Evidence of meeting #56 for Official Languages in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was move.
A recording is available from Parliament.
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
But he could present his arguments after reading out the amendment. That's how we've been doing it from the beginning.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
I'm letting him go at his own speed. He has the floor. This is the way he wants to proceed, and I can't object.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Marc Serré Liberal Nickel Belt, ON
Let me go back to my last sentence, Mr. Chair.
More specifically, the amendments will add new clauses and additional details, particularly with regard to what the employer is required to do in order to respect the employees' right to work and be supervised in French, generalizing the use of French within the business, the right of the employees to receive all communications and documents in French, the publication of an advertisement to fill a position, the criteria for determining knowledge of a language other than French, and ensuring that all employees are entitled to a work environment free from adverse treatment.
Amendments like LIB-40.1 prove that the federal system can be equivalent to the Quebec system in terms of use of French in businesses and that the two systems can coexist collaboratively.
Amendment LIB‑40.1 specifically seeks to strengthen the right to communicate in French by giving employees the right to receive employment forms, transfer documents, individual contracts, documents related to the conditions of employment and training, and collective agreements and their schedules in French. This right will continue in order to allow for the employment relationship to continue.
That's part of amendment LIB‑40.1, which we all have in front of us. I don't know if there are any comments on this amendment.
1:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Thank you, Mr. Serré.
Mr. Godin, I believe you had a comment to make.
1:50 p.m.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Mr. Chair, we're studying clause 54, which is important. I know there have been discussions with the Quebec government. For us, the interests of Quebec are important.
We received 11 amendments from the federal government last night. I think it's important for the people watching to know that. We want to do our job well, but I have to say that I have far more faith in the Government of Quebec than in the Government of Canada. The federal government has the support of the Government of Quebec, which is the guardian of the French language in Quebec. I don't have a problem with what my colleague said, but I'm not happy about getting these amendments at the last minute. It's a lot of work to study them, and we don't have a department working for us.
1:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Thank you, Mr. Godin. We're still studying clause 54, by the way.
Since there are no other comments, I will call the vote on amendment LIB‑40.1.
(Amendment agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0)
1:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Now we're on amendment LIB‑41. Does anybody want to move it?
Mr. Housefather, the floor is yours.
March 31st, 2023 / 1:50 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to my colleagues.
Since Ms. Lattanzio had another committee meeting to attend and couldn't be here today, I have the pleasure of moving amendment LIB‑41 on her behalf.
The reason we're moving this amendment is that the current wording of Bill C-13 has caused a lot of confusion and consternation among Quebec's anglophone groups. Let me explain.
Proposed subsection 9(1) of the future use of French in federally regulated private businesses act would create three rights for employees, which we agree with. They are the right to:(a) carry out their work and be supervised in French;(b) receive all communications and documents...in French; and(c) use regularly and widely used work instruments and computer systems in French.
Subsection 9(3) of the future act would not prevent employers from communicating or providing documents in both official languages, but it wouldn't make that a right.
It's not a right; it's a permission. As opposed to creating a right to do things in English, employers would have the permission, as long as they're fulfilling their duty, to provide other employees with the right to do things in French. They would have permission to say to employees who would prefer to do things in English that they can do things in English. What's happening here is that we're creating an exception for documents and communication, saying they can be in English.
Subsection 9(3) covers paragraph 9(1)(b) of the future act but not paragraphs 9(1)(a) or 9(1)(c).
This means that if I'm an anglophone employee in Quebec and I prefer to use work instruments and computer systems in English, my employer can say that francophone employees who want those instruments and systems in French will get them, but the act doesn't specify that I have the right to get them in English, any more than it specifies that employees who prefer to work and be supervised in English can do that if the employer allows other employees to work and be supervised in French.
I think employers will find it confusing that Bill C‑13 creates an exception for documents and communications, but not in relation to paragraphs 9(1)(a) and 9(1)(c) of the future act. Will employers have the right to provide other employees with computer programs or systems in English? Do they have the right to allow other employees to work in English?
I would much prefer to avoid having that confusion by simply adding that as long as French-speaking employees or those who prefer to work in French are accorded the right, meaning they have to be allowed to do what's in paragraphs 9(1)(a), (b) and (c), an employer is free to let employees who prefer to do things in English also do what's in paragraphs 9(1)(a), (b) and (c) in English. That is the purpose of this amendment.
Thank you.
1:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Thank you.
Are there any other questions or comments?
Mr. Beaulieu, over to you.
1:55 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
I'm going to vote against this amendment, because it essentially enshrines the right to work in English. We're not against the occasional use of English, but French needs to be the common language in Quebec if we want all citizens to be part of the same society and to be able to communicate with one another. French is the glue that binds all citizens of Quebec and brings them together.
The purpose of the Charter of the French Language is to make French the common language at work, not to offer a choice between English and French, which is what the Official Languages Act does.
1:55 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I just want to respond to Mr. Beaulieu's comment.
This amendment doesn't create a right to work in English. New subsection 9(1) of the bill would create three rights in relation to language of work. New subsection 9(3) reads:
The right set out in paragraph (1)(b) does not preclude communications and documents from being in both official languages but the use of French must be at least equivalent to the use of English.
The problem here is that the bill grants three rights in relation to language of work, but create a clear exception regarding just one of those rights. That is confusing.
No one is demanding the right to work in English. However, I should hope that my colleagues would agree that if an employer gives employees who prefer to work in French the right to carry out their tasks, communicate, receive documents and use work tools in French, the employer should also be able to tell other employees that they can ask to work with computer programs in English if they want, for instance.
This element is missing from the proposed bill, and I don't understand why. In fact, it raises doubt. Some of the people I represent are concerned about this aspect, and as a lawyer, so am I. I hardly see how a change like this could cause problems for anyone if accepted.
1:55 p.m.
Liberal
1:55 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
I'd just like to point out that it's not simply a matter of having information technology tools in English.
Amendment LIB‑41 Also says that employees could do their work in English and receive all documentation and communications in English.
My view is that this proposal introduces a form of right to work in English.
2 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu.
Are there any other comments?
As there are none, we will now vote on amendment LIB‑41.
(Amendment negatived: nays 10; yeas 1)
2 p.m.
Liberal
2:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
I call the meeting back to order.
We are now at amendment BQ‑69.
Mr. Beaulieu, would you care to propose the amendment?
2:05 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
Yes, Mr. Chair.
I propose that Bill C‑13, in Clause 54, be amended by replacing lines 32 and 33 on page 42 with the following:
both official languages but the use of French must predominate over the use of English.
If French is said to be the common language, then I think it's only to be expected that it should predominate. English is not excluded, but it specifies that French must predominate.
2:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Since there are no questions or comments, I will call the vote.
(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5)
2:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
That brings us to amendment LIB‑41.1.
Mr. Serré, would you like to move it?
2:10 p.m.
Liberal
Marc Serré Liberal Nickel Belt, ON
Yes, Mr. Chair.
The amendment is simply intended to give more teeth to regulations specifying that a certain number of documents, in the opinion of the business, are to be made available in French. For example, it could involve announcement's about filling positions subject to conditions, contracts of adhesion and arbitration awards.
The amendment also introduces a new clause, clause 9.2. It gives unions the right to receive communications and documentation in French, as is the case for a provincial regime applicable in Quebec.
2:10 p.m.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.
2:10 p.m.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
Mr. Chair, I thought that all the LIB series amendments numbered with periods are basically the result of a collaboration between the Government of Quebec and the Government of Canada to ensure compliance with both statutes, the Act Respecting French, the Official and Common language of Québec and the Official Languages Act.
I would suggest speeding up the adoption of these amendments by trusting the officials who worked on them. Earlier, we unanimously adopted the first two amendments in the series. Allow me to suggest proceeding quickly without fully reading each of these amendments. The purpose is to speed things up to get through the whole document.
These amendments are extremely technical. No one has had the time to read them. I, for one, haven't had the time to do so. I don't want to rush things for no reason, but I believe that we have no option but to trust the Quebec and Canadian government officials who worked on these amendments to make both acts consistent with one another.
2:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Mr. Généreux, I have to read them one at a time. In fact they don't exist until they have been proposed.
As we have the wording of the amendments in front of us, we can call the vote right away without any debate. As the chair, I can't require this, but the committee can decide to proceed this way. Nevertheless, we will keep your comment in mind.
Mr. Godin, you have the floor to speak to amendment LIB‑41.1.