Official Languages Committee on March 21st, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

That brings us to amendment CPC‑40.

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

It looks like it's my turn again, Mr. Chair.

We're introducing CPC‑40 for the same reasons.

I move that Bill C‑13, in Clause 23, be amended by adding after line 22 on page 15 the following:

(c) a statement that the Government of Canada recognizes the importance of francophone immigration to economic development.

We're adding paragraph (c) to paragraphs (a) and (b) of this bill. I don't believe I need to repeat what I've been saying for several weeks at committee meetings. People are aware of the Conservative Party's views.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Any questions or comments?

(Amendment agreed to: yeas 10; nays 1 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

We will now turn to amendment CPC‑39. There was a minor error, but just to make sure we're talking about the right amendment, I will give you its reference number, 12105064.

Mr. Godin, you have the floor.

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

Mr. Chair, I'm very pleased and proud to introduce amendment CPC‑39. It's along the same lines as the one introduced by my Liberal colleague Mr. Samson. It simply reinforces the importance of giving school boards and educational institutions in Canada access to federal properties. I will read it. It's quite long.

I move that Bill C‑13, in Clause 23, be amended by adding after line 22 on page 15 the following:

44.2(1) Before disposing of federal real property or a federal immovable, the federal institution that manages it shall consult any official language minority school board or commission and any other interested official language minority community organizations that serve the area in which the property or a movable is located with regard to their needs and interests in relation to it. (2) Before selling or leasing the property or movable in question, the federal institution shall offer interested official language minority community organizations (a) in the case of property or an immovable whose area does not exceed 12 acres, the opportunity to purchase or lease it in whole or in part; (b) in the case of property or any movable whose area exceeds 12 acres, the opportunity to purchase or lease up to 12 acres.

Mr. Chair, I feel it's important to say that organizations are not looking for a handout. They want to cover the costs. They also want access to land. There is currently a problem in British Columbia, and we need to look to that and put very specific language in Bill C‑13 that will prevent these kinds of situations in the future and provide access to land.

Mr. Chair, the problem isn't that not enough students want to learn French. The problem is infrastructure. Therefore, we must give organizations access to the infrastructure to meet their needs, because classes are overflowing.

Let's give ourselves tools as a federal government. Let's take responsibility and ensure that these organizations have access to federal assets and buildings that are going to be neglected or put on the market. In my opinion, it would be legitimate to give them priority.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Before we go any further on amendment CPC‑39, I must inform you, Mr. Godin, that there is no line conflict with the new LIB‑20, which is on page 104 of the bundle of amendments.

There is no line conflict because your amendment changes the text by adding lines after an existing paragraph. However, LIB‑20 as adopted says virtually the same thing. I've been advised to show this to the members before going any further and to allow questions and comments.

Mr. Housefather, you may comment first.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

I just wanted to say the same thing.

Because LIB‑20 was adopted, we already have instructions in the bill for disposing of federal buildings that go a certain way.

Mr. Godin's proposed amendment doesn't say exactly the same thing as LIB‑20. As I'm Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement, and my department would be responsible for implementing these provisions, I believe it would be contradictory having these two sets of instructions in one act would be contradictory.

I don't believe it would work. The two sets of instructions are asking the government to do two different things with its buildings.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Mr. Godin, you have the floor.

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

I hear your comment loud and clear, Mr. Housefather.

Actually, this goes into the legal realm, and I'm not a lawyer. I would like to verify what implications this will have. I'd rather have a belt and suspenders than nothing in the act.

Mr. Newman, do we need suspenders?

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Mr. Newman, you have the floor.

[Warren Newman]

I often wear both suspenders and a belt for the same reason but, in this case, we don't believe it's necessary. In addition, we need to prevent confusion and, if possible, avoid creating a situation where we have to weigh one rule against another in the same act.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Mr. Godin, please go ahead.

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

How would adopting this amendment affect interpretation of the act?

I realize that I'm asking you point blank.

You understand that we're making decisions for the future. I'm willing to withdraw my amendment if it conflicts. However, can you determine how it would conflict?

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Go ahead, Mr. Fallu.

[Marcel Fallu]

As adopted, LIB‑20 is a little more comprehensive in terms of consultation, but I will come back to that.

What I notice is primarily the verb “lease” in CPC‑39 in the context of disposing of surplus property. I'm wondering about the intent.

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

The intent is to provide access.

[Marcel Fallu]

Okay.

It also refers to a number of acres, to an area. I have to admit that I don't know enough of the context to comment on the number of acres. I don't know if you want to add anything to that.

So it's a little more specific, but in terms of consultation, it's pretty much the same, in my opinion.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Mr. Généreux, you have the floor.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

I'm going to rephrase the question.

You will recall that we adopted an amendment by Mr. Samson that stated somewhat the same thing. Do you feel that amendment was sufficient?

You understood the principle of wanting to make federal buildings available to school boards so that they could have priority access to them, as needed.

I believe that the wording was quite clear in Mr. Samson's amendment. In your opinion, was that sufficient?

If not, would amending this amendment reinforce what Mr. Samson was proposing?

My question is for Ms. Boyer.

[Julie Boyer]

Thank you for your question.

In my opinion, the scope of amendment LIB‑20 was quite clear.

This can be implemented, and when a provision about properties is involved, we need to make sure that the following people are notified and consulted in this order: other federal institutions, the provinces and territories, including municipalities which include official language minority communities, and indigenous groups.

The various groups are notified in that order, and they can consider purchasing the properties. That's very clear.

However, it might be confusing to have a second amendment that adds something about acreage. That said, LIB‑20 clearly states that official language minority communities must be consulted.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Mr. Housefather, you have the floor.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

The amendment talks about leasing buildings or properties. However, under our current policy, we don't lease buildings, we sell them. We provide the opportunity for groups to purchase them, but we don't keep the buildings for people to lease. That would completely change our policy.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Mr. Housefather.

Mr. Godin, you have the floor.

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

Actually, I'm going to keep my amendment because it's stronger than the LIB‑20 amendment that was adopted.

Remember that section 41.1(1) begins as follows: “In developing a disposal strategy for a surplus federal real property or a federal immovable, every department and supporting federal institution shall take into account the needs”….

However, my amendment includes a requirement, so I feel it's more important. That's why I'm keeping it.

Mr. Housefather, yes, when you talk about leasing, that may be a flaw in my wording, but the fact that no properties are leased right now is no guarantee that it won't happen in the future.

Therefore, I stand by my amendment. I stand by it because it's important that organizations have access to federal properties.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Mr. Godin.

Because no one else wishes to speak, we will proceed with the vote on amendment CPC‑39.

(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5)