Richard Nadeau

[Business of Supply, May 29th, 2008]

Mr. Chair, I would like to begin by saying that I find it very interesting that we are discussing international issues. In a former life, when I taught secondary school, I took part in or set up UN debating clubs in four different schools. I myself took part in the first Southern Ontario Model United Nations Assembly in 1977. I was the ambassador from Lebanon, a country that was going through a very difficult time then. Because of that experience, I have always had an interest in and an affinity for international affairs.

A number of issues interest me. I would like to know what Canada's position is on la Francophonie, the Canadian International Development Agency and the Minister of Foreign Affairs and where we are headed.

I will start with the Ottawa convention, which expired in 2007. Not long ago, in November 2007, when I was in Laos with the Minister for La Francophonie, we met with an NGO that was working on mine clearance. In Laos, during the war in Vietnam, the Americans—who always denied it—dropped roughly 10 million bombs, a third of which did not explode. When you go to Laos, you see men working in the fields who are missing a leg. The same is true of boys. This is an extremely difficult situation. Canada was a major partner. Thanks to CIDA and la Francophonie, Canada helped Laos clear mines and unearth the bombs dropped by American B-52s. They did not explode because they were dropped from too low an altitude.

That said, I have a question for the Minister for La Francophonie. Since Laos is a member of the international French-speaking community, I would like to know what sort of support Canada is providing for Laos and the other countries in this regard. The Ottawa convention was an extraordinary treaty on anti-personnel mines and mine clearance. It expired in 2007, and there was no indication that the government wanted to renew the treaty.

[May 29th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I am indeed reassured to see that my colleague, the parliamentary secretary to the minister responsible for the 2010 Vancouver-Whistler Games acknowledges the situation. In any event, we had talked about this.

My colleagues may rest assured that I am not going to run through all of the occasions on which Canada has failed in its responsibilities regarding the French fact in Canada and Quebec. In any event, the Bloc Québécois, Quebec athletes and trainers and the francophones of Canada will certainly be watching to make sure that Mandarin is not in fact the other so-called official language of the Canadian contingent in Beijing. Both French and English do have to be used. It is extremely important that no confusion remain on this point.

Out of respect for the Quebec nation, it must be understood that it is a French-speaking nation with its own culture and that French takes precedence there. We respect our anglophone minority, the official minority of Quebec, and we want Canada to respect both official languages, and will insist on this, for as long as we are part of the Canadian federation.

[May 29th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, on April 11, I asked the minister responsible for official languages the following question:

Francophone athletes and media representatives with the Canadian mission will be welcomed by bilingual volunteers during the Beijing Olympic and Paralympic Games. However, by bilingual, the Canadian Olympic committees mean mastery of English and Mandarin. They have forgotten one of Canada's official languages, our language: French.

Is that yet more proof that nobody really cares about the Quebec nation or its language, and that French has no place in the Canadian Olympic delegation even though it is the official language of the Olympics? Will the government intervene to ensure that French is also required?

It was the parliamentary secretary responsible for the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics who answered my question. To the great surprise of everyone present, he assured us that the 2010 Olympic Games will be completely bilingual.

The problem with the parliamentary secretary's answer is that he was talking about the 2010 Winter Games in Vancouver-Whistler, British Columbia. I was asking about something entirely different, namely the Olympic and Paralympic Games to be held in Beijing in the People's Republic of China in summer 2008. That is the problem with the answer.

When the parliamentary secretary completely derailed, I gently told him that I was asking about Beijing. However, he did not change his answer.

I am generous. After question period, I ran into the parliamentary secretary and he acknowledged that he made a mistake because he did not understand my question at first. I can overlook that.

However, I would like to take advantage of this debate to hear an elected representative of the government explain the adjustments to the bilingualism criterion.

Why Mandarin and English? How did they come up with that? Is this the Conservative government's new approach under its action plan for official languages? By the way, we have been waiting for the government to unveil its new plan since April 1, 59 days ago.

Are the Conservatives planning a round of constitutional talks to eliminate French as an official language of Canada and replace it with Mandarin? We have to wonder.

It would not surprise me in the least. The Conservatives recognize Quebec as a nation on paper only. The Prime Minister, who used to belong to an active coalition that fought among other things against Bill 101 in Quebec, would see it as a way to crush Quebec's identity and French language.

Is the Canadian Olympic Committee, some of whose member sports federations make headlines occasionally for their lack of respect for athletes from Quebec and francophone athletes, also in on the Mandarin movement, in order to eradicate French once and for all?

Canada has been trying to eliminate the French fact for some 245 years. We have only to think of the Durham report and the Union Act in the 1840s, after the patriots in Lower Canada were denied parliamentary democracy. Canada allowed the English-speaking provinces to abolish French-language schools and services. You know as well as I do. Consider the following examples: in 1871—

[Official Languages, May 29th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, Commissioner Fraser points out that the action plan for official languages, which expired on March 31—two months or 59 days ago—has not yet been renewed.

What is the minister waiting for to renew the action plan without further delay given that the current limbo is increasingly worrisome for the francophone and Acadian communities? The Conservatives are more concerned with helping their oil friends than communities.

[Official Languages, May 29th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, a lack of vision, coherence and leadership by this government have been identified in the annual report on official languages tabled today by Commissioner Graham Fraser. Bilingualism of Supreme Court judges, the court challenges program, the lack of an action plan are but a few examples provided.

When will the minister responsible for official languages begin to concern herself with francophone communities, which are more than ever threatened, and when will the Prime Minister show the leadership that has been lacking?

[Petitions, May 28th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I am presenting a petition with 69 signatures. These Quebeckers are calling on the Government of Canada to actively respect the Quebec nation and Bill 101.

[Gatineau Olympiques, May 14th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, it is with considerable joy that I acknowledge the great triumph of the Gatineau Olympiques in winning the President's Cup, the top trophy in the Quebec major junior hockey league.

The Olympiques beat the tough Rouyn-Noranda Huskies in five games in the final round. This is the fifth time the Olympiques have won the President's Cup since 1995. Such a record is a testament to the solid organization of Gatineau's hockey team and the talent of its players.

On behalf of the Bloc Québécois, I want to congratulate the Olympiques. We are behind the Olympiques 110% as they head to the grand finale of major junior hockey, the Memorial Cup, which is starting this week.

Go Olympiques go.

[Official Languages and the Supreme Court, May 12th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, like the Commissioner of Official Languages, columnist Yves Boisvert has said that Supreme Court justices should be bilingual. According to Mr. Boisvert, it would be appropriate for them to understand both official languages and to have direct access to the language of one of Canada's two legal cultures.

Will the Prime Minister exercise judgment and add the knowledge of both official languages to the necessary criteria in the list of basic competencies of Supreme Court justices?

[Official Languages, May 8th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, imagine for a moment that this government had not put any figure under the National Defence heading in the March budget. Unthinkable, you say? But for the official languages action plan, on page 256 of the budget, there is nothing. It says: “to be determined”. That was on February 26, and here we are on May 8, 72 days later, and still there is nothing.

The Conservative government said to wait for the results of consultations leading up to the Lord report for the action plan renewal. The document was made public on March 20, and still nothing.

The fact that the Minister of Canadian Heritage, Status of Women and Official Languages has yet to table the second plan proves that the anti-French-language and anti-French-culture neo-Reform ideology reigns supreme amongst the Conservatives.

[Petitions, May 7th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I am presenting a petition with 195 signatures from Quebeckers who are calling on the Government of Canada to actively respect the Quebec nation and Bill 101.