Joël Godin

[Status of the French Language in Montreal, November 25th, 2020]

Madam Chair, I salute my colleague from Jonquière.

My answer to him is that I will respect all members of the House. I will let the people of Quebec judge the arrogance he just demonstrated. Earlier, his leader simply mentioned the NDP and the Bloc Québécois.

Tonight we are working for official languages. The “who” is not important. We have an important issue in Quebec, and that is the French language. We need to stand up, we need to respect one another, and the Bloc Québécois does not have a monopoly on the truth.

[Status of the French Language in Montreal, November 25th, 2020]

Madam Chair, I truly appreciated the privilege of working with my colleague from Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup.

I had the privilege of being a member of the Standing Committee on Official Languages for a few months and meeting with organizations. They are so convinced of the need to update the Official Languages Act that instead of preparing reports, briefs and testimony, they have actually drafted a bill. Everything is all there, it is ready to go, but the Liberals do not want to move forward. What we are hearing from the Minister of Official Languages is that they are working hard. They have been working hard for five years on this file and many others.

When will the Minister of Official Languages table her bill to modernize the Official Languages Act?

[Status of the French Language in Montreal, November 25th, 2020]

Madam Chair, I would like to thank my colleague from New Westminster—Burnaby.

One way to advance the French language and encourage people to use it is to promote it. This is not about pitting English and French against each other but about encouraging people to take pride in speaking French. In other countries, there has been an increase in the number of people who speak French.

Why is the French language declining in Canada? Why has nothing been done in five years? My colleague's question is very relevant and we should promote French so that people are proud to speak it.

[Status of the French Language in Montreal, November 25th, 2020]

Madam Chair, I thank my colleague from Beauport-Côte-de-Beaupré-Île d'Orléans-Charlevoix. The lights have come on in Charlevoix.

I simply want to assure my esteemed colleagues that when the Conservative Party of Canada is in power we will do everything we can to protect the act and official languages. We will implement measures to help us keep our commitments.

It is a fact that the current government, which has been in power for five years, has not delivered. We have a good record, and when we are in power we will implement measures to protect official languages.

[Status of the French Language in Montreal, November 25th, 2020]

Madam Chair, I appreciate the question from the Minister of Canadian Heritage.

He just quoted two organizations. I have a list of more than 25 organizations that do not agree with his bill. This evening, it is important that we work together, recognize the problem of the French language in Montreal, start working on it and stop saying that they are working hard.

They must give us a date for the modernization of the Official Languages Act. Will it be before December 31, 2020?

[Status of the French Language in Montreal, November 25th, 2020]

Madam Chair, I am proud to address you in French this evening as an MP from the Quebec nation and the member for Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier.

Language issues have always been very important to me. I am a member of the Canadian Branch of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie and I also have an international responsibility. I have the privilege of chairing the Parliamentary Affairs Committee, which represents more than 88 parliaments that use and promote French.

Let's get right to the point. The decline in the language of Molière in the beautiful province of Quebec, particularly in the Montreal region, is real, and I am extremely concerned. The same sort of thing is happening in francophone communities outside Quebec and, as parliamentarians, we need to protect the language. Statistics show beyond a shadow of a doubt that there has been a decline in the use of spoken French at work and at home in Quebec.

An article published by Le Devoir in 2019 indicated that the number of people who speak French most often at home is dropping by 1%. That may not seem like much, but if we lose 1% every year, then we will lose a lot and francophones will no longer be heard by their communities.

This decline may seem minor, but it will translate to much bigger losses in the next 20 years. We need to act now.

Quebeckers are concerned. According to a Leger Marketing survey, nearly six in 10 Quebeckers feel that the situation has gotten worse in the past decade. The same proportion of people feel that the use of French will continue to decline over the next decade. Sixty-three per cent of respondents said that they were concerned about the situation of French. I repeat: I am very concerned for our future generations.

However, what I find most embarrassing is the Liberal government's inaction. Seriously, I ask myself this question a lot: Where have the Liberal members from Quebec been for the past five years? Back in 2015, this government campaigned on promises about official languages.

I must say that over the past year and in recent days, the Quebec Liberal caucus has shown that it has no respect for or credibility when it comes to the French language. First of all, in the WE Charity scandal, the Liberal government awarded an untendered contract to an organization with no ties to Quebec and no way of communicating with francophone Canadians.

In recent weeks, the Minister of Canadian Heritage, a Quebecker, introduced Bill C-10 to modernize the Broadcasting Act. There is no provision to ensure that French is protected.

As if that were not enough, the member for Saint-Laurent expressed doubts about the decline of French in Montreal, and the Quebec president of the Liberal Party agreed. Without mincing words, and said that Bill 101 is quite simply oppressive.

We might have thought it was a lapse in judgment or a misinterpretation of what the member for Saint-Laurent said. However, a few minutes after she quit the Standing Committee on Official Languages, the member for Saint-Laurent was at it again. She “liked” a tweet that said that the crisis around the decline of French was exaggerated. Seriously, it is unacceptable. Was she expressing what the Liberal MPs from Quebec are thinking? Maybe.

When we add it all up, we can say that we know the current government's real opinion on the decline of French, despite the fine words from the Minister of Official Languages and the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons. The Minister of Official Languages often likes to say in this chamber that our political party has no lessons to give her party. I would just like to take this opportunity to remind her that it was the Conservative Party of Canada, led by the Hon. Brian Mulroney, that repealed the Official Languages Act in 1988. The Liberals can brag outside the House and say that they were the ones who brought in this legislation in 1969, but again, history shows that it was the Conservatives that had to improve policies brought in by the Liberal Party.

That statement is not unfounded. According to Linda Cardinal, a political scientist and research chair in Canadian francophonie and public policy at the University of Ottawa, “The 1969 legislation had no real might. It conferred primarily political rights, whereas the 1988 legislation had more to do with human rights.”

The Conservative Party has always made it a priority to defend the interests of people across the country, and amendments to that act certainly made things better for all francophones across the country. However, the act is in dire need of an overhaul because it is 2020 and the act has not been modernized in over 30 years.

In 2017, the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages asked parliamentarians to modernize the act, but the government never did more than talk, like the lyrics from that famous song that goes, “Words, words, words”. I do not sing as well as the member for Shefford. I do not have that talent.

I would add that the government has nothing but words to offer Canadians. When it is time to put plans into action, this government simply cannot.

In June 2018, Mark Power and Darius Bossé, lawyers working in the area of language rights, wrote in an op-ed that the survival of French in Canada requires a thorough revision of the federal Official Languages Act. I could mention several other experts who have publicly criticized the current situation. In spite of everything, it is obvious that there is no linguistic sensitivity on the part of this government. To this day, the member for Ahuntsic-Cartierville and Minister of Official Languages cannot tell us when she will introduce her legislation to modernize the act.

When I was preparing this speech, I was surprised to learn that the current Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry in this government voted against the Conservative motion moved in 2006 recognizing the Quebec nation and, by extension, the importance of French in Quebec. Worse still, 15 Liberal members voted against that motion. That is not counting those who did not show up for the vote. Fifteen Liberals voted against that motion, and several others were absent. We can therefore conclude that the member for Saint-Laurent is not the only one in the Liberal Party of Canada caucus who does not really care about the decline of French.

There is a genuine consensus on our side of the House. Our leader publicly announced it a few months ago. He did not play politics like the members opposite. He was clear about the issue and our caucus has been too. We will always respect Quebec's areas of jurisdiction and work with Quebec's elected officials as real partners.

We agree with the Legault government that Bill 101 should be applied to federally regulated businesses in Quebec. Quebeckers deserve to be represented by members who will stand up for them, who will defend the French language and who are able to say loud and clear without any ambiguity that French is declining in Quebec and Montreal.

I would like to close with a famous quote by Albert Camus, which represents the essence of my political commitment and which should inspire the member for Saint-Laurent and the other members of the Liberal Party. He said, “Democracy is not the law of the majority but the protection of the minority”.

Liberal members from Quebec did not do their duty and the Minister of Official Languages is not doing anything to resolve the situation, but we will continue to protect and defend our two official languages in Montreal, Quebec and all across Canada.

[Digital Charter Implementation Act, 2020, November 24th, 2020]

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague from Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia.

I would rather not see stiffer penalties and fines as a way to get results. I think that we have to be smart and strategic about it. We need to think carefully and pass legislation that will yield concrete results and protect Canadians.

[Digital Charter Implementation Act, 2020, November 24th, 2020]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons.

In my speech, I raised certain questions. I think that we must act and that the intent of the legislation is positive. Having said that, I will not pretend to present any facts today. I want to hear from computer experts in the field. I think that we need to send this bill to committee in order to study it and to get it right.

The bottom line of my speech today is that we need to get it right in order to protect Canadians in the technological world. That is how I would put it. As my colleague said, we need to take a comprehensive look at the bill.

I fully agree with him; we need to take a comprehensive look at it in order to protect Canadians.

[Digital Charter Implementation Act, 2020, November 24th, 2020]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Victoria for her question, which is very relevant.

I would not even break it down by category. As I mentioned at the end of my presentation, Canadians must be protected. We could include the banking sector, e-commerce companies, Facebook and all organizations. I say organizations, because there is also fraud in other organizations. That is why I am taking this opportunity to say that the government should ban Huawei from 5G. I am talking about organizations and all businesses that could benefit from exploiting Canadians.

My colleague is perfectly correct: We need a stronger act to protect Canadians, and it must cover all users and possible scammers.

[Digital Charter Implementation Act, 2020, November 24th, 2020]

Madam Speaker, I would like to inform you that I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Lethbridge.

Today we are discussing Bill C-11, an act to enact the Consumer Privacy Protection Act and the Personal Information and Data Protection Tribunal Act and to make consequential and related amendments to other acts, which received first reading in the House on November 17.

I am aware of the importance of the issue addressed in the bill. It is 2020. Who would have thought that, in 2020, we would have to come to grips with technology in such a hurry because of a pandemic?

Technology was already evolving at a fast pace, but I can say that we have had to increase our knowledge at great speed. If someone had asked me three months ago if I was comfortable with teleconferencing, I would have said no, but today it is an everyday occurrence. It is important to address this issue.

I would like to remind the House that I represent the fantastic riding of Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier in Quebec. In 2019, the personal data of 2.9 million Desjardins members were leaked. They were victims of identity theft. Their data were resold to people who wanted to use them to do business in the financial sector. Although the leak did not involve banking information, it still exposed the affected customers to identity theft.

On June 20, 2019, Desjardins revealed that the personal information of 40% of its members had been illegally shared outside the organization by an employee, who had since been fired, of course. On July 8, Quebec's Commission d'accès à l'information and the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada announced that they were launching investigations. On July 15, Desjardins broadened its identity theft protection and offered protection to more than 4.2 million individual members and 300,000 corporate members. On November 1, it announced that all 4.2 million individual members had been affected by the data leak. About 173 of the 350,000 corporate members were also affected.

I will reveal that I am a Desjardins customer and that I was part of this group. Even before the pandemic, digital transactions were commonplace. The current context is speeding things up.

Today's bill comes from a good place, because we do need to keep up with the times, but will we be able to apply and enforce it? Are we not putting the cart before the horse? That is the problem with this bill.

Examples in my riding make me wonder. The government is trying to bring in legislation that would impose astronomical fines on non-compliant companies. The government is puffing out its chest, bragging that our country will be giving the biggest, juiciest, harshest and most lucrative fines, but will we be able to collect?

What do we want? We want to protect Canadians and provide them with the necessary tools. Would it not make more sense to invest in a service that gives these tools to our businesses, so they can help Canadians and consumers?

I have mixed feelings about this bill. It obviously comes from a good place, but are we taking the best possible measures to ensure solutions for the coming days, weeks and months? We need something concrete.

My constituents often tell me that I must find it hard to be a parliamentarian, because I am pragmatic. We need concrete solutions. The goal is laudable, but are we taking the right measures? I am not sure.

I hear from many businesses and citizens. They are still calling me to tell me they are having problems with Phoenix. They are federal employees who are having problems with their pay because of Phoenix. Phoenix is a problem that was never fixed. It has been around since the Liberal government's first term in 2015. It is now 2020, and nothing has been resolved.

I agree that we need to enact a law to protect personal information, but there may be other priorities. We are seeing it now with the Canada Revenue Agency. I have constituents calling my office to ask if I can help them, because the CRA is claiming it sent them money that they never received, which is a sign that they are victims of fraud and their identity has been stolen.

Should we be enacting a law to punish large companies when we cannot even solve the problem in our own backyard? I am aware of the importance of this bill, but I wonder whether we are taking the right measures.

I mentioned this earlier, but it is worth repeating: I am the member for Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, which is in the province of Quebec. Quebec has a program to help people who have a baby: The mother or the father is entitled to parental leave.

Here is another example that boggles the mind. One of my constituents meets all of the EI eligibility criteria, but his claim is being reviewed because there seems to be some problem factoring in the parental leave he took in 2019 and the Canada child benefit claim he submitted during the pandemic interfered with processing his claim.

That only happens in Quebec. The Liberal government seems unaware of the existence of provincial programs, and its Canada-wide employment insurance system prevents it from fixing the problem. In this case, is it because it is a Quebecker? Is it because he is a father? I am asking because I want to stress the importance of finding concrete solutions to systems before we consider a bill that will punish big corporations.

I completely agree that those who are at fault should be held responsible, should accept the consequences and should pay if they break the law. I completely agree with my colleagues on that point. However, I wanted to show how bizarre this situation is, a situation that puzzles me.

Clearly, we need to reflect on this and update the legislation, but is the version being introduced today the best one? I think we need to send this bill to committee for further study and consultation with specialists and experts. We did actually notice that there is only one expert regarding the tribunal.

I do not pretend to be such an expert. I am not computer savvy and, as I said six months or a year ago, I was unaware of my skills and adaptability to technology. Many members here in Parliament have managed to learn quickly, at lightning speed.

That is why we need to think about this bill and, as I said in my speech, not put the cart before the horse. We need to do things right to make sure that the bill really meets Canadians' needs. At the end of the day, the goal is the same: to protect society's interests and ensure that Canadians are respected and protected. We are all working toward this goal.

I will now happily answer my colleagues' questions. On that note, let us be vigilant, because fraud is always lurking around the corner.