House of Commons Hansard #118 of the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was quebeckers.

Topics

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:10 p.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

Order.

The hon. member for West Nova.

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:10 p.m.

Conservative

Chris d'Entremont Conservative West Nova, NS

Madam Speaker, I have a simple question.

When it comes to Canada's francophonie, Quebec is seen as the brightest light in the country. The member mentioned the Acadians, who are part of Canada's francophonie.

Can he tell us how Quebec can work with the provinces to promote small francophone communities in the rest of Canada, like mine, where the common language is French?

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:15 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for the question.

Of course Nova Scotia has an extremely prosperous Acadian community. It has networks of co‑operatives and credit unions. It is very exciting to see the renewed prosperity of the Acadian community in Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island. It is encouraging.

Now, the federal government has a role to play in funding francophone institutions. The problem is that for several years, this area has been neglected by both the current Liberal government and the former Conservative government.

The NDP supports the development of francophone communities across the country. Naturally, if an NDP government is elected in the coming months, that is what we will work on. It is vital to our collective future.

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:15 p.m.

NDP

Richard Cannings NDP South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC

Madam Speaker, my colleague from New Westminster—Burnaby briefly mentioned indigenous languages in his remarks. I wonder if he could expand on that with respect to my riding of South Okanagan—West Kootenay and the indigenous language of Nsyilxc?n. Only perhaps 100 or 200 people are left in the world who speak that language. Indigenous languages need protection and support to thrive after years of residential school and the brutal suppression of these languages.

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:15 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Madam Speaker, my colleague from South Okanagan—West Kootenay always asks very pertinent, relevant questions in the House.

This has been a national tragedy. Combined with what we have learned and continue to learn about the genocide over the past few weeks, this is a question of emergency. Many indigenous languages have already perished. We see young indigenous activists attempting by every means possible to revive those languages. They need substantial supports from the federal government. The federal government loves to support banks and billionaires. The government needs to put a priority on supporting indigenous languages in peril and those that are still strong and need additional reinforcements.

Admissibility of Amendments in the Fifth Report of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage —Speaker's RulingPoints of OrderGovernment Orders

12:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

I would like to thank the member for Banff—Airdrie for his point of order raised yesterday regarding admissibility of amendments made to clauses 8 to 47 of Bill C-10, An Act to amend the Broadcasting Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts, by the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, and contained in its fifth report.

The member argued that by putting the question on amendments after the expiry of the time provided for in the time allocation order of the House, the committee went beyond the provisions of the order. Accordingly, he asked the Chair to strike out from the report the amendments adopted to clauses 8 to 47 of the bill. In addition, he asked the Chair to rule out of order the amendment introducing new clause 13.1 because it was outside the scope of the bill.

Several principles come into play when considering the first issue of this point of order.

Time allocation allows for specific periods of time to be fixed for the consideration of one or more stages of a public bill. Its main effect is to determine a set amount of time for debate.

As was recently pointed out, we have few examples of time allocation motions applied to committee consideration of bills. Until last week, we had no example of such a motion being adopted since February 2001, when the House made important Standing Order modifications in regard to committee consideration of bills and the selection of report stage motions. There are few precedents involving the imposition of such an order on a committee.

The Chair is generally reluctant to involve itself in committee matters unless something extraordinary has occurred. This reluctance is even greater when the committee has not provided any insight through a substantive report to the House. While it is also generally understood that committees are masters of their own proceedings, this principle is not unlimited.

We know for instance that the Speaker may be asked to intervene when committees exceed their mandate when considering legislation. This is usually with respect to the procedural admissibility of amendments.

The member for Banff—Airdrie referred to page 779 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, in his intervention. Were the principle and scope of the bill respected? Was an amendment infringing on the royal recommendation, or was it relevant? These are matters of interest for the Chair.

On June 7, the House adopted a time allocation motion concerning Bill C‑10 so that no more than five additional hours of debate be allotted to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. At the expiry of the limit, after which the proceedings were to be interrupted, and I quote, “every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment.”

There is no question that the House, by adopting a time allocation motion, has decided to limit the study of the bill in committee. The committee continued its study of the bill, and committee members debated and proposed amendments until the end of the time allocated.

When the committee reached the five-hour mark, it had to interpret the House order and reconcile it with the decisions previously taken in regard to the amendments put forward by both independent members and committee members, as well as context surrounding its consideration of the bill.

The House order is silent about the amendments submitted by independent members deemed moved in the committee and about amendments for which committee members had given notice and that had already been distributed to members but not yet proposed.

Ultimately, the committee decided that all amendments received prior to its five-hour deadline would be put to a vote, but that no further amendments or subamendments would be considered.

It is clear that the committee considers all the clauses of the bill and that amendments submitted by representatives of all the recognized parties, as well as by a member belonging to a party that is not recognized, were proposed for the vast majority of them after the five-hour deadline had passed. The Chair is not empowered to pronounce itself on the circumstances surrounding the study of these amendments, it can simply note the result.

As mentioned earlier, the precedents in regard to the interpretation by a committee of a time allocation motion are very few. That said, in the view of the Chair, the terms of the House order were clear and stated that, at the expiry of the five hours, no further debate ought to take place nor amendments moved or adopted.

I therefore rule that the committee exceeded its authority by putting the question on amendments after the five-hour mark. However, in the list of amendments made to clauses 8 to 47, the Chair notes that the amendment made to clause 23, which added text to line 7 on page 20 and replaced line 8 on page 24 of the bill with new text, was the consequential result of an amendment previously adopted by the committee to clause 7 of the bill. Accordingly, this amendment will stand.

All other amendments made to clauses 8 to 47 are declared null and void, and will no longer form part of the bill as reported to the House. In addition, I am ordering that a reprint of the bill be published with all possible haste for use by the House at report stage to replace the reprint ordered by the committee.

Finally, with respect to the amendment that created new clause 13.1, I would agree with the member that this modifies a section of the Broadcasting Act that was not covered by Bill C-10. As such, it is a violation of the “parent Act” rule and it goes beyond the scope of the bill. Consequently, it is also declared null and void and will not form part of the bill. Report stage, the next step in the legislative process for this bill, will accord an opportunity for amendments to the bill to be made.

I thank the House for its attention.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:25 p.m.

Bloc

Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like to start by marking the 30th anniversary of my wonderful political family, the Bloc Québécois. Officially born at a founding convention on June 15, 1991, the Bloc Québécois has been the only federal political party dedicated solely to defending the values and interests of Quebeckers for the past three decades.

I would also like to point out that the first member elected following the creation of my riding of Laurentides—Labelle in 2003 was Bloc Québécois MP Johanne Deschamps, who served three terms between 2004 and 2011. It was in fact from Ms. Deschamps that I got to learn the trade. I worked as her political aide from 2009 to 2011. I have learned a lot over the past few months, and I am still learning. It was a privilege to have this experience.

The women and men who make up the great Bloc Québécois family have been working for 30 years. I just want to take a minute to show just how proud we can be of our achievements.

The Bloc Québécois is working for Quebec culture. For example, there is Bill C‑10, so ably defended by the member for Drummond.

We are working for agriculture, particularly through my esteemed colleague from Berthier—Maskinongé's sustained defence of supply management.

We are striving to protect the environment by frequently speaking in favour of climate accountability and ending federal subsidies for fossil fuels. This cause is being championed by the all-female duo of the members for Repentigny and Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia.

We are working for Quebec's economy by presenting demands and applying pressure to obtain a real federal aerospace policy, support the development of Quebec's forestry industry and defend our Quebec businesses. My colleagues from Joliette, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot and Jonquière are doing remarkable work on these issues.

We are working for border security by calling for oversight of border management. I am thinking of our member for Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia among others.

Of course, we are working for the sound management of government business by holding the government's feet to the fire on issues that represent a conflict of interest, whether it is the partisan appointment of judges or the awarding of contracts to Liberal friends. I salute the hard work of my colleague from Rivière-du-Nord. I have been working alongside him for the past 14 months.

I would like to highlight the Bloc Québécois's efforts to improve employment insurance by proudly proposing to increase the number of weeks of sickness benefits. I salute my colleague from Salaberry—Suroît and her Émilie Sansfaçon bill.

We are working for health care by continuing to demand that the government increase health transfers. My colleagues from Montcalm and Joliette are working on this file.

We are also working for seniors by continuing to press for an increase to old age security. I want to commend my colleague from Shefford for her work on this file.

Today is a big day, a very important day for us. On this, our party's 30th anniversary, we have moved a motion stating:

That the House agree that section 45 of the Constitution Act, 1982, grants Quebec and the provinces exclusive jurisdiction to amend their respective constitutions and acknowledge the will of Quebec to enshrine in its constitution that Quebeckers form a nation, that French is the only official language of Quebec and that it is also the common language of the Quebec nation.

Today we are not asking the House whether it agrees with Bill 96 or whether it thinks Quebec should enshrine in its constitution that Quebeckers form a French-speaking nation. We are calling on the House to acknowledge a reality.

The amending formula to section 45 allows, or rather would allow, since I am hoping to hear in all the speeches that each and every one of us supports the motion, Quebec and every other province to amend its Constitution. That is a fact. Quebeckers chose to use this tool to enshrine in their constitution that they form a nation, that French is the only official language of Quebec and that it is also its common language. That too is a fact. I remind the House that our motion merely asks that the House agree, as I said before, that Quebec has the right to do this and that the motion basically uses the wording of the Constitution Act, 1982.

To clarify the terms of our motion for those watching, I will simply give the example of the term “nation”. A bit of research will tell us that, when applied to a state or territory, it can be synonymous with “country”. That is what we mean when we speak of the United Nations, of which Quebec cannot be a member because it is not sovereign.

The motion states that Quebec is a nation. What does that mean? It is not about becoming a country. The motion calls on the House to recognize that Quebeckers form a nation. The Larousse dictionary defines the word “nation” as a large community of people, typically living within the same territory and having, to a certain extent, a shared history, language, culture and economy. The Robert dictionary defines “nation” as a group of people, generally large, characterized by awareness of its unity and a desire to live together. This is what today's motion is all about. I do not know what my colleagues think, but it makes me think a lot about Quebeckers and what we are experiencing today.

No matter how we turn the question over, it is obvious that Quebeckers form a nation, especially since October 30, 2003, when the Quebec National Assembly unanimously adopted the following motion: “That the National Assembly reaffirm that the people of Québec form a nation.” We agree that passing this motion will reinforce the consensus in Quebec.

There is a reason the Quebec National Assembly specified that it was reaffirming the existence of the nation of Quebec. In fact, this resolution reiterated what all Quebec governments have been saying for decades, namely, that the Canadian confederation is a treaty of union between two nations. Members spoke about this earlier.

Obviously, Quebeckers' conception of their nation has changed over the years. We see ourselves less and less as a minority within Canada and increasingly as a separate nation with its own territory called Quebec and a national government called the Government of Quebec.

Anyone who joins us on this great adventure to build a French-speaking society in North America is as much a Quebecker as the descendants of the 17th-century French colonists, and that is a good example of the Quebec nation's inclusiveness.

In closing, I would like to talk about an experience I had a few days ago. I want to recognize Jessy Gareau, a young graduate from the Centre collégial de Mont‑Laurier who signed an open letter in the Journal de Montréal. He is only 21 years old and he wrote the following, and I quote: “to adopt the necessary measures in our time to save French in Quebec”.

I commend Jessy, and I am sure that—

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Liberal Alexandra Mendes

Order.

I am sure the hon. member will have the chance to continue following questions and comments.

The hon. member for Thérèse-De Blainville.

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:35 p.m.

Bloc

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her heartfelt speech. It is clear that the Bloc Québécois is proud to support and promote the French language and can be counted on to do so.

My question is this: Is there anything my colleague would like to say that she did not have time to tell us?

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:35 p.m.

Bloc

Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC

That is a great question, Madam Speaker. I will take only 30 seconds to answer it.

It is about doing more of what we have been doing for the past 30 years. Our leader talked about the fact that we hear more and more people speaking French on the street. People are proud of our French language, culture and songs, among other things.

Today, we are taking note of that. We cannot disagree on that.

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:35 p.m.

NDP

Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech.

I want to share her enthusiasm and love for the French language, especially with the children of newcomers. I find it very touching.

Would this motion recognizing that French has been the official language since 1974 and the common language not hinder the National Assembly from recognizing indigenous languages, the languages spoken by those who lived on our land before the first settlers arrived?

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:35 p.m.

Bloc

Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC

Madam Speaker, I agree that there are various steps to take. Today's step is specific recognition, an acknowledgement regarding the French language in Quebec.

I spoke earlier about inclusion. We are a big family. We can discuss this with my colleague. We are making a clarification. The motion introduced today recognizes the Quebec nation with French as the main language spoken.

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:40 p.m.

Bloc

Alain Therrien Bloc La Prairie, QC

Madam Speaker, the subject we are debating today is pretty straightforward.

Quebec is a nation. The Conservatives made that declaration in the House in 2006, but it was followed by the words “within a united Canada”. We have deleted those words because they are not really relevant, and that is not what Bill 96 says. It seeks to enshrine in the Constitution that Quebec is a nation. The first observation is quite obvious.

Can this be added to its constitution? Constitutional experts agree that it can. Quebec is a nation with French as its common language, the official language.

Is anyone in the House surprised to me hear me say this? No, of course not.

French has been the official language of Quebec since 1974 and, I would remind the House, its only official language. No one should have a problem with enshrining this in the Constitution.

Does this threaten anglophones in Quebec? Not at all. The anglophone minority in Quebec is among the most privileged in the world, and that will not change.

When Bill 101 was introduced in 1977, some people panicked. Some wanted to move away.

He said, “If you don't like 101, take the 401.”

These people wanted to leave because they thought that it would be the end of their benefits and their rights, and I dare not use the word privileges. When I look at Quebec today I can say that I am not worried about the anglophone minority. It has its universities and no problem getting services in English or using that language throughout Quebec. I have a hard time when someone tells me the opposite.

Is Quebec a nation? The member for Joliette mentioned Lord Durham. In Quebec that individual wanted to extinguish our nation. He believed that Quebeckers were a people without a history or culture and that our salvation was assimilation. That is what Lord Durham used to say. When the member for Joliette mentioned Lord Durham in the House a year ago, there was applause and I never got over it.

I am not talking about Lord Durham to reiterate that dark prediction. In his day, he wanted francophones to assimilate. Today we are talking about French and there are 32 of us here who only speak French in the House. That is one way to thumb our nose at Lord Durham. We can be proud of that. We have been here for 30 years, proving Lord Durham wrong.

I did not bring up Lord Durham just to grumble about him. He said some interesting things, and I will even quote him. In 1838, the Queen instructed Lord Durham to find a solution to the Patriote rebellion. He said, “I expected to find a conflict between a government and a people, but instead found two nations at war within the same state.” Even Lord Durham said there were two nations in Canada. That is not something we made up.

The Quebec nation's name has changed over time, but it well and truly exists. Quebec and Quebeckers are a paradox. They are resilient yet threatened by an anglophone sea and a federal government that has always wanted to weaken their nation.

In 1867, our status as a minority in Canada was institutionalized. We accounted for 33% of Canadians and one of the four provinces. From the federal government's perspective, we were a province. That was Lord Durham's goal. We were on our way to the sad fate Lord Durham had in mind for us.

Resilient to the core, we fought back with the revenge of the cradle. Many francophones went to the United States. Names such as Cartier and Barrière became Carter and Gates. Over the course of two waves of emigration, two million people left for the United States. Even so, the people resisted, producing very large families with 10 children on average and sometimes 14 or 15. Many families had 14 children and 170 grandchildren. Sometimes name tags were needed to tell who was who. That was Quebec in the 19th century. The people fought back through the revenge of the cradle.

The fact that Quebec is a nation is how we managed to resist being swallowed up by the Canadian federation. While the Canadian state subverted the people of Quebec, the Quebec nation became a vector for our survival. The Quiet Revolution, which drove economic growth, gave Quebeckers access to management positions. At the time, we were told that we were born to accept crumbs. Who stood up to challenge that notion and to say that we were capable of managing a business and achieving great things? Who stood up to say that we were going to build dams to prove it?

The Government of Quebec made room not just for French-speaking Quebeckers but also for Quebeckers of all kinds. It told us that we were capable of achieving great things. We were masters in our own house, as Jean Lesage used to say.

Bill 101 was adopted in 1977, and this legislated the use of French as the language of Quebec. Yes, there are anglophones in Quebec and we do protect their rights. We were eventually proven right. Anglophones were protected, which was a good thing, as they are part of Quebec's landscape. We can be proud of Leonard Cohen. That is the how it is in a modern Quebec. Nevertheless, Quebec has a common language, and everyone needs to understand it. It is important.

On the one hand, the Government of Quebec helped us resist, peacefully of course. On the other, we were crushed. In 1982, the word was multiculturalism. Quebec was no longer one of two founding peoples. It was no longer one of four provinces, not even one of 10 provinces. It was just one of many other cultures. That was our new status. That is what the federal powers that be had in mind for us. To make that happen, the government set out to dismantle Bill 101 piece by piece, turning everything upside down and threatening our survival.

The Prime Minister boasted about how Canada would be the world's first post-national country, but Quebec will never be post-national because Quebec is a nation. All 32 Bloc members are here to make that clear and to tell the federal government that it must respect what Quebec wants and what the Government of Quebec wants to do to protect our reality, our language, our culture and our future.

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:45 p.m.

Bloc

Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC

Madam Speaker, after such an inspiring speech, I can understand that our colleagues are somewhat hesitant to rise. I will be delighted to do so, first to congratulate our House leader, the member for La Prairie, who is an esteemed colleague.

He mentioned something that I believe to be very important in our discussions today and that we have often heard from our colleagues from English Canada. He spoke about Quebec anglophones, who are part of the fabric and part of Quebec society. Quebeckers are often described as people who are a little cold towards those who are not or do not consider themselves to be Quebeckers, as was understood at one point.

I believe that Quebec will not form a nation without everyone who belongs to that nation. My colleagues also believe and are convinced of this. A Quebecker is someone who decides and chooses to be a Quebecker.

I would like to ask my colleague from La Prairie if he believes that we should improve how we explain our national project to these groups of anglophones and allophones who, and we truly believe this, are part of the society that we want to establish and part of the Quebec we dream about.

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:50 p.m.

Bloc

Alain Therrien Bloc La Prairie, QC

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the comments made by my colleague, the member for Drummond.

Quebec gives pride of place to the anglophone minority. Quebec anglophones have contributed much more than what they think. They are important to our demographic fabric. I mentioned Leonard Cohen, but there are others who have worked on becoming and being, in their own way, a source of pride in a modern Quebec. They have their place and we will defend the place they occupy, without forgetting our place.

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:50 p.m.

NDP

Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for La Prairie for his speech.

In today's motion, I think that there is consensus, not unanimity, on the three parts. We have minor concerns about the recognition of indigenous languages by the Government of Quebec. We would not want that to undermine or contradict that recognition.

My colleague is also his party's House leader, and I would like to hear what he thinks about the following.

What does he think about the fact that today is the day on which the Liberal government decided to introduce its bill to modernize the Official Languages Act?

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:50 p.m.

Bloc

Alain Therrien Bloc La Prairie, QC

Madam Speaker, that is a very good question. All I can say to my colleague is that the fact that the government is tabling this bill today, at the end of the session, when we have a whole series of bills on the table, makes me think, with the added threat of an election, that this is nothing more than a pre-election ploy. That is what I think. If the Liberals really want to work for official languages and for French in Quebec, all they have to do is vote tomorrow in favour of the bill introduced by the member for Beauport—Limoilou to apply Bill 101 to federally regulated businesses.

If the Liberals are serious, that is what they will do tomorrow.

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:50 p.m.

Hochelaga Québec

Liberal

Soraya Martinez Ferrada LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his impassioned speech. We can clearly feel his pride, which we share, on the issue of the Quebec nation.

Earlier, he talked about births in Quebec and how Quebec has worked to maintain its francophone demographic weight. I would like to hear what he thinks about the challenges of maintaining this demographic weight now that Quebeckers are unfortunately having fewer babies.

What could he tell us about the issue of demographic weight? What can be done to help increase the francophone demographic weight in Quebec?

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:50 p.m.

Bloc

Alain Therrien Bloc La Prairie, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like to read from a poem about immigration and welcoming immigrants, written by a man I consider to be the greatest poet in Quebec.Inside my four walls of ice
I take my time and my space
To prepare the fire, the place
For the people of the horizon
And the people are of my race

We are welcoming immigrants with open arms because, as my colleague rightly pointed out, our population is declining. We want an integration model that enables us to welcome immigrants and help them prosper in Quebec.

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

12:55 p.m.

Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook Nova Scotia

Liberal

Darrell Samson LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence

Madam Speaker, thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak to the motion moved by the Bloc Québécois. I will be sharing my time with the member for Hochelaga.

In my speech, I will be talking about who I am and where I come from. I will, of course, also talk about the Conservatives' record, our successes as a government, the Bloc's motion and the plan to modernize the Official Languages Act.

I am a proud Acadian from Nova Scotia. I come from Isle Madame, a small island just off Cape Breton Island. Isle Madame is about 14 kilometres by 11 kilometres, and more than 97% of residents speak French.

I also want to point out that the Samson family monument in Lévis was erected in honour of brothers Jacques and Gabriel to commemorate Canada's 100th anniversary.

As members know, I grew up in a minority setting in Nova Scotia. French-language education was not guaranteed. I did all of my schooling in English because there was no French school. However, I remember my father saying in 1969 that Canada was going to change and that bilingualism and the two official languages would be part of the new Canada.

As well, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was adopted in 1982, and section 23 guarantees minority language education rights. This section has been enormously helpful for communities across Canada. Starting in 1990, francophone school boards were created in provinces across the country. In 1996, the Conseil scolaire acadien provincial was founded in Nova Scotia, and there were finally French schools across the province.

In 2005, I became the executive director of this school board, a position I held for almost 11 years before being elected as a member of Parliament. It is a remarkable and interesting fact that during those years, the number of students doubled.

In 2015, I was elected as part of the Liberal government, and I sat on the Standing Committee on Official Languages for four years.

I was also the founder and president of the Liberal caucus of official language minority communities. In addition, I was elected president of the Canadian Branch of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie and vice-president at the international level. Clearly, the work is still going on, not only in Canada and Quebec, but also internationally. That is very important.

Let us now talk about the Conservatives' track record. Today, the Conservatives are talking about everything that they are going to do, but one need only look back at what they accomplished during their 10 years in office to see that we need take no lessons from them in this regard.

In 2006, the Conservatives did away with the court challenges program, which we reinstated in 2017. They gutted the Translation Bureau. They reduced the number of employees so that they could give contracts to translation firms, whose quality of work is much lower than that of Translation Bureau employees.

What is more, the Conservatives did not make any additional efforts to increase francophone immigration, and the targets were not met.

When we took office, we reinstated the Mobilité francophone immigration stream. We also awarded additional points to francophone immigrants under the express entry program.

In their 10 years in office, the Conservatives never increased funding for the language communities. In contrast, we enhanced those agreements by increasing funding by $500 million over five years.

Our government has had other successes. When it comes to education, we signed the very first strategic agreement with the Fédération nationale des conseils scolaires francophones.

A year ago, we saw a complete enumeration of rights holders, who are classified into three categories. As part of the 2021 census, members of this community were able to answer questions about being rights holders.

In addition, our government has revised the official languages regulations on service delivery, adding 600 designated bilingual offices across Canada, a very significant increase. We have also partnered with the provinces to put in place a multilateral early learning and child care framework that includes an official languages clause guaranteeing linguistic minorities their fair share.

The Bloc Québécois talks about its motion as if it were going to change the world, but it forgets that there are many Quebeckers and many francophones in our party. We agree that Quebec is a nation within Canada and that French is Quebec's only official language. We already know that the only province that has both of Canada's official languages as its provincial languages is New Brunswick. The other provinces are officially English, but Quebec is French. We already recognize that, just as we recognize that Quebec has the right to amend its own constitution, within the parameters of section 133.

Our government recognizes that French is in decline. In the Speech from the Throne, we made it clear that we would not only protect French outside Quebec, but also within Quebec. Our government recognizes the importance of Quebec and its role within Canada. As the only French-speaking state in North America, Quebec has a special responsibility to promote the French language throughout Canada. The vitality of French in this country depends in part on its actions and its connection with francophones living in minority communities.

The Quebec government supports the Canadian francophonie in various ways. Our government supports francophones and French in Quebec and supports linguistic minorities across Canada. That is why I am so proud to be part of our government. I am also proud of the bill we introduced today. We will protect and promote the use of French across Canada, including Quebec. We will protect linguistic minorities. We are currently modernizing the Official Languages Act. That is very important, because we are going to ensure the vitality of our institutions and our communities.

We will ensure that bilingual justices are appointed to the Supreme Court. We will ensure that French is promoted in Quebec and across Canada. We will ensure that linguistic minorities across Canada are protected and promoted. We will ensure that francophone immigration is protected and promoted both within and outside Quebec, which will continue to be responsible for selecting and integrating immigrants within its territory.

In conclusion, we clearly recognize the two linguistic minorities in Canada. We have been there to protect and strengthen them. We will be there in the future to continue that work. We also recognize that, if we continue to work together, we can fulfill the aspirations of Quebeckers and linguistic minorities in Canada.

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

Bloc

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

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague, whom I like very much. Among other things, I like his accent; it is so fluid.

I know that my colleague is in favour of the Bloc Québécois motion and will vote in favour of it, I am sure. I would like his impression of the amendment that was proposed this morning by other colleagues who would like the wording of our motion to include the words “in a united Canada”.

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

Liberal

Darrell Samson Liberal Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his work at the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs. We have a good working relationship.

As I said in my speech, Quebec is already a nation within Canada. We recognize that and we will continue to work to ensure that the inspiration of Quebeckers continues to develop within Canada.

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

NDP

Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

Madam Speaker, I know that as somebody who is a francophone in a minority setting, the parliamentary secretary will understand that I fight as hard as I can for francophones in my constituency. He will also know that Campus Saint-Jean, the university in my riding, is under threat and that the federal government has told members of my francophone community to be patient.

I would like to ask the member three questions: When will Campus Saint-Jean be notified of funding? How much funding will Campus Saint-Jean receive? How will that funding be applied?

Opposition Motion—Amendment to Section 45 of the Constitution and Quebec, a French-speaking NationBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:05 p.m.

Liberal

Darrell Samson Liberal Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS

Madam Speaker, my colleague has three very important questions. I wish I had a crystal ball, so I could answer those questions as well as I would like to.

I know our government has been working very closely with the members of the Saint-Jean university and the community. We have had several meetings, which I know the members of Parliament from the region have been involved in. We are there at the table working to find ways to ensure this university can continue to do the work required and support minorities right across this country.