Canadian Heritage committee  I may be wrong here--I'd have to go back and look at the Quigley decision--but I think the lawyer acting on behalf of Mr. Quigley was his son. I could be wrong on that, but I think he took the case. There were issues of legal fees, but again, I'd have to look back on what happened at the end of the day.

Canadian Heritage committee  I must say, I think it's very rare. To give you one example of when it would happen, if a union, say, was involved in a file, they may have the financial means to be able to litigate. That would be an example. However, if you look at all the case law--and we rely on that case law when we go to court--I can't think of any in which there was no involvement at all from the court challenges program.

Canadian Heritage committee  I have to tell you that if somebody out there is willing to spend their own resources for whatever reason, and they have those resources to spend, I think the issue is that they may have access to the court. That's exactly what we've been saying.

Canadian Heritage committee  Yes, it is. Access to the court cannot just be by people who have money. People who access the court challenges program, for the most part, are either organizations or individuals that don't have the money to go to court. That's why they apply. If they do have the funds—and some people may have the funds, there may be people who have the financial means to be able to litigate a linguistic right--they'll have access to the courts.

Canadian Heritage committee  I can add that section 15 does not apply to section 23. This section seeks to protect the minority. So, it is clear that the minority is being given rights that the majority does not need.

Canadian Heritage committee  Why? There's a contradiction between section 15 and section 23?

Canadian Heritage committee  I would briefly like to add that the message sent to anglophone and francophone minority communities is simple: cancelling the Court Challenges Program means that it's not worth continuing to try to live in the minority language. That is the message being sent. You are wondering what the impact will be.

Canadian Heritage committee  Mr. Chair, may I answer briefly? The Mike Harris government never thought they were acting illegally or unconstitutionally. In fact, if you look at all the legislation that has been set aside as a result of the court challenges program, never was there a government that purposely set out to violate linguistic rights.

Canadian Heritage committee  Monsieur le président, I'll speak English in my presentation, because I want to make sure everybody can understand directly the message I'm bringing to you today and not with the aid of interpretation. The reality is that when you are a member of a minority you need to have recourse to the courts because the protectors of minorities are not the majority.