Madam Speaker, obviously, the Bloc Quebecois will not support Motion No. 7 before us. This motion calls for the deletion of clause 36.1, which we discussed in committee, having examined the bill clause by clause, and which was added by the committee.
Naturally, we asked questions of the Department of Justice lawyer and departmental officials who came to explain the bill to us.
But some committee members disagreed with departmental officials, who claim that it is not required in the bill, because the law automatically applies, apparently. If the Official Languages Act automatically applies, it does not cost a lot to include it in the bill. Nothing is compromised by doing so.
We said that we thought it was very simple; clause 36.1, which had been added, stipulates that the Official Languages Act applies to the Agency and to its subcontractors. There was the situation with Air Canada, which claims that Air Alliance is not subject to the Official Languages Act.
Complaints were filed with the official languages commissioner on several occasions, not always politely, because the Official Languages Act was not applied in this very parliament. There was the example of the construction site workers. We even received a unilingual English document from the Department of Human Resources Development concerning members' insurance benefits—fortunately, the error was quickly corrected yesterday, and we were sent a letter in French.
It was pointed out, for instance, that all the proceedings in Nagano were in English. Not that long ago, when we had the Commonwealth ceremonies in the Speaker's chambers, the whole thing was conducted in English only.
Ever since we got here, we have not stopped fighting to ensure that the Official Languages Act is complied with. A few years ago, I visited some parks in the maritime provinces during the month of July. Wherever I went, I was told “Mrs. Tremblay, unfortunately the last francophone who came before you took the last French document that we had”. I was told the same thing everywhere I went. It was probably thought that 10 French copies or so would do. I never even saw one. I do not even know whether they exist. I believed what I was told, and I concluded that so many francophones were visiting the maritimes and Newfoundland that they ran out of French leaflets. Quebeckers cannot be accused of not being open, since they visit our national parks in such large numbers.
It appears that, after consulting officials, probably from the Department of Justice, a compromise was reached and Motion No. 8 was proposed. It reads as follows:
36.1 For greater certainty, the Official Languages Act applies to the Agency and the Agency has the duty, under section 25 of that Act, to ensure that, where services are provided or made available by another person or organization on its behalf, any member of the public in Canada or elsewhere can communicate with and obtain those services from that person or organization in either official language, in any case where those services, if provided by the Agency, would be required under Part IV of the Official Languages Act to be provided in either official language.
Motion No. 8, which seeks to replace clause 36.1 of the bill, is simply a reminder of what the Official Languages Act provides. With things being so clear, the agency can never claim not to know that it is subject to the Official Languages Act. This is merely a precaution. Like a double lock on the door of a hotel room, this motion provides added protection. We know that the Official Languages Act protects our rights, but we want to make sure the agency will never forget it.
I will conclude by saying that, since the Reform Party expressed two different opinions on the previous motion, I would like to see at least one of its members tell us that francophones have a right to exist in this country.