Official Languages Committee on March 21st, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu.

Mr. Drouin, you now have the floor.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Being very sensitive to this issue, I simply will not support this amendment.

In my experience, allowing a government to have a head start is not fair for linguistic minorities, because it has many resources when it goes before the courts.

I would have been unable to receive services in French if this program had not existed when I was 14 years old, and later on, when my child was born at Montfort Hospital. I understand that Québec's reality is different, but I cannot support this amendment for that specific reason, which has been so important to my community.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you.

Mr. Godin, you have the floor.

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

My colleague's testimony is very important.

Mr. Newman, is that what the amendment proposed by my Bloc Québecois colleague actually does?

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Mr. Newman, you have the floor.

[Warren Newman]

Can you clarify the question?

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

My colleague just told us about an experience he had regarding his son. I'd like to understand the situation correctly.

Would the amendment presented by my Bloc Québecois colleague actually have the effect mentioned by my Liberal party colleague?

[Warren Newman]

I cannot venture an opinion on hypotheses or Mr. Drouin's experience. From a legal point of view, I have nothing to add for the time being.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Mr. Beaulieu, you have the floor.

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

I want to say that it's not mandatory. In the case of Monfort Hospital, I am among those who donated money and supported the cause. There's no problem.

I do, however, want to say that according to the exact wording of the amendment, disclosure must be done "after a test case is brought", and not before it is filed. According to what I understand from Mr. Drouin's comment and his interpretation of the amendment, disclosure would have to occur before a test case is filed, but it's actually after it's filed that it would be done.

Also, if there is reasonable grounds to think that this disclosure could negatively impact recipients, as in the example Mr. Drouin provided, at that time, disclosure would not be done. However, I myself have conducted verifications with some people from the FCFA, who told me that once their case was heard, they did not see how disclosure could undermine the recipients.

It's public money. People pay taxes and members should know where that tax money is going. It's a simple issue of transparency. I consider the door to be wide open to make sure this causes no harm.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

I think Mr. Newman wants to add something.

[Warren Newman]

Since we're talking about personal experiences, I'll take the liberty of making a personal comment. I argued the case related to the Montfort Hospital file before the Ontario Court of Appeal for the Attorney General of Canada at the time. I am therefore sensitive to the idea that we should not impose too many restrictions or limit francophone minorities' rights outside Québec. As an Anglophone from Québec, I would say that anglophones in the province would also like to make sure that their rights are protected.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Mr. Newman.

Mr. Gordin, you have the floor.

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

Mr. Chair, I will turn to the experts, because what my colleague said is important.

I am sensitive to the rights of francophone minorities outside Québec, everywhere throughout Canada, but in the proposed amendment, I don’t see how they could be undermined.

I would therefore ask Ms. Boyer to interpret the proposed amendment and give me a scenario that looks like what Mr. Drouin shared with us earlier.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Ms. Boyer, you have the floor.

[Julie Boyer]

Thank you very much for the question, Mr. Chair.

The only issue of concern has to do with the commitment to provide funding to an "organization, independent of the Government of Canada, responsible for administering a program". The issue has to do with disclosing the transfer of funds coming from Canadian Heritage. The independent organization managing the program, the University of Ottawa, would declare the amount of funding granted in connection with the program. The university would then manage funding allocation, but I don’t think it could be required to report on it under Bill C‑13.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Ms. Boyer.

Mr. Serré, you have the floor.

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I’d like Ms. Boyer to tell us more about the Court Challenge Program, which has two components. Specifically, I’d like her to tell us a bit more about the human rights component. Mr. Drouin was wondering earlier if the proposed amendment could have an impact on those rights.

[Julie Boyer]

Thank you for the question.

I would like to give the floor to my colleague, Mr. Fallu.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Mr. Fallu, you have the floor.

[Marcel Fallu, Manager, Modernization of the Official Languages Act, Department of Canadian Heritage]

Bill C‑13 contains the provision we’re currently discussing, but it also includes another section, section 52. This section aims to amend the Department of Canadian Heritage Act to offer an equivalent, but for the human rights component of the Court Challenges Program.

In the current bill, the two components are not included in the same section. It mentions the powers of the same minister, but we considered it inappropriate to connect them to the human rights aspect in the Official Language Is Act. It is, however, the same Canadian Heritage program, which funds it through a contribution agreement with the University of Ottawa, an independent third party.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

I give the floor to Mr. Beaulieu.

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

The article in Bill C-13 stipulates that the minister provides funding to an independent organization for the purpose of bringing test cases or other important cases before the courts. However, we want the nature of each case to be disclosed in order to determine how the money was used.

The arguments raised would be valid if we wanted the information to be disclosed before or even as soon a subsidy was granted. But we’re asking for the nature of the test cases, for example, to be disclosed once the litigation is done, if it doesn't harm recipients.

At the very least, there should be disclosure about the nature of each case, so that we can know how the money was used and what sector was impacted. Otherwise, it becomes a black box.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu.

Mr. Beaulieu, you have the floor.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My next question is for Ms. Boyer.

On line 27, it reads:

to provide funding for test cases of national significance to be brought before the courts to clarify and assert constitutional and quasi-constitutional official language rights;

What Mr. Beaulieu is proposing is “and quasi-constitutional official language rights, including the right to ensure the existence of the majority-French society in a Quebec where the future of French is assured”.

Number one, by taking one element of constitutional rights—