Joël Godin

[An Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada's Official Languages, April 26th, 2023]

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.

[An Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada's Official Languages, April 26th, 2023]

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.

[An Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada's Official Languages, April 26th, 2023]

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.

[An Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada's Official Languages, April 26th, 2023]

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.

[An Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada's Official Languages, April 26th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, I acknowledge the work of my colleague, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Official Languages, with whom we worked on Bill C-13 at the Standing Committee on Official Languages. I would like to inform my colleague that, today, we are not debating the bill at third reading. We are studying the bill at report stage. My colleague should have spoken a little about the amendment motions he moved that delayed the study and passage of Bill C‑13.

I would like to know why my colleague did not move these motions to amend in committee when we were working on Bill C‑13.

[Official Languages, April 25th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, a resident in the Lower St. Lawrence area in Quebec needed help and dialed 911. Nasty surprise, the operator did not speak French. Let us try to imagine asking for help from someone who does not understand us. Things do not go well and it is disturbing.

The CRTC, which regulates cellphones, must ensure that all Canadians, even francophones, have access to 911 service.

What explanation does the Prime Minister have for the CRTC's failure to provide security and access to 911 service in both official languages?

[Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act, April 18th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak to the merits of Bill C-239, an act to amend the Act to enable certain tax payments to be made to the provinces and to authorize agreements with the provinces for the collection of taxes. I am going focus on the second half of the title.

The truth is that the Conservative Party of Canada is the only party that truly respects provincial and territorial jurisdictions. In fact, in early 2019, during question period in the House, I asked why the Prime Minister was stubbornly saying no to a single tax return in Quebec. One of my colleagues had tabled a motion in the interest of Canadians, and Quebeckers in particular. That motion read as follows:

That, given:

(a) the House has great respect for provincial jurisdiction and trust in provincial institutions;

(b) the people of Quebec are burdened with completing and submitting two tax returns, one federal and one provincial;

I should add that this is the only province in Canada that is required to file two tax returns.

(c) the House believes in cutting red tape and reducing unnecessary paperwork to improve the everyday lives of families; therefore,

the House call on the government to work with the Government of Quebec to implement a single tax return in Quebec, as adopted unanimously in the motion of the National Assembly of Quebec on May 15, 2018.

We Conservatives work together in the interest of all Canadians. The arguments presented in this motion are still just as valid. It is about respecting the provinces and also the intention to improve the quality of life of Quebeckers and the Canadian people.

Our leader, at the time, said that “no public service jobs will be eliminated” and that “we need public servants to ensure that our federal laws are upheld” and enforced. He said that “we can also make more effective use of the people who work for the federal government.”

Again in 2021, the Conservative Party of Canada supported the single tax return and also campaigned on it. The sponsor of Bill C‑239, the member for La Prairie, was inspired by our commitment, which goes back a few years, and the clear desire expressed by the National Assembly of Quebec. We listen to the intentions and will of the National Assembly of Quebec.

CRA workers, among others, have expressed concerns about their jobs. I heard the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons say that public servants did a good job during the pandemic. That is true, but all public servants in every department did a good job, not just CRA employees working in Quebec.

Out of respect for public servants, we must protect their jobs. That can be done when there is good will. That is a concern for us, the members of the Conservative Party of Canada. I would remind the House that the federal public service has been negotiating with the Liberal government for more than a year, and that there will be a public service strike this evening at one minute past midnight if an agreement is not reached. When people say that public servants should be treated well and that we should find jobs for them, we should come to an agreement with them because they did a good job during the pandemic. They are right. There were shortcomings and problems, but I believe that we must respect our federal public servants.

We still have a labour shortage. We are in the midst of an economic crisis and, on top of that, a labour crisis. Instead of handing out outrageous contracts, this government could show some faith in its own employees.

I recognize that there are certainly situations where expertise is needed to perform certain tasks, and that contracting out may be required. However, in many cases, Canadian public servants have filed complaints because, among other things, the contractors were doing the same work as the public servants, so the excuse of the need for expertise to justify these contracts does not hold water.

Earlier this year, federal public sector unions expressed concern about this issue. The president of the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada said, “[This] results in higher costs and lower quality services for Canadians, less transparency, less accountability and the loss of institutional knowledge and skills”.

As the sponsor of the bill said, on the one hand, there is a shortage of workers and, on the other hand, we are paying two people to do the same job. I agree with him. It is a bit ridiculous.

It is ridiculous and outrageous that the Liberal government spent $11.8 billion on subcontracts in 2021. It is now 2023, and I am sure the situation has not gotten any better. All I have to say is “McKinsey.” I will leave it at that. I think people who are listening still understand that while the abuse and waste continue, so does the preferential treatment for Liberal friends.

The Conservative Party is the only party that can implement this, because history has shown that the current Liberal government does not necessarily respect the majority of the House. Many private members' bills that were supported by a majority of the House have still not been implemented by this government. That is a lack of respect for democracy. That is the Liberal government. Meanwhile, Canadians would have benefited from all of those bills that parliamentarians had a chance to introduce because of the lottery system for private members' bills. I will come back to that another time.

The Conservatives support a united Canada and are in favour of a fairer and simpler tax system for all Canadians. We want to simplify the lives of Quebeckers, who are the only ones who have to file two tax returns. Today is April 18, my daughter Anne-Frédérique's birthday. I want to take this opportunity to wish her a happy birthday, but I also want to say that, on April 18, Quebeckers and Canadians across the country have to complete their tax returns. In Quebec, they have to file two returns. Does the Liberal government not trust Quebeckers? I am not sure. Why, in 2023, are Quebeckers still required to file two income tax returns?

In closing, I simply want to say that in this chamber only the Conservative Party of Canada can establish a single tax return to improve Quebeckers' quality of life.

I would have liked to take questions. Unfortunately, in accordance with procedure, there are none.

[Passports, March 21st, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, a citizen from Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier received five envelopes from Passport Canada containing confidential documents of citizens from five different provinces in Canada, including credit card numbers, passports and social insurance numbers.

This is an alarming situation. Canadians are losing confidence. How many Canadians have found themselves in this situation? Luckily this information fell into the hands of an honest citizen.

How can Canadians trust the Prime Minister when his government cannot even handle confidential documents?

[International Day of La Francophonie, March 20th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, as the member for Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier and an ardent defender of the French fact, today, March 20, I am proud to mark the 53rd International Day of La Francophonie.

This year, the Organisation internationale de la Francophonie chose “321 million francophones, billions of cultural content” as their theme in order to celebrate the diversity of francophone cultural creation and emphasize the importance of ensuring that it can be easily accessed online.

Language does not belong to a country or region. It belongs to the individual, and only the individual can determine its future and survival. The modernization of the Official Languages Act is one way to stop the decline of French, but we also all need to do our part to stop the decline of French. As francophones, we need to establish a strong presence, while respecting the other language.

We need to work together to keep our country bilingual. The French language is not a rival; rather, it is a distinctive force.

Let us be proud of our country's English-French bilingualism today and throughout the year. We need to take action now.

[Telecommunications Act, March 6th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, one thing my colleague from Saint‑Hyacinthe—Bagot did not mention is that, when there is a change in leadership, it makes perfect sense to reflect on one's political future.

I invite the Bloc Québécois members to reflect on that when they choose a new leader, as they too have done regularly in the past.

The thing is that, when we think about it, there are options. One very important option is the status quo. We may have to check the record to see what my colleague said. I have a very clear recollection of what I said: status quo, reflection, departure, new party.

I am very happy. I feel very comfortable in the Conservative Party of Canada, and it is the only party I can work with to defend Canadians' interests.