Debates of Nov. 25th, 2020

Status of the French Language in Montreal

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Madam Chair, the member’s invitation is based on lies.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Madam Chair, I would just like to thank the leader of the Bloc Québécois for his comments.

I do not agree with his conclusion. He spoke about the day when Quebec will stand up. Quebec is already standing up.

We, the 78 members, represent Quebec. No one person in the House can claim to speak on behalf of Quebec. We, the 78 members, the cabinet members, the members of the opposition, the Bloc Québécois members and the NDP member represent Quebec. I wanted to set the record straight.

Now, the leader of the Bloc Québécois in his always inspiring French—and I say this respectfully and not sarcastically, because it is always inspiring for all of us—raised some very important points about our discussion on protecting the French language.

Does he realize that if we really want to change things, we need a responsible government here, in Ottawa, and that it is not always by being in opposition that we can make the federal government take action? We can do so by ensuring that there is a federal political party in Ottawa, in the House of Commons, that is responsive to Quebeckers. That is not the case at present.

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Madam Chair, there has never been a federal government that has deserved Quebeckers' trust. That is why we, as the voice of Quebec in this place, must always speak about what is good for Quebec and against what is bad for Quebec. That is the very identity of the Bloc Québécois.

As for the fact that Quebec is standing up, that is a good one-liner, but I would say to my esteemed colleagues that it is because they are looking at the ball and chain attached to Quebec's feet and have not yet seen how high Quebec can rise.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Madam Chair, I have never been compared to Ti-Mé from La Petite Vie before, but I will not dignify the Bloc Québécois leader's quips and barbs with a reply.

I will simply remind him that extending Bill 101 to federally regulated businesses has been part of the NDP platform since 2008. Four successive NDP leaders have endorsed that idea.

Does the member not think that improving the status of French in Quebec, beyond applying the Charter of the French Language to federally regulated businesses, also requires positive, constructive measures, like funding and increased flexibility to offer French language courses to newcomers?

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Madam Chair, I am quite certain the Government of Quebec has already thought of that.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Madam Chair, first off, congratulations to our leader for what was, as always, a very inspiring speech.

The government House leader and the Leader of the Opposition made some very interesting comments, but, as we always say, they need to walk the talk.

I am astonished at the number of members in the House tonight. Judging from their comments, tonight's subject must be awfully dear to the hearts of our Liberal colleagues. Someone is pointing at the screen. How many Liberal members are on the screen? There are 18 Liberal members who are participating virtually and three or four who are physically present in the House. There are as many Bloc Québécois members here as could be allowed due to the pandemic. The Conservatives, however, turned out in great numbers, and we appreciate it.

What does my leader have to say about that?

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Madam Chair, we can indeed debate and discuss other political parties’ interest in the issue of the French language.

There are some who see it as a temporary political issue to be disposed of as soon as possible, because it is a hot potato. This would be on par with wage subsidies being claimed by political parties, or perhaps vaccines that will be available later in Quebec and Canada than elsewhere. It is one of a long list of topics. We could talk about judicial appointments or the Prime Minister’s family. There are lots of topics. There are many more topics under the rug than on it.

Of course, we cannot expect enthusiasm from the members on the other side. This is especially true since a large majority of the Liberal members are not from Quebec, and it is harder to get them to make grandiose declarations of love for Quebec. I imagine that the Leader of the Government is exerting considerable pressure to find a few who will not end up putting their foot in their mouth to be able to do that.

I do know some members, both Liberal and Conservative, whose attachment to the French language is very sincere; I am sure of it. It is just a question of numbers and critical mass. In the Liberal Party, the numbers and critical mass do not allow it to be anything more than a passing fad in that caucus.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Madam Chair, I would like to remind the leader of the Bloc Québécois that he has made it a habit, almost a reflex, to confuse the Bloc Québécois with the whole population of Quebec. The Bloc Québécois is only a political party. It is no better or worse than any other party. Its members speak on their own behalf, not on behalf of all Quebeckers.

I would like to know if the leader of the Bloc Québécois is capable of understanding that a member can belong to the Liberal Party, the Conservative Party, the Bloc Québécois or the New Democratic Party and still feel a deep affection for Quebec, just as they can love French and defend it. The Bloc Québécois does not have a monopoly on loving Quebec and the French language.

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Madam Chair, speaking from a purely mathematical perspective, I am happy to see that the government House leader recognizes that the Prime Minister of Canada does not speak on behalf of Canada, since his government is a minority one.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Chair, I just heard the government House leader say that we are not the only ones who can speak on behalf of Quebeckers. However, his own party is about to vote against our bill, which we tabled after a motion was adopted unanimously by the National Assembly. Here is a quote from that motion:

THAT the National Assembly recall that French is the only official language of Québec; ...THAT it affirm that the Charter of the French language must be applied to companies operating under federal jurisdiction....

That is a unanimous request. I would like to hear my leader talk about the fact that we are apparently not the only ones who can speak on behalf of Quebeckers, but that we respect the decisions made in Quebec City.

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Madam Chair, there is only one Parliament that can claim to speak on behalf of Quebeckers, all Quebeckers, and only Quebeckers. It is my only national Parliament, the one where my allegiance, as a citizen, lies first and foremost, and that is the Quebec National Assembly. There is a kind of log where all the unanimous votes passed by the Quebec National Assembly are recorded. In general, in fact in virtually all cases, it says the opposite of what the Liberal Party of Canada says.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Madam Chair, I have a quick question for the leader of the Bloc Québécois. He spoke earlier about the ball and chain. He just brought up fond memories of the time when we sat together in the National Assembly. For him, it is the only place where Quebeckers can meet.

If he loves it so much, why is he not the leader of the Parti Québécois?

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Madam Chair, I am quite happy here, because on a winning team, there are offensive players and defensive players. We are pretty good at defence when it comes to keeping Quebec's rights, privileges and interests from being constantly shoved around by the federalist “goons”, if my former colleagues will pardon the expression, because of their numbers.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Madam Chair, I am very pleased to rise to speak this evening.

I would like to start along the same lines as the Leader of the Government and the leader of the official opposition and point out that there are 78 members of Parliament from Quebec, and each one of these members is as legitimate as the others. The NDP represents 454,000 Quebeckers, which is not insignificant and must be respected in our discussions in the House.

No one has a monopoly over Quebec or over defending the interests of Quebec or the French language. I think this is something we all care about.

I am so proud to participate virtually in this evening's debate because the French language is something I hold very dear. I was fortunate to grow up and live in a home filled with French books, songs, movies and music. The songs of Félix Leclerc and Gilles Vigneault filled my childhood and teenage years. I was immersed in the music of Pauline Julien, Gérald Godin, Claude Gauthier, Robert Charlebois and Diane Dufresne. I could not get enough of Quebec comedians like Yvon Deschamps, Les Cyniques and Sol, and of French comedians Pierre Desproges and Raymond Devos. They were all so unbelievably talented at eloquently using the language, making us laugh and also making us think, all of which made me want to understand and learn more about the beautiful French language.

That is why debates like the one we are having tonight are so important, because this is not simply about a bill or a motion. For many Quebeckers, as well as Acadians and francophones outside Quebec, I am sure, it is a vital and fundamental issue that goes to the core of who we are collectively and individually. Quebec's language and culture are inextricably intertwined. I think this debate is extremely important and needs to take place.

I heard a lot of partisan attacks in the previous interventions. I am not saying I will shy away from those completely, but I will try to refocus the debate on verifiable, objective facts that will help us assess the situation, and on constructive suggestions for improving the defence and promotion of French.

Last week, I was proud to be the member moving a motion calling for the French language to be defended and promoted in Quebec and across Canada. That motion was passed unanimously by the House.

Let me point out that, according to 2018 stats, 94.5% of people in Quebec are able to have a conversation in French. We can agree that it is not necessarily a very sophisticated or complex conversation, but it shows that all the hard work of past years is bearing fruit. Michel C. Auger mentioned that percentage when he was on Tout le monde en parle two years ago.

There are four indicators for the French language: mother tongue, language spoken at home, language used in public, and language of work. Personally, I do not feel they are all equal because I think language of work and language used in public are the most important indicators.

There has been a slight decline in the use of French at home. From 1996 to 2016, 82% of households spoke French regularly, but not exclusively, at home. That percentage dropped to 79% in 2016, a slight decline of 3%.

The numbers for spoken language at home by immigrants, by newcomers, are interesting. Before 1981, only 30% of them adopted French, nearly 33% opted for English and 37% used a language other than French or English. Between 2011 and 2016, more than 41% of newcomers adopted French, 49% chose a language other than French or English and only 9% chose English. In 30 years, we have seen an increase in the use of French at home by newcomers. A 2011 report by the Office québécois de la langue française found that a growing number of immigrants chose French over English as the language of use at home.

The real problem, and this is why it is important to have this discussion, is the language of work. According to a 2019 report by the Office québécois de la langue française, French is in decline in retail businesses. People are more often welcomed in English or in a bilingual manner than before. The same report also noted that once the desire to be served in French was expressed, the person received the service in French in Montreal more than 85% of the time.

There is a problem of perception and hospitality, but it is no catastrophe. We must be vigilant and we need to do more, but we also need to make decisions based on objective facts and the reality on the ground. Efforts do need to be made to help businesses, especially those with 25 to 50 employees, report more to the Quebec government on the linguistic quality of the services offered by their employees.

I want to commend the work being done in this area by the Quebec labour movement, especially the FTQ and the CSN, which work mainly in the private sector. They have good programs and work a great deal on French integration.

French integration is key. Bill 101 must apply to companies under federal jurisdiction. That has been part of our platform since the days of Jack Layton. It was taken up by Nycole Turmel and Thomas Mulcair, as well as our current leader, the member for Burnaby South. It is also a question of equal rights for workers. They must have access to documents in French in the workplace.

The matter of French integration is a major issue. I think that considerable efforts must be made to improve access to French language courses by making them free for newcomers. Right now, they face obstacles, such as the requirement to get a study permit. These obstacles may have been put there by the Government of Quebec or to the Government of Canada.

Some members of my staff teach French to newcomers. They tell me that people who do not yet have permanent status have a hard time accessing French classes. This is a major problem.

When the leader of the NDP and I met with the Premier of Quebec before the last federal election, we made it clear that there must be sufficient federal resources to help Quebec teach newcomers French.

There are other things that can and must be done as well. I think that has already been said tonight.

The bill to renew the Broadcasting Act was tabled recently. It is vital to establish very clear goals, principles, approaches and directives for the CRTC, but also for the Canada Media Fund and the Canadian Television Fund, in order to have the necessary resources to create original French-language content, as opposed to translated content. We must secure the means to do it, whether through CRTC regulations, general policy or directives to the CRTC.

In my view, the Bloc Québécois bill requiring French tests for refugees and family reunification applicants is inappropriate and would be hard to implement in reality. It is kind of a bogus solution, not a real solution to a real problem. That is why we in the NDP are quite critical of the idea at this time.

I see that my time is up, and I will allow my colleagues to ask me questions.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to my colleague's speech.

I think he is sincere in his love of the French language. He mentioned his former leader, Thomas Mulcair, who, incidentally, called out the member this week over a position he recently took. Our esteemed colleague from Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie felt that the Bloc's proposal to make an adequate knowledge of French a condition for becoming a citizen in Quebec was divisive.

Who is right here, Mr. Mulcair or the member?

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am right.

I do want to expand a bit on my answer. I remind the member that there are three types of immigration: economic immigration, which is managed exclusively by Quebec and which awards significantly more points for knowledge of French; family reunification; and refugees.

I find it hard to justify the idea of forcing a French test on people applying for family reunification or on refugees who are fleeing poverty, war or exploitation. In addition, the argument for requiring French tests does not account for movement between provinces. If someone becomes a citizen in Ontario, Nova Scotia or British Columbia and then moves to Montreal, any theoretical benefit of this bill is lost.

In our opinion, this is not fair to refugees, and it would be hard to enforce when someone moves between provinces.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to hear the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie. As I said, he is one of the members who speak for Quebec, like the other 77 members from Quebec. We all speak for Quebec. It is not the exclusive property of a single party.

The member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie lives in the heart of Montreal. The second part of the name of his riding means a small homeland, which is a very apt description. People there have joie de vivre, and it is as Québécois as it gets. Can the member tell us what the reality of French is in his riding? We know that the West Island is only a few kilometres away, and the east end of Montreal is similarly close in the opposite direction.

What is the status of French, and how is it under threat in his riding?

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Louis-Saint-Laurent for the question.

I agree with him. Voting against a Bloc Québécois motion does not mean that we are against Quebec and Quebeckers. Quebec does not belong to a single political party. I completely agree with my colleague's comment.

French is actually at risk in Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie in terms of its day-to-day use and as a language of business, but we also have to recognize that Montreal's English-speaking community is the most bilingual in all of Canada. Its members are able to communicate in French fairly easily. More and more French-speaking Quebeckers speak English, and more and more English-speaking Quebeckers and Montrealers speak French as well.

This allows for a very respectful relationship, but we still need to be very careful, especially in the retail sector.

[Jagmeet Singh, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to be able to express my opinion on this very important subject.

Members know that I am not francophone, but I am a proud francophile. When I was young and living in an anglophone city, I decided to learn French. That was a gift that stayed with me for the rest of my life. My dream, in a country with two official languages, is to promote both of those languages.

I understand the need to always be vigilant in protecting and promoting French in Quebec.

Does my hon. colleague believe that, in order to promote French, the beautiful language of Molière, we need to put an effort into teaching it to the many people who come to Canada from other countries?

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the leader of the NDP and member for Burnaby South for his question.

I find that extremely fascinating. It is a wonderful story. Now Quebeckers know that, in his teenage years, as part of his personal and family life, he chose to learn French out of curiosity and a love of that language. I think that will resonate with many Quebeckers. I also think that he was absolutely right in saying that we need to invest the necessary resources in teaching French to newcomers. The NDP prefers to take a constructive, positive approach that helps people to learn the beautiful language of Molière and integrate into society. We do not want a restrictive or punitive approach, particularly if it is less effective and harder to enforce. That is why, in my opinion, the New Democrats committed to not only apply Bill 101 to federally regulated businesses but also to allocate additional resources to French education.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague quoted Yvon Deschamps during his short presentation. Yvon Deschamps was a master of irony, which is a convenient little device that allows us to say the opposite of what we really mean. People use irony often. I think it is funny coming from my colleague for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, especially when he tries to claim the NDP was behind the legislation to apply Bill 101 to federal jobs. Sadly for him, that is not so. It was the MP Pauline Picard who introduced the bill for the first time in 2007. As is often the case when Quebeckers are interested in something, the Bloc Québécois made the first move and introduced a bill like that one. The NDP picked the idea up afterward.

The irony does not stop there. The NDP's strong presence here today illustrates how important its members think French is. The seats are all full. What a strong contingent. I would like my colleague to set the record straight, at least. When he spoke to the leader earlier, he said it was an NDP idea. If he has any decency, he will set the record straight.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Jonquière for the question.

All I said was that applying the Charter of the French Language to federally regulated businesses has been part of the NDP platform for at least 12 years. It is not only a good way to defend and promote French, but it is also a concept that affects equal rights for workers. We want employees at Caisse Desjardins and employees at Royal Bank to have access to the same rights, the same services in French and the same job contracts in French. We are so in favour of workers' rights that unlike the Bloc Québécois, we have never voted in favour of closure to impose back-to-work legislation in order to prevent striking workers from exercising their right to strike. That is what the Bloc Québécois did in 2009.

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie for his intervention, which was very interesting and very relevant.

He talked about the importance of culture. I would like him to sum up in 30 seconds how he sees the vital connection that exists between language and culture.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Minister of Canadian Heritage for the question.

I think that in the heart and soul of Quebeckers, the concepts of culture and language go hand in hand. That has been the case for decades, and I do not see that changing anytime soon. I invite the Minister of Canadian Heritage to be open to possible amendments to his Bill C-10, to further clarify the fact that we need original French-language content made in French in Quebec and Canada. I think that for the next 20 or 30 years, that would be crucial.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

I would like to raise something that has happened a few times now. Through you, I would like to remind Bloc members that we must not refer to the presence or absence of people in the House, especially knowing that many NDP members are participating in this event virtually. It ends up trivializing what is an important debate. If you could remind the Bloc members about that, I would much appreciate it.