Official Languages Committee on May 9th, 2024

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First of all, I'd like to say that I look forward to seeing the final wording. I hope it will be sent soon, so we can see it in detail.

I also want to say that it's sad it has come to this. I'm sure we've all witnessed heated or explosive committee meetings before. However, in my 16 years here as a member of Parliament, I've rarely seen an explosion directed at witnesses. As parliamentarians, we must be prepared to hear points of view with which we do not agree. Indeed, that's the essence of our work. It's perfectly okay to express disagreement. I myself often do so in my committees. However, what we saw on Monday was insulting. It was incredibly disrespectful.

I also think it has damaged our committee's reputation. It sent a message that witnesses cannot feel safe and free to express their views as they wish.

The incident is all the more troubling knowing that the member in question, in addition to being a permanent member of the committee, is the chair of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie, of which I am also a member. In that capacity, he represents Canada on the international stage. Word of this incident will reach our fellow international APF members, if it hasn't already. It's absolutely unacceptable for a representative of the Canadian francophonie to behave like this.

In closing, I'll add that I'm troubled by the fact that it took four days for the member in question to deliver an apology to the witnesses. As I said, it's unfortunate that things have come to this point, but I don't think we can downplay what happened on Monday. It sent the wrong message not only to the witnesses who were here on Monday, but also to witnesses we'll want to hear from in future. It damaged the committee's reputation and that of the Canadian francophonie on the international stage.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Ms. Ashton.

Mr. Serré, you have the floor.

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The first thing I want to say is that—

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Just a moment, Mr. Serré. I think Mr. Beaulieu wants to say something.

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

Yes, I have a point of order, Mr. Chair. I haven't moved my subamendment. Generally speaking, I should be able to present my subamendment before we move on to debate.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

It's done. Ms. Ashton asked that your subamendment be circulated. The clerk is—

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

My point is that I would then like to be able to explain it. You didn't give me a chance to explain it.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Right, okay.

I would remind the committee that the discussion at this time must be limited to Mr. Beaulieu's subamendment and the changes he's making to Mr. Généreux's amendment, which the latter wishes to make to Mr. Godin's motion.

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

I asked to speak, but I didn't even have a chance to explain it.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Do you want to speak to your subamendment now, or do you want to wait until it's been circulated?

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

I'd like to be able to explain it. Then people can respond to it.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

You're right.

Pardon me, Mr. Serré, but I'm going to give the floor back to Mr. Beaulieu, while the clerk rewrites the motion to insert the elements proposed by Mr. Beaulieu into Mr. Généreux's amendment.

You have the floor, Mr. Beaulieu.

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

Thank you.

I think the subamendment is important for a number of reasons.

On the one hand, it must be acknowledged that the witnesses relied on science. In fact, they referred to a Statistics Canada study that shows that the fact that people attend university in one language encourages them to function in that language. Several studies have previously been done on the subject. This is by no means a new fact.

Over the past two or three days, after this insult, Mr. Drouin has added to it by saying that the witness's comments were simplistic and that it amounted to taking him for a fool. According to the polls, 58% of Quebeckers are in favour of applying Bill 101 to CEGEPs, and I don't think these people are fools. In his view, defending this idea was extremist; in his view, it was simplistic. Be that as it may, it's based on scientific data. Criticize all you want, but there's no denying it. It's not simplistic.

On the other hand, it's unbecoming behaviour for a parliamentarian or chair of a parliamentary association, let alone the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie, to scorn and try to intimidate witnesses who come to testify calmly. Mr. Drouin even twisted their words. The witnesses did say that it was one of the factors of anglicization, but it wasn't the only one. Mr. Lacroix made that clarification. Mr. Drouin said that, in their opinion, overfunding English‑language universities in Quebec would cause the anglicization of Quebec. That's one of the factors.

Then Liberal ministers, including Mr. Boissonnault, followed up with personal anecdotes. However, the data put forward by the witnesses was based on science. You can't rely on personal anecdotes.

I wonder how Mr. Drouin can continue to act as chair of the Canadian Branch of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie when he has denigrated the majority of francophones in Canada, which is in Quebec. There will be a conference of the francophonie in Montreal this summer. How will Quebeckers feel in this context? I think it's unacceptable.

By definition, we're here to receive witnesses. There have been times when I've had witnesses in front of me with whom I really disagreed. I even found their comments insulting, but I've never attacked them in that way, nor have I ever disrespected them. That's the bottom line. We're supposed to accept the diversity of opinions from witnesses.

I think it's really unacceptable—

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Excuse me, Mr. Beaulieu. Give me a few seconds.

While Mr. Beaulieu is presenting his arguments, we're circulating the documents containing his subamendment. It will help us follow the discussion. The elements referred to in Mr. Beaulieu's subamendment appear in blue. Below it are the elements previously proposed by Mr. Généreux in his amendment, which would now be shifted down.

Go ahead, Mr. Beaulieu.

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

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

We had originally planned to hear from the minister. Unfortunately, the circumstances brought about by the member for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell have put us in this situation.

I would like to ask the minister if he could extend his appearance at our meeting as Minister of Official Languages, since this concerns him, and it is in the interest of official languages. So can he extend his presence at our meeting?

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Hold on one second. I—

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

That wasn't a point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

I don't know whether this is a point of order or not, but, in practice, we do need to know whether the witness we had planned to hear from in the first hour of our meeting can give us more time. He certainly has a very busy schedule. So let's get rid of that line of questioning.

Mr. Minister, is that possible for you? The floor is yours.

[Randy Boissonnault, Liberal, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Unfortunately, colleagues, I have to leave at 9:15 because I have other commitments this morning. I'm sorry.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

That's perfect. We understand. We had an hour on our agenda.

Mr. Beaulieu, I apologize for interrupting you, but I think everyone will be able to follow your arguments more easily by having the subamendment that has just been circulated in front of them.

Please continue.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Mr. Chair, I raised a point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Did you have a point of order?

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Which one?