Official Languages Committee on March 31st, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Ms. Ashton.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

I wanted to make a brief comment. We had already been advised by the Clerk's office that these amendments were out of order. Having said that, I want to point out that the issue of the bilingualism of the Governor General and the Lieutenant Governor has already been raised in committee. I share the concerns of my colleague, Mr. Godin. It is unacceptable that these two individuals do not speak our two official languages.

This is a matter of political will. We hope that governments will change their tactics in the future, to ensure that we have bilingual representatives in the highest positions in the country. We also recognize that there is a need for people who speak indigenous languages as well, as the Governor General does, but I hope that the message from the committee is that there needs to be a change in approach and that there needs to be political will, regardless of which party is in power.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

I appreciate your comments.

That brings us to amendment LIB‑36.

Since no one is moving this final amendment, clause 49 remains unchanged and I call it to a vote.

(Clause 49 agreed to.)

(Clause 50)

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Let's move on to clause 50 and amendment CPC‑55.

Mr. Godin, do you wish to move this amendment?

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

Yes.

I move that Bill C‑13, in Clause 50, be amended by replacing lines 31 and 32 on page 37 with the following:

93.1 (1) On the fifth anniversary of the day on which this section comes into force and every five years after that

This is yet another amendment that is very consistent with the specific goals that Conservative Party of Canada members have had from the beginning, which is to stop the decline of French and to protect and promote both official languages.

The bill proposes that the new law be reviewed on the tenth anniversary of its coming into force, but the reality is that days, even years, could pass after that date. Let's not wait 10 years, let's build in some protection and give ourselves the tools to react more quickly. That is why a five-year deadline is so important.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Mr. Godin.

Before opening the floor for debate on amendment CPC‑55, I would like to inform the committee that if it is adopted, amendment BQ‑59 cannot be moved, as the two amendments are identical.

Since there is no debate on amendment CPC‑55, I will put it to a vote.

(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5.)

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

We are at amendment BQ‑59, but I must apologize, Mr. Beaulieu, because I misspoke. Since this amendment is identical to amendment CPC‑55, it cannot be moved. I want to thank our legislative clerks for their guidance.

Moving on to amendment CPC‑56.

Do you wish to move it, Mr. Godin?

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

Mr. Chair, amendment CPC‑56 is interesting, but I will not move it because I have another one that is even more powerful.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Moving on to amendment CPC‑57.

Mr. Godin.

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

I move that Bill C‑13, in Clause 50, be amended by replacing line 33 on page 37 with the following:

anniversary, the President of the Treasury Board, in consultation with the Minister of Canadian Heritage, shall un‑

We do not want to exclude the Department of Canadian Heritage.

I'll repeat what I've been saying all along: It takes consistency, and we are being consistent here on our side. I hope I will have my colleagues' support.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Before opening the floor for debate, I want to advise committee members that if CPC‑57 passes, amendments LIB‑37, BQ‑60, and NDP‑15 cannot be moved due to a line conflict. I would add that the result of the vote on amendment CPC‑57 will apply to amendment CPC‑58, as they are correlated.

Coming back to amendment CPC‑57, which I will call for a vote since there are no questions or comments.

(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5.)

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

As it happens, amendment CPC‑58 is also rejected.

We will now move on to amendment LIB‑37.

Do you wish to move it, Mr. Drouin?

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

I move that Bill C‑13, in Clause 50, be amended by replacing line 33 on page 37 with the following:

anniversary, the Minister of Canadian Heritage shall, in consultation with the President of the Treasury Board, un-

Our colleague, Mr. Drouin, was close. I simply flipped the wording around.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Before we hear questions and comments, I would like to inform you that if LIB‑37 passes, BQ‑60 and NDP‑15 can no longer be moved due to a line conflict.

Questions or comments?

You have the floor, Mr. Godin.

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

In fact, Mr. Chair, I disagree with my colleague. By reversing the sentence, by putting the Minister of Heritage first and proposing that he consult with the President of the Treasury Board, it takes away from the role of the Treasury Board.

The review must be conducted by the Treasury Board, which oversees the act's administration. Remember that amendment CPC‑7, which was passed, gives this authority to the Treasury Board using language such as “the Treasury Board is responsible for” and “shall, in consultation with the other federal departments, coordinate”.

This amendment is contrary to what is now in the bill. I am going to talk about consistency again and repeat that we need to be consistent. We are wasting our time if what we are doing messes up everything in the bill. What we were doing in the beginning no longer meshes with what we are doing today.

I cannot vote in favour of this amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you.

Are there any other questions or comments?

Mr. Généreux.

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

Mr. Chair, think of a sentence like “Mom and Dad are having a baby”. As we know, mothers can have babies but fathers cannot. That is a fact. If we change the sentence to say “Dad and Mom are having a baby”, it's like saying that dad, rather than mom, will have the baby. It doesn't work that way.

It is the same thing here. Reversing the order in which Treasury Board and Canadian Heritage are mentioned totally changes the spirit of what we have been trying to do with this bill all along, which is to have a captain on the ship or a pilot in the plane. Someone needs to take the lead in getting this bill done and implemented.

I want to turn to Ms. Boyer and the public servants.

In our view, as long as there is a captain on board, the course of the ship can be altered and it can make it to a safe harbour. Implementing this proposed change would, once again, split the responsibility for implementing the Official Languages Act between Canadian Heritage and Treasury Board.

The act has existed for 50 years and we believe, although we may be wrong, that it should be administered by one specific organization, which would of course share its resources with Canadian Heritage and other institutions. We believe that the Treasury Board should be responsible, within the Canadian government, for implementing the Official Languages Act. We believe that would be the right thing to do.

As public officials, what do you think?

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Ms. Boyer, you have the floor.

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

Thank you for the question.

First, I want to clarify that the Official Languages Act applies to all federal departments and institutions, and that this committee specified that it would be the Treasury Board that would be responsible for implementing the act.

Elsewhere in Bill C‑13, as currently drafted, specific roles are given to ministers, such as the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship for example, because of their mandate. This amendment addresses reviewing the act implemented by the Treasury Board. This amendment proposes that this review take place every ten years and be conducted by Canadian Heritage in consultation with the Treasury Board. This review would cover parts IV, V, and VI of the act, as well as part VII, which you have just added, to ensure that the results of the review are clearly identified.

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

Therefore, from what I understand, this amendment does not go against our previously expressed desire that Treasury Board drive the project.

[Julie Boyer]

Exactly.

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

Mr. Adam, I would like to have your thoughts on this. Do you have the same understanding?

[Karim Adam, Director, Oversight and Compliance, Official Languages Centre of Excellence, People and Culture, Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer, Treasury Board Secretariat]

Yes, my understanding is similar in terms of roles and responsibilities and that part of the act.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Go ahead, Ms. Terrien.

[Chantal Terrien, Manager, Modernization of the Official Languages Act, Department of Canadian Heritage]

As Ms. Boyer was saying, we need to remember that even with the changes that were made, under clause 4 of Bill C‑13 some items are still the responsibility of the Minister of Canadian Heritage, including the action plan for official languages and the implementation of the estimation of the number of rights-holders. It is also worth remembering that the Department of Canadian Heritage has a mandate focused on Canadian society, with which it establishes connections.