Debates of Nov. 26th, 2024

(Bill S-13. On the Order: Government Orders:)

November 25, 2024—The Minister of Justice—Consideration at report stage of Bill S-13, An Act to amend the Interpretation Act and to make related amendments to other Acts, as deemed reported by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights without amendment.

Interpretation Act

[The Speaker, Liberal, Greg Fergus]

Pursuant to order made on Tuesday, November 19, Bill S-13, an act to amend the Interpretation Act and to make related amendments to other acts, is deemed reported without amendment, deemed concurred in without amendment at report stage and deemed read a third time and passed.

(Bill reported, concurred in, read the third time and passed)

Transport, Infrastructure and Communities

[Peter Schiefke, Liberal, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 20th report of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, entitled “The Role of McKinsey & Company in the Creation and the Beginnings of the Canada Infrastructure Bank”.

Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is my privilege and honour to present a supplementary report on behalf of the Conservative Party. We continue to call for the abolishment of the Canada Infrastructure Bank, and we call for greater transparency in order to prevent future conflicts of interest, such as those that Dominic Barton had.

We need a government that works for Canada, not a government that continues to take from our people.

Criminal Code

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-420, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (criminal organizations and proceeds of crime).

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to introduce a bill today that aims to create a registry of criminal organizations. This idea has been raised in the House a number of times in recent years. This is the third time I personally have proposed it. The bill also includes provisions for freezing and confiscating property obtained by criminal organizations in the course of their criminal activities. I am pleased to table this bill and hope it receives the approval of all my colleagues in the House.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Official Languages

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

Madam Speaker, I move that the third report of the Standing Committee on Official Languages, presented on Tuesday, December 5, 2023, be concurred in.

I will be sharing my time with my colleague from Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup.

Today, we are talking about the third report, and the motion reads as follows:

That the committee report to the house its deep condemnation of the CBC using a Paris-based audio studio to record a podcast, choosing it over a Quebecois-based recording studio to avoid the Quebec accent.

I am proud to rise in the House this morning to represent the people of the wonderful riding of Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, but I am also proud to live in a bilingual country where people speak French and English. I am taking the time to focus on French and English because it is important to remember that the Prime Minister of this Liberal government appointed a Governor General who is bilingual but does not speak one of the two official languages, French. Worse still, he appointed a unilingual anglophone lieutenant governor for Canada's only bilingual province, New Brunswick.

The list of examples demonstrating this Liberal government's lack of intention or willingness to protect French is too long for me to read right now. I would not want to run out of time for my speech.

Bilingualism is central to our Canadian identity. I stand here today in our nation's most important democratic chamber, where French and English have been granted equal privileges since its creation in 1867. Canada's francophonie outside Quebec is vibrant and resilient, reflecting the perseverance of a language and a culture that have endured for generations despite facing challenges. At the same time, Quebec's francophonie, with its rich culture and its role as the stronghold of French in North America, bears witness to a strong, proud collective identity. Together, these two distinct, but complementary, facets of the francophonie enrich Canada's identity and remind us about the importance of preserving this unique linguistic duality, which is a source of national pride.

Why am I talking about Canadian identity? The answer is quite simple. The Broadcasting Act states that the programming provided by the CBC should:

(i) be predominantly and distinctively Canadian,

...(iv) be in English and in French, reflecting the different needs and circumstances of each official language community, including the specific needs and interests of official language minority communities,

(v) strive to be of equivalent quality in English and in French,

(vi) contribute to shared national consciousness and identity,

...(viii) reflect the multicultural and multiracial nature of Canada;

Understandably, I nearly fell off my chair when I saw a headline in the Journal de Montréal on October 11, 2023, that read: “CBC Podcasts translated podcast into French in Paris to avoid the Quebec accent”. What a disgrace. I thought I must have read it wrong. As I read the article, I learned that CBC Podcasts chose to contract a studio in Paris instead of local talent to adapt the hit Canadian podcast Alone: A Love Story into French—I said the title in English because I am a staunch defender of English-French bilingualism in Canada—because the Quebec accent would have less international potential. Is that part of CBC/Radio-Canada's mandate?

When confronted in committee, Ms. Tait, the CEO of CBC/Radio Canada, told us that it was just a mistake and that it would never happen again. Can such contempt for Quebeckers and Canada's francophones be so easily excused? She said this as the person who was CEO during the period when the CBC's audience numbers plummeted by nearly 50%, forcing her to cut 800 jobs last December.

Yesterday, Ms. Tait told the Canadian heritage committee that she was entitled to a performance bonus. Wow. After failing to produce content that Canadians actually want to consume, and after missing 79% of the key performance targets that they made for themselves, it is clear that the last thing CBC executives deserve is more bonuses. To all the Radio-Canada fans out there, I want to be crystal clear that we in the Conservative Party of Canada will defund the CBC, which is an antiquated broadcaster that has fallen out of touch with the interests of Canadian anglophones, but we will maintain funding for Radio-Canada and its French-language programming. It is important that we make this clear.

The role of a public broadcaster is to offer content that the private market cannot deliver, and the CBC's English-language services are no longer getting the job done. By contrast, Radio-Canada remains an essential broadcaster for Quebeckers and francophone minority communities. For them, there simply are no other comparable sources of news. By refocusing Radio-Canada's resources, we could enhance the services offered to francophone communities from the standpoint of programming quality or access to local and national news that actually reflects their reality. The Conservative Party's goals when it comes to official languages have always been clear. We must halt the decline of French and protect and defend both official languages, both in Quebec and across Canada.

Yesterday in committee, my colleague from Battle River—Crowfoot moved a motion to halt the payment of bonuses to CBC executives. When I found out how it went, I fell off my chair again, and now my hip is a little sore. Do my colleagues know which members voted with their Liberal friends against the cancellation of these bonuses? It was the members of the Bloc Québécois. How disappointing. How can they justify paying a bonus to a CEO who holds Quebeckers and francophones in contempt? What is the point of the Bloc Québécois? Whom is it good for? The Bloc poses as the defender of Quebeckers and Canada's francophones, but it is in cahoots with the Liberals. What happened yesterday in committee was just the latest demonstration. I would add that the Bloc has introduced a bill that would add an extra layer of bureaucracy and worsen the daily struggles of official language minority communities.

I have the privilege of working with official language minority communities and organizations that fight for their rights on a daily basis, and I can assure the House that they are showing perseverance and determination in their fight to keep French alive in minority communities across Canada. Here is an example. Outside Quebec, the place where the use of French as a second language is increasing the most is Yukon. I commend Yukon's communities for their hard work and perseverance. The results are very clear. All across Canada, people are proud to be Quebeckers and Canadians and proud to be interested in learning the other official language. According to a report from the Commissioner of Official Languages of Canada, 87% of Canadians want to be bilingual.

In conclusion, the only party that really wants to halt the decline of French throughout Canada, including in Quebec, and protect and promote both official languages is the Conservative Party of Canada.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board]

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his remarks.

I want to ask about the English-language CBC. It is the Conservative Party's position, as articulated in the member's speech, to cut off English-language services from the CBC, but for the English-language minority communities of Quebec outside of Montreal, the CBC offers a vital service. In many rural parts of Quebec, the CBC is the only link to news that English-speaking communities have.

How will the member address the issue of English-speaking minorities in Quebec if he cuts funding to the CBC's English-language branch?

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

Madam Speaker, I would remind the House and everyone tuning in that my colleague is the only person who has voted against the Official Languages Act.

To answer his question, I would just like to say that the status of English in North America and the status of French in Canada are completely separate. I can assure Quebec anglophones that they will have access to news in English, in their language.

[Louis-Philippe Sauvé, Bloc, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thought it was pretty funny to hear my colleague say that his party is the only one defending French in the House. I think Pierre Bourgault put it best when he said that putting the two languages on an equal footing means stomping on one language with both feet. My colleague's celebration of bilingualism strikes me as being completely at odds with his purported desire to protect French.

That said, I have a question about CBC/Radio Canada. The Liberal government is currently putting in place a plan to integrate the operations of the CBC and Radio-Canada to prevent a Conservative government from defunding the CBC.

Here is my question. If the public service succeeds in doing this, what will my colleague's government do? Will it defund Radio-Canada, which provides a space for francophone creators and culture? Will his government make cuts to it?

I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on this.

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

Madam Speaker, first of all, I would like to congratulate the new member for LaSalle—Émard—Verdun on his recent election. He managed to capture a Liberal stronghold, so I commend him for that.

Now, had he listened to my speech, he would know that we in the Conservative Party of Canada have made it clear that we will allow Radio-Canada to communicate in French throughout Canada, both in Quebec and in all the provinces and territories of this great French and English bilingual nation.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Madam Speaker, I am deeply concerned and curious about how the member responds to English-speaking Canadians, the many in my riding of Victoria but also those across Canada, who value the CBC for its English-language content and Canadian content, especially given that defunding it would clear the way for flagrantly partisan news outlets like Rebel News and True North. It seems self-interested for the Conservatives to want to defund an organization combatting misinformation, especially given the election of Trump and the spread of disinformation across North America and around the world.

I am curious about how the member responds to the concerns of Canadians who do not want to see the CBC defunded.

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

Madam Speaker, governing means being a responsible manager.

Let us look at the facts. North America has a pool of more than 350 million anglophones and some 10 million francophones. We have Radio-Canada and the CBC. Before going any further, I would like to remind my colleagues that Radio-Canada costs Canadian taxpayers more than $1 billion. Radio-Canada gets approximately 30% to 40% of the audience. Unfortunately, the CBC gets only 3%. Those are the facts. Decisions need to be made.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak to a topic that makes me very indignant. My indignation is shared by millions of Quebeckers and Canadians. Let me explain.

Once again, CBC/Radio-Canada, an institution funded with taxpayer money, is betraying the values, culture and trust of the people who pay for it to exist, the people it is supposed to serve and represent. The CBC chose to record a podcast in a Paris studio in order to avoid the Quebec accent. Shame on the CBC. This is an affront to me and my fellow Quebeckers. It is an affront to our culture, our contribution to Canada, and, lastly, our very existence, because the CBC's message is all too clear. The message is that the Quebec accent is offensive. That is unbelievable.

It is hurtful, but it is not the only thing here that hurts us. I cannot talk about the CBC without mentioning the waste of public resources. For one thing, why did it use a studio in a foreign country when Canada and Quebec have perfectly well-equipped facilities capable of meeting its media needs? Why did it waste public funds instead of supporting the local economy, encouraging local talent and respecting our linguistic and cultural identities? On the one hand, we have the CBC's blatant affront to Quebeckers, but on the other, we have the CBC's CEO, Catherine Tait, demanding more and more money from taxpayers.

Just yesterday, Ms. Tait told the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage that she was entitled to a bonus. I would remind my colleagues that, under Ms. Tait, the CBC's overall audience level plummeted by almost half and that she was forced to cut 800 jobs in December 2023 alone. These cuts left hundreds of Quebec families scrambling.

In her opening statement yesterday, Ms. Tait asked the government for even more taxpayer dollars. Does anyone know what she did the last time the government gave her taxpayer money? Of the $42‑million emergency top-up the Liberal government gave her, $18.4 million went to executive bonuses. Another $3.3 million went to 45 executives. If we divide $3.3 million by 45, we get a bonus of about $73,000 per executive. That is more than the annual income of the average Canadian worker, yet Ms. Tait wants a bonus.

What is the Bloc Québécois doing about all this? It is voting with the Liberals to protect CBC bonuses and support Ms. Tait. That is so appalling. Once again, the Bloc is showing that it will always put the Liberal Prime Minister's interests before those of Quebeckers. I keep looking for a Bloc Québécois in the House, but day after day, all I can find is a “Liberal Bloc”.

How can we tolerate or justify this kind of abuse of public funds when millions of Canadians are unable to make ends meet, when millions of Canadians are lining up every day at food banks and when the number of unhoused is skyrocketing across Canada? Meanwhile, the CBC is wasting millions of dollars in public funds in unjustified bonuses and recording podcasts in Paris because they do not like the Quebec accent. It is unbelievably ironic.

It is a question of respect. It is a question of respecting taxpayer money of course, but it is even more a question of respecting the taxpayers themselves. The CBC does not respect Canada's values and cultures. By choosing to avoid the Quebec accent, the CBC is telling us loud and clear that our regions' accents and identities are not good enough. That is what that means. How ironic on the part of an organization that purports to represent Canadian diversity. What is diversity if not the recognition and promotion of our differences rather than their contempt and rejection? The Quebec accent is an integral part of the Canadian identity, the Canadian francophone identity and our Canadian heritage. Rejecting the accent means rejecting part of Canada.

This contempt for Quebec and taxpayers did not appear out of thin air. It is fuelled by a Liberal government supported by the Bloc Québécois, which has lost all sense of priority. The Liberal government prefers paying the CBC millions of dollars and filling the pockets of its friend the president rather than thinking about Canadians' finances and addressing the real problems Canadians are facing after nine years of irresponsible governance.

On our side of the House, we refuse to tolerate such contempt. The common-sense Conservatives say no to this culture of contempt and privilege. Canadians and Quebeckers deserve better. The common-sense Conservatives will defend taxpayers, workers and families. They will defend their interests and their paycheques rather than abuse them to fill the pockets of their friends and the CBC's corrupt and contemptuous senior executives.

I cannot keep quiet about that. My colleague from Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier and I have been members of the Standing Committee on Official Languages for many years. We are seeing mismanagement by this government, who appoints a Governor General who does not speak French, here in Ottawa no less. The same goes for the Lieutenant Governor of New Brunswick. Fortunately, she was just replaced by someone who is bilingual, in a bilingual province, but she was appointed by the Liberal government.

These are examples of this government's lack of accountability where French is never the top priority. We see it often at the Standing Committee on Official Languages. It is unfortunate, but lucky thing the Conservative Party is there to stand up for the real interests of all francophones.

Therefore, I move:

That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word “That” and substituting the following:

“the third report of the Standing Committee on Official Languages, presented on Tuesday, December 5, 2023, be not now concurred in, but that it be recommitted to the committee for further consideration, with a view to amending the same so as to recommend that the government refuse to approve any bonus or performance pay for the CBC/Radio-Canada president and chief executive officer, who presided over the decision to award production contracts to foreign companies in order 'to avoid the Quebec accent', provided that, for the purposes of this study:

(a) the acting Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Official Languages be ordered to appear before the committee, for at least two hours, at a date and time fixed by the Chair of the committee, but no later than Tuesday, December 17, 2024; and

(b) it be an instruction to the committee that it present the amended report to the House no later than Monday, January 27, 2025.”.

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

The amendment is in order.

Questions and comments, the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

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

Madam Speaker, Canadians in all regions of the country are very much aware that the leader of the Conservative Party does not like the CBC, and I would suggest that is in all regions and includes Radio-Canada. However, we have had no clear indications about that from the Conservatives, other than their machete-holding leader wanting to cut wherever he sees fit, one of those cuts being to broadcasting.

On the one hand, the Conservatives are trying to say they are defenders of the French language, but on the other hand, the CBC, and in particular Radio-Canada in the province of Quebec, is going to be cut by the Conservatives. I am wondering how members of the Conservative Party can justify the type of discussions they want to have today, which are based on their genuine lack of respect for CBC Canada, period. Canadians know that; that is the Conservative agenda.

Can the member expand on why the the Conservatives do not feel that Radio-Canada has a role to play?

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Madam Speaker, it is first and foremost a question of management of public funds. Obviously, we all agree about Canadian culture, be it anglophone or francophone, but when we look at how public funds are being managed within CBC/Radio-Canada, we see it makes no sense at all. If this were a private company, it would have gone bankrupt long ago.

Obviously, though, this is no public company. It is an organization that represents the country as a whole, its culture and so on, which is completely normal, except there is a way of handling things. Ms. Tait has appeared before the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage a number of times, and each time she repeats the same thing. Management always wants more, but they are not getting results.

[Louis-Philippe Sauvé, Bloc, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Madam Speaker, no one here will be surprised to learn that I am a sovereignist. My colleagues in the Conservative Party purport to be defenders of francophone communities outside Quebec and of bilingualism, but at a time of increasing questioning of the French fact and bilingualism in this country, their buddies, including Conservatives like J.J. McCullough, are saying that there is no place for bilingualism and that we francophones are the spoiled brats of Confederation.

How will my colleague justify cutting off funding for the CBC with his compatriots in English Canada if his party keeps Radio-Canada? Has the member for Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière‑du‑Loup thought of that?

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Madam Speaker, just a week ago, the leader of the Bloc Québécois wondered what he was doing here. I imagine my colleague is asking himself the same question. The reality is that the Bloc Québécois is in it just for Quebec and does not care in the slightest about the rest of Canada. Nevertheless, the Bloc is delighted to be here and to reap the benefits. This is clear in everything its members do. They fatten up the government and support the Liberals three-quarters of the time, if not 100% of the time, and then they want to lecture us. I think they would be better off heading to Quebec City.

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

Madam Speaker, Donald Trump has just announced that he is going to throw 25% tariffs on Canada's economy, throwing our industries into absolute chaos. How did the member who lives in the 19-room mansion in Stornoway respond? He comes in here and sends his troops in to fight about why CBC gave a contract to one company and not to another. The Conservatives are unfit to represent Canada at this time. What they are doing now is saying they will support radio stations in Quebec but shut them down in the rest of the country. This is about dividing people.

In my region in northern Ontario, CBC is the voice that keeps people together. However, the Conservatives think that they can divide Canadians, that they can say they will give Quebec everything it wants if they vote for the Conservatives. People in Quebec are not dumb enough to vote for that man, who will not have a plan—

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

I have to give the hon. member for Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup a chance to answer.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Madam Speaker, my NDP colleague must be extremely confused these days. He has to vote with his leader to prop up a party the New Democrats cannot stand. They say so everyday here in the House of Commons, and now my colleague is trying to lecture us. This is truly nuts. The NDP members must be so confused.

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

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to talk about this very important issue. I want to start by focusing on the issue first, and then I will go into some of the motivations for having this particular debate.

I for one am a very big fan of multiculturalism and the fact that Canada is a bilingual nation. With a name like Lamoureux, I can assure members that I have a very strong passion and belief in how important it is that Canada continues to promote and encourage being a bilingual nation. I thought I would give a bit of a reflection on what went wrong with my family in regard to the French language.

My ancestors have been in Canada for generations. Many years ago, they went from the province of Quebec to Manitoba and Saskatchewan. During the 1950s, the French language was not very well received in certain parts of the Prairies. In this case, my grandmother on my mom's side, with the last name of Lambert and Pasquis, discouraged my mother from learning French. In fact, she never spoke it at home; my mother was told never to speak French, only English. That was in rural Saskatchewan during the 1950s. My father, in contrast, was raised in a family in which they spoke French fluently.

Before living in Winnipeg, my family was in St-Pierre-Jolys in rural Manitoba, which is still a strong French community today, along with St. Boniface. However, because of the disconnect during the 1960s, one would say that women's rights were not as great as they are today, so my mom was the one who raised us. She never spoke French in the household. We never had the opportunity to learn French, which is unfortunate.

I would argue that French is spoken in the Prairies today to the degree that it is because of Pierre Elliott Trudeau. He believed in Canada as a bilingual nation. Through that belief, we started to see programming in our school and educational systems that promoted and encouraged speaking French. I still remember, in my earlier childhood, when French was not well received, particularly on the Prairies, by a good majority of people. That has changed in such a positive and encouraging way. I would date it back to the 1970s, when we had a solid commitment from the national government, saying that it wanted French spoken across the country. We needed to recognize the uniqueness of the province of Quebec and its culture and heritage, as well as to ensure that French was also spoken outside Quebec.

Fast-forwarding to today, I can go into a number of schools in Winnipeg North and see people of Punjabi or Filipino heritage who can speak Punjabi, English and French.

It is the same thing when we hear of children who are nine or 10 years old speaking Tagalog, French and English, as well as how popular the French language is as a respected language after one or two generations. It has changed. Today, there are more people speaking French in Canada than ever, and I would suggest that the number will continue to grow. As I said, I will look to Pierre Elliott Trudeau and the policy decisions he made back then as the root of this. Policy decisions matter; they make a difference, and that is why I posed the question in regard to CBC and Radio-Canada. Radio-Canada is very unique in the sense of the French language and the promotion thereof, not to mention CBC on the national scene and the important role it has to play.

The leader of the Conservative Party, more than any other leader in the House of Commons, has a personal vendetta against CBC. Let us not kid ourselves. I have talked about the Tory, the Conservative-Reform hidden agenda, and we saw it in the question I had posed. We should not believe for a moment that the Conservatives look at Radio-Canada as something they would not make cuts to. When I posed the question previously, the member talked about whether we should be financing and so forth. He did not jump to the defence of Radio-Canada, let alone CBC.

Just yesterday, I quoted a CBC story to one of my colleagues. I quoted from a story being reported, and it happened to be CBC's story. It was a very serious quote that I gave to the member opposite. His response to it was that it was CBC, and he sat down. Conservatives do not have any respect for that national newscast. For the Canadians who might be following this debate, the Conservatives actually stopped participating in political panels in regard to CTV. I do not know if they are back at it, but I was attending both CBC and CTV political panels not that long ago, and the Conservatives were nowhere to be found. They look at these institutions with a genuine lack of respect. It is coming from the leader of the Conservative Party.

Why is that important? I will go to some quotes. A wonderful story came out in regard to what is happening within the Conservative caucus. Here is how the story started off. Is it any wonder that people should be concerned about the Conservative Party of Canada, particularly the leader, and its attitudes towards the CBC? The story is all about Conservatives and Conservative MPs who are concerned about the leader of the Conservative Party. They are being quoted; they do not want to use their names. If they use their names, they will be punished. This is from a number of sources, not just one or two, but many sources in terms of the making up of this story.

[An hon. member]

Yes, it is made up.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, one member says it is made up. This reinforces the attitude we heard yesterday, that CBC has no credibility from the Conservative Party's perspective. Canadians would disagree, especially if we factor in that it is not only CBC.

CBC says:

After two years of [the leader of the Conservative Party] as their leader, many Conservative MPs say they are much less free now than they were before his arrival.

The man who promised during his leadership run to make Canada ‘the freest country in the world’ maintains tight control over the actions of his caucus members.

When we talk about Radio One and the French language, this is why the people of Quebec, and in fact the people of all of Canada, should be concerned. We should remember that this is a pet peeve of the leader of the Conservative Party. It is a personal, vindictive attitude that he has toward CBC, and he wants it defunded.

Here is what Conservatives are actually saying about their leader: “He's the one who decides everything. His main adviser is himself.... The people around him are only there to realize the leader's vision.” This is not me saying it and it is not CBC; it is reliable, numerous sources that have been canvassed in regard to the Conservatives and Conservative members of Parliament.

That is why I say that public policy at the national level matters. The French language today is spoken more than it ever has been, and it is because of a national government. It was a government of Pierre Elliott Trudeau that had a vision of Canada, and we are realizing the results of that vision today.

This is why I wanted to be able to address it by using me as an example. If only the policy would have been in place during the 1950s and going into the 1960s, I suspect I would be addressing the House in French as opposed to in English right now. I would suggest that this is why we need to be aware of the fact of what is behind the motivation and the hidden agenda of the far-right Conservative Party today.

That is something I would like to encourage all Canadians to get an understanding of: who it is that the leader of the Conservative Party is. We often talk about the cuts, and those cuts can easily be substantiated in terms of the allegations that are coming from this side, and not only from Liberals. We also see them from members of the Bloc, as well as the Greens and the New Democrats, all of whom are expressing concerns about the types of cuts the Conservative Party of Canada is actually talking about.

I said I wanted to speak a bit about the motivation, because that is a very important aspect of why we are actually using this particular concurrence report for debate today. Look at the report itself. It is not very complicated; it is pretty straightforward. This is what the Conservative Party wanted to debate today: “That the committee report to the House its deep condemnation of the CBC using a Paris-based audio studio to record a podcast, choosing it over a Quebecois-based recording studio to avoid the Quebec accent.”

I share the concern that is being expressed in the report. I would like to think that all members would share in that concern, but it begs the question of why the Conservative Party would move this particular motion today. There are literally hundreds of motions on the tabling of reports that could in fact be brought forward, yet the Conservatives singled it out as the one they wanted to debate today.

We should ask ourselves why it is doing that. I cannot recall the Conservative Party ever, in years, using an opposition day motion to talk about the French language. If it is such an important issue, why has it not done that? It has not once that I can recall; if I am wrong, members can please stand up and let me know. I suspect I am not. Maybe 10 or 12 years ago it might have; I do not know 100%.

I found out just 30 minutes ago that the Conservatives have decided to talk about this particular issue, so do not try to be misled, and I say this whether to the people of Quebec or Canadians as a whole who have a passion and care about French language and want to ensure its preservation, promotion and growth. These things are not going to come from the Conservative Party of Canada; they are going to come from a continuation of Pierre Elliott Trudeau and the type of policies that we have brought forward as a Liberal government.

I very much want to see the Conservative Party actually take a look at how they are playing such a destructive role here on the floor of the House of Commons. It is truly amazing. In fairness to the Conservative members, I can appreciate, based on the story, that they do not really have much of a choice. They have to follow what the leader tells them to do, and there are a number of quotes I can use.

Tomorrow is caucus day, so the Conservatives need to start holding their own leader to account. What are we at now? It is six weeks and counting of the Conservative filibuster. The Conservatives try to pass the blame. They say to do this and do that and then we will be able to do government business. That is just not true. The filibuster is a multi-million dollar game in order to support the self-interest of the Conservative leader.

That is what this is all about, and at the end of the day, I would suggest that we need to recognize that this is the very same leader who orchestrated Stephen Harper's being found in contempt of Parliament. The game we are witnessing day in and day out from the Conservative Party today is not only a massive waste of financial resources but it is also preventing substantive debates from being able to occur. The leader of the Conservative Party is putting his personal interests ahead of the interests of Canadians, and that needs to stop.

I would like to introduce an amendment. I move that the motion be subamended by deleting all the words after the words “so as to recommend that the government” and substituting the following: “expresses its deep concern for the Conservative Party of Canada's threat to cut all funding to CBC and Radio-Canada, which would leave millions of Canadians living in official language minority communities without reliable news coverage in their language of choice.”

It is a good amendment and I hope all members will be voting for it. We will be watching the Conservatives in particular.

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

The subamendment will be taken under advisement.

With questions and comments, the hon. member for Yorkton—Melville has the floor.