Mr. Speaker, the minister just talked about the importance of democratic political symbols, and I will give him an opportunity to apply this principle. The motion before the House reads as follows:
That, in the opinion of the House, recognition that the Québécois form a nation within a united Canada means, in particular, that Quebec has the right to ensure that immigrants to Quebec must learn French first and foremost.
My question is quite simple: are Conservatives for or against this motion?
The minister surely noticed that the part about the “recognition that the Québécois form a nation within a united Canada” is taken word for word from the Conservative motion about the recognition of the Québécois nation that the House adopted.
The Supreme Court of Canada is an invitation to a teleological interpretation, to an examination of objectives and context. In this place, our goal is to make sure that we express ourselves unanimously, despite the Supreme Court ruling. When we talk about recognizing the Québécois nation, we say that the Government of Quebec has the right to require that immigrants and newcomers to Quebec send their children to French schools first and foremost. However, in last week's nonsensical ruling, the Supreme Court of Canada tore a big hole in the protection of the French language.
Can the minister tell us if his government will support the recognition and protection of the French language, yes or no? Will he, just like the Supreme Court, pay lip service to it and simply disappear when the time for real action comes?