Debates of April 26th, 2023

Motions in Amendment

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

Mr. Speaker, before I begin, I just want to say that I would have liked to debate the motion moved by my Bloc Québécois colleague. I think that we Conservatives would have agreed to it, because it is consistent with what we presented in committee, in that it is about shortening the review period. Instead of 10 years, as written, we wanted to shorten the period to five years, but the Liberals refused. My colleague in the Bloc Québécois had an even better idea, which was to reduce the review period to three years. When something is urgent, we need time to react. The faster we react, the easier it is to close the gap in order to halt the decline of the French language.

As a fervent defender of French, I am always happy to rise in the House of Commons to defend the language. My goal is obviously to halt the decline of the French language and to protect and promote both official languages.

Before I get into the nuts and bolts of the issue, that is, the government's proposed amendments to Bill C-13, an act for the substantive equality of Canada's official languages, at report stage, it is important to understand how we got here.

Earlier, my colleague mentioned that funding was doubled, but we lost eight years that could have been spent providing the tools needed to protect French here in Canada. This government has been in power for eight years and, for eight years, it has dragged its feet when it comes to official languages. It gives organizations the illusion that it is doing enough to protect bilingualism in Canada.

Way back in 2018, the Prime Minister pledged to modernize the Official Languages Act, a promise that was repeated in the 2019 and 2021 Liberal platforms. It will probably be repeated again in the next election campaign, the outcome of which remains to be seen.

In 2021, the government tabled a white paper on the reform of the Official Languages Act, titled “English and French: Towards a substantive equality of official languages in Canada”. Bill C-32 was tabled by the then minister of official languages, who is now the Minister of Foreign Affairs, but it later died on the Order Paper when the government decided to call an election.

When she was appointed after the 2021 election, the new Minister of Official Languages promised that she would present a new version of the Official Languages Act in her first 100 days. She almost kept her promise. Bill C-13 was tabled in March 2022 to halt the decline of the French language in Canada and promote our two official languages, English and French.

Why am I focusing on the words “English and French” when talking about bilingualism? It is because the government appointed a Governor General who is bilingual, but who does not speak French. The Governor General is our representative, and has some lovely qualities, but unfortunately, she does not speak French. That is a good representation of how much this government cares about defending the French fact.

If it were as important to the Liberals as they say it is, rather than just an election promise, we would not be here today debating Bill C‑13, since a reform would have been adopted long ago.

In rising in the House today, on April 26, at report stage of Bill C-13, an act for the substantive equality of Canada's official languages, I recall the many times the language minister rose in this chamber.

She stated:

I hope once again that members of the House will work with us because stakeholders across the country want this bill to be passed as quickly as possible and we have a lot of work to do.

She was right. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Official Languages tried several times in committee to shut down debate on this bill by limiting the number of witnesses who would appear before the committee and the amount of time that would be spent debating the amendments. The Conservative Party of Canada takes English-French bilingualism very seriously.

We had an incredible opportunity to modernize the Official Languages Act, something that has not been done since 1988. As parliamentarians, this was our chance to take meaningful action to reverse the decline of French, a very real problem in both Canada and Quebec.

We were good sports and reached out to find compromises to move this file forward. We took the time to listen to stakeholder organizations that are feeling the impact of the decline of French every day, and we took the necessary action to give Bill C-13 more teeth, as the minister has said. However, we were unsuccessful because of a lack of will on the part of the government.

At committee stage, the Liberals moved over 50 amendments, many of which were identical but were submitted by different Liberal members. Some Liberal members also monopolized the time for debate and kept the Standing Committee on Official Languages from moving forward. That shows three things: The Liberals are not working as a team, they are inconsistent and they are disorganized.

Now here we are today, April 26, 2023, at report stage, with about 10 government motions on the table, and that is after some were withdrawn. These motions do not amend the substance of the bill. They could easily have been put forward in committee, but the Liberals chose instead to draw out the process for passing the bill.

I heard my colleague talking earlier about moving forward as quickly as possible so that the bill can be passed as soon as possible, as all organizations are calling for. Unfortunately, this was not taken into consideration, which is why, today, we are talking about details that are wasting time and dragging out the debate.

In accordance with the normal legislative process, we will have to vote at report stage. That will be followed by another stage in the House of Commons. We do not know when this will happen, since the government has not revealed its strategy. However, we will have to return to the House, debate and vote. Then the bill will have to be studied by the other place, the Senate. This shows that the Liberal government is talking out of both sides of its mouth. It says it wants to move fast, but it is disorganized. Amendments were moved today. Amendments were moved in committee. I just want to point out that the Liberals moved 50 amendments.

They drafted a white paper, Bill C-32 and Bill C‑13. They submitted Bill C‑13 to committee and are submitting it again today. What does that show? It shows that the government does not necessarily want to fast-track Bill C‑13. I think that is unfortunate.

I also think it is unfortunate that the Bloc Québécois was unable to move its motion because the Liberals objected. I respect and accept your decision, but the decision was made based on the fact that it could have been debated in committee, yet that also applies to what the government just proposed.

Unfortunately, the act will not have a shorter review period that would allow us to make adjustments when we find out, on the day it takes effect after the bill receives royal assent, that it cannot ensure that concrete action will be taken to halt the decline of the French language in Canada.

I think that this is important, that we should be proud of this bill, proud of our French language and proud of our English language. Bilingualism is something for Canada to be proud of, something that makes us attractive and unique. We owe it to ourselves to respect the organizations that work hard every day to protect our official language minority communities.

With all due respect for my colleague, we in the Conservative Party of Canada will once again reach out and not obstruct the progress of Bill C‑13.

However, I hope the Liberal government does not have any more surprises in store for us that will slow the process down. We should pass the bill as soon as possible so we can move on to something else and give our organizations the tools they need to do what they do every day to protect the French language, halt its decline, and protect and promote English and French. We do not want to pit our two official languages against each other. We are proud of both.

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Official Languages]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech and his interventions in committee.

My colleague mentioned the following words several times: no delay, all the rest, amendments. This bill is in fact constitutional and contained 200 amendments. A lot of work was done in collaboration.

Every party leader has made a statement about Bill C‑13. However, we have heard nothing from the Conservative leader.

My questions for my colleague are the following: Is the Conservative leader going to take a position on Bill C‑13, and is the Conservative Party going to support Bill C‑13, like communities across the country are asking it to do?

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

Mr. Speaker, my colleague's question is very relevant.

I would like to point out that he may have been reading from the wrong page in his speech because his was a third reading speech. We are in the House to debate motions that were moved by the Liberal government.

I can assure the House and all Canadians that our leader will take a position and will vote on Bill C‑13 in due time.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Official Languages Act has been around for a while. The government wanted to modernize it and, when they did, it was because it had failed. The act did not ensure the survival of French throughout Canada, from coast to coast to coast, or ensure that francophone minorities are treated in the same way as the anglophone community in Quebec.

Can my colleague tell me how he reconciles the government's desire to table Bill C‑13 to try to slow the decline of French with its introduction of an action plan that will provide $280 million in funding to the anglophone community in Quebec to ensure its survival, as though English were threatened in Quebec, in Canada and across North America?

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

Mr. Speaker, I think my colleague and I have the same objective.

I had the pleasure of working harmoniously with the Bloc Québécois to advance Bill C‑13 and above all to stop the decline of French and protect it. In the Conservative Party, we have a more Canadian vision, that of protecting English and French in minority communities.

Now, what my colleague mentioned is not in Bill C‑13, but in the action plan for official languages, which was announced today. As if by chance, we are debating Bill C‑13 in the House today and the government decides to introduce its action plan. There is a marketing strategy there.

What I want to say is that we were not available for the reading of the action plan. There will be a briefing session tomorrow morning at 11 o'clock, and I will be attending.

The information I received is that 20% of the funding will be allocated to anglophone minorities in Quebec. The question we must ask is, on what criteria was that percentage based?

As my colleague mentioned concerning official languages, the situation of French outside Quebec is different from that of English in Quebec. I have fundamental questions about the percentage. We must not neglect our anglophone friends but there is no denying that additional efforts are needed for francophones outside Quebec.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to recognize the important work of my colleague with respect to this bill. I know the issue of immigration is especially important to him. We know that there is a huge need to welcome francophone immigrants from around the world and that that is a big part of Bill C‑13.

Would the member be in favour of increasing funding for consular services and recruitment efforts to attract and process more francophone files from abroad?

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, with whom I had the privilege of working on Bill C‑13.

With regard to francophone immigration, it is unfortunate that there is only one small paragraph in Bill C‑13 about identifying targets and indicators, but no obligation to achieve results.

We did a more pragmatic study in committee. We adapted our motion to be more in line with the NDP's, to ensure that we have accurate data to promote francophone immigration, and I hope the results will be very encouraging for the future of francophone immigration in Canada.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

Order. It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands, Taxation; the hon. member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith, Seniors; the hon. member for Regina—Lewvan, The Economy.

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

Mr. Speaker, the atmosphere in Quebec is electric these days. There is a movement, a collective awareness as the decline of French is picking up pace. There is every indication that is the case. Whether it is a question of which language is spoken at home, a person's mother tongue, the first official language spoken or the language of work, there is a rapid decline of French, especially in Montreal. This cannot continue. Language projection studies—even those from Statistics Canada, which is certainly not a loyal ally of French in Quebec—indicate that there is going to be a very rapid decline.

Bill 101 has been shored up and the mobilization continues. Quebec's French language minister has called for a national awakening. I think we need to continue to mobilize. The federal language law has long been the blind spot in Quebec's language debate, but I think that with the debates we have had on the federal language law, people are beginning to better understand what it is. It is pretty incredible. For 53 years now, since 1969, Pierre Elliott Trudeau's Official Languages Act has been essentially, if not solely, about strengthening English in Quebec.

The Official Languages Act came into being on the heels of the Laurendeau‑Dunton commission. The commission was the brainchild of André Laurendeau, an editorialist with the newspaper Le Devoir. He championed a model somewhat similar to the one used in Switzerland or Belgium, a territorial model based on collective rights. He also believed that the Quebec issue had to be a priority. Lester B. Pearson was in power at the time. In the meantime, André Laurendeau died.

When Pierre Elliott Trudeau came to power, he changed course completely. He introduced an institutional bilingualism model that gave individuals the freedom to choose their official language, English or French, but only where numbers warranted. Essentially, this model is the opposite of Quebec's approach, which is centred on protecting the future of French and making French the common language across Quebec's territory. The same approach is used around the world. This type of language planning model makes it possible to ensure the future of a language and genuinely protect Quebec's minority languages.

The other major principle of the Official Languages Act is really an aberration. I am talking about the principle of symmetry or equivalence between Quebec's anglophones and the francophone and Acadian communities. It was really an aberration from the start. The Laurendeau-Dunton commission conducted a very thorough investigation and found that, out of 14 language groups in Quebec, francophones ranked 12th in terms of average income. We were therefore at a great disadvantage.

Quebec anglophones were part of the Canadian anglophone elite, and they enjoyed over-funded institutions, like schools and hospitals. There was really institutional extreme overfunding in favour of the English. What Mr. Trudeau and the Liberal government of the day decided to do to help was to fund institutions, English-language educational institutions. This has frequently been denounced. The Bloc Québécois has always denounced it. In a case on signage brought by Alliance Quebec, even the UN ruled that anglophones in Quebec cannot claim minority rights because they are part of the Canadian majority. It is there in black and white. If Quebec were independent, we could then say that francophones form the majority, but until Quebec is independent, we are subordinate to the federal government, which passed official languages legislation that aimed to strengthen English in Quebec, the only francophone state in North America. It continues to do so.

If the federal language law was overlooked, it was mostly because the Liberal government, rather than directly confronting Quebec and intervening to challenge Bill 101 before the courts or using its power of disallowance, used a very effective strategy, which consisted of fostering the emergence of special interest groups in civil society, groups that it funded directly and that led court challenges and mobilized the population to defeat Bill 101. The government even established a court challenges program to defeat Bill 101.

These 60 or so groups are funded by the federal government. For a very long time, whenever French was being defended in Quebec, we were called racists, xenophobic or inward looking, when the complete opposite is true. Having a common language makes it possible for a nation to include newcomers. That is not at all what happened. This continued for a very long time. Bill 101 was undermined in almost every sector to which it applied.

Today we are seeing a more rapid decline of French. In this federal language law, part VII requires federal institutions to support the anglophone community in Quebec. The government is funding the anglophone community in Quebec.

We thought there would be a change when the government recognized that French is in decline and that it had a responsibility to protect and defend French everywhere, including in Quebec. The Prime Minister kept saying that when he was presenting his action plan, but almost all the new investments in Quebec, roughly $280 million out of $1.4 billion, will be used for protecting and promoting English alone. It is incredible. That is $56 million more a year that will be added to the $90 million that is being paid to bolster all these groups that have budgets. Anyone involved in groups advocating for French outside Quebec — I, myself, was involved in such a group in Quebec — knows that money is key, and in the case of this funding, it will contribute significantly to anglicizing Quebec.

I think we really need to take action. We saw the action plan. There was a last-minute agreement with the Government of Quebec regarding the French language in federally regulated businesses. That is an improvement, a step in the right direction. I said it before and I will say it again, because we want to promote the widespread use of French in every business sector. This is supposed to encourage the knowledge of French among business executives.

The Bloc Québécois supports any possible advancement of French in Quebec. That is why we are going to support this bill. However, there are still some asymmetrical elements in the rest of the bill. The principle of equivalence between anglophones and francophone and Acadian communities is still there, so this bill will continue to anglicize Quebec.

Fortunately, Quebeckers are beginning to organize. We will keep informing people. I plan to do a tour of Quebec, because not many Quebeckers really know how the Official Languages Act works or know that all the funding goes to anglicizing Quebec. I think that if we take a few years to rally public opinion and to get this legislation changed, and if the federal government stays as closed off as it has been throughout the debates, there is one question that Quebeckers will start asking themselves or that will become more and more clear in their minds: assimilation or independence?

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Official Languages]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech, his passion for the French language and the work he does in committee.

Earlier he made reference to the positive collaboration with the Government of Quebec. I also heard the leader of the Bloc Québécois say he was going to vote in favour of Bill C‑13. I wonder if my colleague will join us in calling on the Conservatives to vote in favour of Bill C‑13 and to see what we can do about this.

I would also like to know why the leader of the Bloc Québécois is voting in favour of Bill C‑13. What are the positive aspects of this bill?

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

Mr. Speaker, as I just said, we will vote in favour of Bill C-13 because it does make some progress, particularly with regard to federally regulated businesses. It does not meet the demands or Quebec or our demands because, like the Government of Quebec, we are calling for Bill 101 to apply to federally regulated businesses. Such will not be the case. The businesses will get to choose.

However, since several elements of Bill 101 have been incorporated in the Official Languages Act, the minister is hoping that businesses will decide to continue to comply with Bill 101 over the Official Languages Act. We will see what happens when the Official Languages Act is implemented.

Minister Roberge also criticized the fact that all of the money is being spent on the anglophone side to support English and services in English in areas under provincial jurisdiction. I think that an agreement was reached on one thing, but the rest of the Official Languages Act is unacceptable for Quebec. It will merely speed up the English takeover of Quebec. We are going to rally the public so that we are able to amend this legislation for Quebec.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his efforts in committee. As a member representing a riding in British Columbia, I would point out that interest in learning French is very strong. Hundreds of thousands of students attend or have attended immersion schools.

The Liberal government likes to pat itself on the back for its efforts on behalf of francophone communities. However, francophone communities and francophone immigration lost ground during the pandemic. The federal government provided no support.

Here is my question. Is my colleague concerned that the bill will not make a difference?

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

Mr. Speaker, I think there are some good things in there for francophones outside Quebec. Will this reverse the decline of French? Unfortunately, I doubt it.

It was announced that most of the investments and improvements would be for immersion schools, while schools by and for francophones outside of Quebec lack funding. Even at the outset, a study by the federation of francophone parents outside Quebec lamented how the bulk of the funding was being distributed. I think that between 78% to 88% of the federal funding for schools goes to anglophones in Quebec and to teaching English in francophone schools in Quebec. There is very little funding for francophone schools outside of Quebec even though francophones are becoming increasingly assimilated.

Francophones are forced to fight for every inch. I am in awe of the francophones outside Quebec who fight for French every day. We will continue to support them. We will vote for the bill because every step forward for them is important. Personally, I think it will weaken Quebec. If we weaken French in Quebec, it will weaken French everywhere else in Canada, too.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to represent a riding in northern Ontario that has a strong and vibrant francophone culture. The NDP fought for more post-secondary education and access to French health care and cultural programs.

The federal government must support francophone immigration in northern Ontario. Will my colleague support the NDP in its fight to increase francophone immigration services in northern Ontario?

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

Mr. Speaker, we certainly support having an increase in francophone immigration. We have seen, for example, that more than 80% of student visa applications from francophone Africa are being rejected. I believe that is a real problem. We have spoken out about this many times, and our efforts seem to have paid off. We are told that the acceptance rate for francophone African students has increased.

I also hope that my NDP colleagues, who are supposed to support Quebec's self-determination and who regularly vote against measures in favour of Quebec's right to self-determination, will support these efforts. Charles Castonguay has studied this issue. The data indicates that francophone immigrants who settle outside Quebec are very quickly assimilated into the English culture.

Measures are needed to ensure that French becomes the common language in areas outside Quebec with a high francophone concentration; that would make it possible to integrate these newcomers. Otherwise, it is like putting water into a leaky bucket.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today on behalf of the NDP to speak to Bill C-13, an act for the substantive equality of Canada's official languages. Today is an historic day. It has been 30 years since the Official Languages Act was last amended. Finally, here we are; we have succeeded. It was hard work at times, but it was important.

This work is not only important, but it is essential for the francophonie, for Quebec, for Acadia, for the Franco-Manitoban community, as well as for all our communities. It is important for me, for my children, for all of our children and for our collective future.

I am a proud francophile. I was born in Thompson, in northern Manitoba. I am the daughter of two immigrants. My first language is neither English nor French, but Greek. I understand how lucky I am. My parents understood the importance of speaking both of Canada's official languages, and it is because of the struggle of francophones across the country, educators and their allies that I have had options to study French.

Manitoba is home to many francophones, and they have fought for their rights and for public investment in education, for example. In the 1980s, a Manitoba NDP government, including my father, fought against discrimination and defended the language rights of francophones in terms of public services and legislation. This taught me, from an early age, that nothing can be taken for granted. I also know that generations of young Canadians can communicate in our two official languages because of the dedication and especially the passion for French shared by our teachers.

I applaud the work of Mrs. Vachon, Miss Duceppe, Mr. Vermette, Mr. Labelle, Mr. Lamothe, Mr. Picard and many others. Many of us will never forget Mr. Macdonald, who put his heart and soul into his work to help us learn his language, our language. Mr. Macdonald was a proud Acadian, and his joy for his people and the Acadian culture was infectious. It is because of teachers like Mr. Macdonald and all those I have named, as well as hundreds of other francophones across the country, that many generations like mine speak French and that we have a unique and enriched understanding of our country and our world.

I want the same thing for my two children, Stefanos and Leonidas, who are now five and a half. They go to kindergarten at La Voie du Nord, a French school in the Franco-Manitoban school division. They are part of the next generation. The world has become smaller for that generation. However, in a Canada where French is in decline, we need to reverse that decline and fight for the next generation.

Today, I want to say that I am proud of the work that we did on the Standing Committee on Official Languages. On several occasions, I shared my experience and the challenges that families like mine experience in being unable to access French day care services. That is why I am proud of the work that we did in committee and that the NDP did in committee to guarantee that language provisions will be mandatory in federal-provincial agreements. The money that will be distributed and the funding that will finally be granted will help to ensure that francophone and anglophone minority communities get their fair share in this and other areas.

I also want to highlight the leadership demonstrated by such organizations as the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne, or FCFA. I want to recognize the efforts of its president, Liane Roy. The FCFA is the national voice of 2.8 million French-speaking Canadians. They represent the voice of francophones across Canada and played a key role that has led us to this day. Thanks to them, the President of the Treasury Board will be responsible for enforcing Bill C‑13, francophone immigration will be supported, and there will be language provisions and stronger powers for the Commissioner of Official Languages. I want to salute defenders of the French language across the country.

The last major official languages reform took place in 1998. Clearly, the Official Languages Act had holes in it, such as the struggle to create an unbroken educational pathway for our children from early childhood to the post-secondary level, the lack of francophone staff, and problems related to accessing the justice system in French, communicating in French in an emergency, and obtaining health or public safety information.

The number of francophones in Canada has also experienced a sharp decline. We all know the statistics. In 1961, francophones accounted for 25.1% of the population. Today, they make up less than 23%. Obviously, if we do nothing to protect our services and institutions, the decline will continue.

I do not understand why the leader of the Conservative Party keeps attacking the CBC and Radio‑Canada. Bill C‑13 clearly states that the federal government recognizes that the CBC contributes through its activities to enhancing the vitality of the English and French linguistic minority communities, as well as to protecting and promoting both official languages. The leader of the Conservative party even asked to cut $1 billion from CBC/Radio-Canada's funding. In 2021‑22, CBC/Radio-Canada received $1.2 billion from the federal government, so that kind of cut would be disastrous. If the Conservative Party understands that French is in decline across Canada, then why does it want to cut so much money from an institution that is so critical to protecting and promoting our two official languages?

The work of the Standing Committee on Official Languages was hard, but the spirit of collaboration was there. I want to thank all the members of the committee, whether they were Liberal, Conservative or from the Bloc, who made important amendments at the committee. I know that we did not always agree, but we all had the same goal: to protect French in Canada and stand up for the rights of linguistic communities in Canada. The amendments that were supported in committee are essential, and I sincerely hope that the Senate will respect them.

I would also like to acknowledge the work of the Minister of Official Languages. We found a way to work together with the common goal of amending the Official Languages Act in order to give communities the resources to protect their own language, our language.

Respect is fundamental to the work that we did in committee. I want to highlight the fact that, unfortunately, some members of the House of Commons based their comments in committee on outdated concerns and claimed that the systemic decline of French does not exist, even in Quebec. The NDP has a clear message for those who subscribe to the idea that if francophone rights and resources are protected, other communities will suffer or vice versa: There are no losers when we protect official languages. Living in a country where French and English are respected makes life richer.

The reality is that Bill C‑13 would change the federal government's approach by recognizing that French is a minority language throughout Canada and North America and that the measures the government takes must reflect that. This is an important change that will help slow the decline of French.

Today, we are moving forward on a national project, a project rooted in the recognition of first peoples and indigenous languages, a project that sends a clear message that we are proud of our two official languages. We are proud of a multilingual, multicultural, diverse Canada. We are proud to be able to move forward and fully support the protection of French, to ensure the rights of official language minority communities.

That is why I strongly encourage all my colleagues in the House to vote for Bill C‑13, an historic bill.

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Official Languages]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague and her party for their hard work on the official languages file. She is a proud Franco-Manitoban. We are doing this here for our children as well, like her own twins. This is extremely important for the future of the francophonie in Canada.

What specific immigration measures or language provisions does she believe are important in the bill?

She also referred earlier to the Conservative Leader of the Opposition, who wants to dismantle the CBC. Does she think the Leader of the Opposition should vote for Bill C‑13?

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

Mr. Speaker, I believe it would send a clear message if all parties, including the party leaders and the leader of the Conservative Party, vote in favour of Bill C‑13.

We must recognize that French is in decline. Bill C‑13 proposes measures that will stop this decline. We all worked on this.

We all have a chance to support this bill and especially to support the important work that must be done to protect the French language.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge and thank my colleague for Churchill—Keewatinook Aski. We worked very actively on Bill C‑13, although we did not always see eye to eye.

I heard her say in her speech that she was satisfied with Bill C‑13 and that the central agency, the Treasury Board, would do the work associated with the act as a whole. She talked about language provisions.

I would like her to reassure me. Were these supposed to be the provisions with teeth that would halt the decline of French and protect and promote the two official languages? I have serious doubts about the effectiveness of Bill C‑13.

I would like her to tell us more about the role of the central agency, the Treasury Board.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question and especially for his work.

With respect to the Treasury Board, we could certainly go much further in that area. I have to say that we have taken steps in the right direction with Bill C‑13.

We know that the government's approach to date has not worked very well. The Treasury Board must play a key role by working with the Minister of Official Languages to implement this bill and protect and defend French properly.

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

Mr. Speaker, I was rather surprised because, throughout the clause-by-clause study, my colleague voted against the proposal to consult Quebec on the matter of positive measures. She voted against the proposal to let Quebec be in charge of its language planning. She voted against allowing the Charter of the French Language to take precedence in cases where there is a conflict between it and the Official Languages Act. I could name a whole host of amendments.

I would also like to hear her opinion on something. In the official languages action plan, all of the grants are once again going to strengthen English in Quebec. How does she think that is going to help reverse the decline of French?

It is French that is threatened, not English. It seems as though the federal government is going to continue funding and subsidizing only groups that encourage the anglicization of Quebec.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his hard work in defending the interests of Quebec, but also for his support of francophone communities outside Quebec.

We New Democrats are proud of the work we did with the Quebec government to finalize a bill that reflects the interests of Quebeckers. We supported the agreement that the Quebec government has with the federal government. It is clear that there is a lot of work to be done to support French, even in Quebec.

The federal government has a key role to play and must fulfill its obligation.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it pains me that I cannot ask this question in French. The hon. member reflected on her children, the next generation.

What is left for us to be able to promote bilingualism across the country in a way that will ensure that it is embedded, for our children and our children's children, to truly honour the French language from coast to coast to coast?

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

Mr. Speaker, I know my colleague is a proud parent. This is about the next generation, and Bill C-13 would give us the tools to put a stop to the decline of French, give all of our children a chance to learn both of Canada's official languages, support francophone communities in majority anglophone areas and really live up to the vision of Canada that we all have.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, just as the member for Hamilton Centre indicated, it pains me as well to not be able to deliver my comments in French. French is such a beautiful language, and with a last name like “Lamoureux”, one would expect that I could speak French. I think that might even be kind of a good starting point, just to emphasize what we are debating here today.

We need to take a look at the importance of Canada's diversity, and when we talk about that diversity, we need to recognize that Canada is a bilingual country, English and French. We need to recognize how important it is for all Canadians to recognize that fact. In many different ways, that has enhanced us as a nation, and for us to achieve our potential, we need to recognize the importance of French and English, and the fact that we are a bilingual nation.

I do not say that lightly. I look at my own heritage and where my family originated from a number of generations ago. On my father's side, it was the province of Quebec, just outside of the community of Montreal. My mother's side also originated in the province of Quebec, but her family went into Saskatchewan and, as I understand it, the United States. On my father's side, they came to the province of Manitoba.

I say this because, when my mother was growing up in the rural communities of Saskatchewan, it was discouraged to speak French. It was looked down on. If someone wanted to get ahead in southern Saskatchewan or in that Moose Jaw and Gravelbourg area, they did not speak French. That is what my mother was told. As a result, she could not speak a word of French, even though her mother, my grandmother, could speak French.

My father, on the other hand, went to and grew up in Manitoba. My heritage in Manitoba comes from St-Pierre-Jolys and the Transcona area. My father was still of the generation that could speak French. That was passed on to him.

I was born in the early sixties, and I can understand my mother was the one who raised the children. She did not speak to us at all in French. My father could speak French, but my mother could not. However, like with my grandmother, it was deemed as something that was not important, even though we were in the province of Manitoba, and even though my father could speak French.

I believe it was Pierre Elliott Trudeau who ultimately recognized the importance of Canada being an English and French country. When Pierre Elliott Trudeau brought in the Official Languages Act, there was quite a resistance to it out in the Prairies, but it was that leadership and that initiative that started, in my opinion, to change the way that people on the Prairies viewed the French language.

Even though there was a cost factor to it, we have seen Liberal prime ministers from then all the way to now who say the same thing: It does not matter where we are in Canada when it comes to the importance of the French language, the French factor and French being one of our two official languages.

Through the Official Languages Act, we saw the growth of the French language in the province of Manitoba. We can put it in the perspective of the twenties, thirties and forties, when the French language was being rejected in the province of Manitoba, to the point when French started to be promoted. Communities such as St-Pierre-Jolys, Sainte-Anne, Saint Boniface and so many others are communities that really came alive. There is also Ste. Rose. Senator Molgat would never forgive me for not mentioning Ste. Rose.

In many ways I would like to think, and I may be a little bit biased, that Manitoba led the Prairies in understanding, appreciating and valuing the French language and in seeing the benefits of that diversity.

Even inside the Manitoba legislature, we started to move toward converting English-only laws into bilingual laws. At the end of the day, we can take a look at Winnipeg North and what is happening there today.

It is truly amazing, when we take a look at the waves of immigration that come to the province of Manitoba. I could talk for hours about things such as the Filipino heritage community and how it has had such a wonderful positive impact in the province of Manitoba, particularly in health care, or the Indo-Canadian community and how often Punjabi and Tagalog are spoken in the north end of Winnipeg, not to mention Ukrainian and a number of indigenous languages.

If we go to schools such as École Stanley Knowles and other schools in the north end, we will see that French is a part of a bilingual program. We will see kids of, let us say, Filipino or Punjabi heritage, in grade three or grade four, speaking English, their home heritage language and French. There is more French being spoken today in the province of Manitoba than there ever has been.

I would suggest to members that that is because of national policy. That national policy is ensuring that French is being spoken in every region of the country. There is no one in the Liberal caucus who would not recognize the French factor in the province of Quebec. The province of Quebec is leading the way, in many ways, in ensuring that Canada plays that pivotal role, not only in North America, but around the world, in recognizing and appreciating the true value of the French language.

That is something for which it does not matter where one is from. One does not have to be from Quebec. Like me, one does not even have to be able to speak French to understand and appreciate the value of the French language and us being part of a bilingual nation.

What does Bill C-13 do? It modernizes legislation that was passed decades ago, to the extent that the last time we have seen this kind of modernization was with Pierre Elliot Trudeau back in the late sixties.

As a government, we have recognized the importance of the French language and how important it is to promote and support it, not only with legislation but also with budgetary measures. The actions of the government have been incredibly positive in recognizing, promoting and ensuring that Canada will continue to have a nation that is bilingual.

This is all while recognizing the important role that Quebec has to play in this. That is not by choice, but because Quebec has to play that role. It will continue to do so, but we will continue to build the French language from coast to coast to coast, because it is the diversity that is so critically important to our country.