subsection 33(1) and is amended by adding the following:(2) In making regulations under subsection (1), the Governor in Council shall take into consideration the minority status of the French language in Canada due to the predominant use of English and the linguistic specificity of Quebec.This section would not restrict services already available to the anglophone and francophone communities.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you.

Ms. Lattanzio, you have the floor.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Regarding my colleague's subamendment, I want to ask officials.... In terms of this new statement being made, my first question would be, do you not see a contradiction with regard to the spirit of the previous amendment? BQ-14 resembles almost word for word, in its first part, CPC-15, which has been withdrawn. The language used in the first part is almost identical.

We heard the testimony last week. I paid particular attention to both of your responses, Ms. Boyer's, as well as Mr. Quell's.

First, do you not see a contradiction with regard to this subamendment? Does this not open the door to constitutional challenges?

[Julie Boyer, Assistant Deputy Minister, Official Languages, Heritage and Regions, Department of Canadian Heritage]

Thank you for your question.

On the first, I think.... I don't have the text in front of me, but I took note when you read it, Mr. Beaulieu. It still seems to maintain an obligation with “shall take into consideration”. That is an obligation to demonstrate this was taken into consideration. I don't think that obligation disappears with an additional sentence saying it should not affect services already offered to anglophones.

There I would pause, because I wonder whether “already offered to anglophones” suggests it could impact new services, or the offer of new services, to anglophones in Quebec.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Ms. Lattanzio, you have the floor.

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

My next question is probably directed to Mr. Newman.

Do you not see this opening the door to constitutional challenges?

[Warren Newman, Senior General Counsel, Constitutional, Administrative and International Law Section, Public Law and Legislative Services Sector, Department of Justice]

The courts are always open for business, and there are constitutional challenges to many provisions of many statutes.

Here, this is a provision that would take into account a factual situation that French is in a minority situation in Canada, and it also would take into account predominant use of English linguistic specificity in Quebec.

It's all in the context of making regulations. I do not think it's necessary to add such a provision. There are already plenty of earlier provisions in the act that guide the interpretation of the act, the spirit of the act and the way these implementing provisions are to be carried out.

We're in a part of the act, as I said last time, that really deals with implementing a constitutional guarantee, section 20 of the charter. We don't want to stray too far from the principle of section 20, which is really to provide services in both English and French at an operational level and to ensure communications in both languages with the public. This is really à côté—to the side of that—and I don't think it is relevant to the implementation of the section 20 charter guarantees in part IV, which part IV was designed to deal with.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Mr. Newman.

Mr. Godin, you have the floor.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I think that my colleague's intent is to ensure that there is no attack on the rights of the two minority language groups, anglophones in Quebec and francophones outside Quebec, or that their rights are infringed. I think it would be appropriate to leave it there to ensure that francophones and anglophones are not placed in opposition. It's important to work towards that, so that the country's two official languages are not in confrontation with one another.

I personally think that it's important to support this new amendment, which I presume illustrates the Bloc québecois' desire not to work against anglophones, but rather on behalf of both official languages. I can confirm that this is also what the Conservative Party of Canada wants.

Since we began discussing this bill, three key issues have come up: stopping the decline of French, protecting the two official languages, and promoting those languages. I believe it's important to draw attention to this. The whole philosophy underpinning it should apply to all future interventions.

You know what the Conservative Party of Canada's position is.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Mr. Godin.

Mr. Housefather, you have the floor.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll be brief.

I have two questions for Ms. Boyer.

I appreciate the addition from my colleague Mr. Beaulieu to try to fix the overall problem, which is that this is directing you to do something that is contrary to the overall intention of the act.

The proposal is to add that the clause proposed in the amendment, "not restrict services already available to the anglophone and francophone communities."

It would not, for example, if there was a new service being offered, stop you from having to do exactly what you mentioned before would be the consequence of this amendment, which is to consider how to limit that service in English in Quebec, taking into consideration that French services are to be offered more predominantly. Would that be correct?

[Julie Boyer]

That is my understanding, yes.