44th Parl. 1st Sess.
March 1, 2022 10:00AM
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-13, An Act to amend the Official Languages Act, to enact the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act and to make related amendments to other Acts.
36 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 10:14:52 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, they have a leadership race to sort out. They need a bit of a break.
Back to more serious things. I simply want to say that we will be introducing a bill that would protect Quebec's weight within Canadian institutions. This does not mean that we, as good neighbours, no longer wish to work together. We want to continue working together with the Canadian entity, no matter how it is defined in the future.
The Bloc Québécois will introduce a bill because, in the meantime, Quebec needs to have weight to protect the best interests of Quebeckers, to promote Quebec and to be able to defend Quebec's ideas, including the ones that will be studied soon. The Official Languages Act should not be enforced in Quebec, which manages the French language quite well, and, what is more, the Quebec government is the best in the world at protecting its historic minority, the anglophone minority.
We need this weight to defend culture, arts and communications, especially with respect to broadcasting. This topic will be discussed soon and the discussion must reflect Quebec's unique perspective.
In order to do this, we need a voice that cannot be diminished or grow weaker by the day within Canadian institutions. We want to at least maintain what we have, with the expectation to get more.
229 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 11:01:04 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the NDP supports the motion. It supports the principle of maintaining the constitutional balance in Canada and preserving Quebec’s role and votes in the House of Commons. I agree with that.
My problem is with the fact that my Bloc Québécois colleagues claim that the French language is disappearing across the country. That is not true. I invite them to visit northern Ontario, where the French language is doing very well.
Can my colleague explain the role of bilingualism across Canada in 2022?
91 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 11:01:44 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my NDP colleague for his question. I think that French needs a lot of support, since it is very fragile. If you look at the situation closely, I agree that we can do better. That is why I am supporting the Minister of Official Languages, the hon. member for Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe.
I think that there is always a way to help strengthen, promote and safeguard the French language in Canada, not only in Quebec, but especially in northern Ontario and across the country. French is always in a very precarious situation. We must make a deliberate effort to support French across Canada. I hope that this will bear fruit and that the French fact will thrive outside Quebec for centuries to come.
132 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 11:52:42 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from New Westminster—Burnaby for his question.
I have been a member of Parliament for nearly 11 years now, and in my experience, the NDP has always been focused on Quebec and its place, on respect for the Quebec nation, and on protecting the French language both in and outside Quebec.
The 2012 bill reflects that. Our party also adopted the Sherbrooke declaration, which recognizes the Quebec nation and asymmetrical federalism.
78 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 12:05:35 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to pick up on the member's last comment in regard to the French language being spoken in Canada.
I believe that, in Manitoba, there are more people who can speak French today than in the history of the province, and I think it is because of strong, national policy supported and enhanced by provincial jurisdictions. Also, as a member of Parliament for Manitoba, I have a great deal of passion for the province of Quebec. There are things that we have in common, such as a strong, healthy aerospace industry. Supporting the province of Quebec does not necessarily mean that one has to be a member of Parliament representing the province of Quebec, or vice versa. Could the member provide his thoughts on that?
130 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 12:23:17 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I could not agree more with my colleague.
This reminds me of a time in my not so distant youth when I was president of the Parti Québécois’s Comité national des jeunes. Some Franco-Ontarians came to see us at the end of a meeting at which we had discussed Quebec independence. They asked us if we often heard the argument that an independent Quebec would forget about the francophone communities outside Quebec. They told us not to buy that argument and that, on the contrary, Quebec would serve as a guiding light when making their future demands.
I would also like to come back to a comment that I heard just before, something to the effect that the Bloc Québécois does nothing for francophone communities outside Quebec. However, I spoke just today about immigration and accepting francophone students, the difficulties that we have run into and the battle that we are fighting on this issue. We are doing this not just for Quebec, but also for the benefit of many French-language educational institutions outside Quebec, as was often stated in committee.
196 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 12:34:49 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague.
I want to come back to Hubert Aquin. In his essay “La fatigue culturelle du Canada français”, he asked: what will ultimately become of French Canada? That is a question that I have been asking myself for the past 30 years.
Could my identity disappear in the distant future? Could the unique place that Quebeckers have in the world disappear? Yes, it could happen if we let things go; if our political weight in the House is reduced; and if we set aside what has sustained us over the past 50 or 60 years: the dream of building a country.
110 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 2:54:58 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we were eager to read the new bill to modernize the Official Languages Act.
Quebec's one request was that it wanted to be solely responsible for linguistic planning in its territory. The Liberals have said no. Ottawa is interfering again. It is ensuring that its legislation will override the application of the Charter of the French Language. It will be optional for federally regulated businesses.
Why not simply let Bill 101 apply in Quebec as Quebec has requested?
82 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 2:55:54 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his question.
Promoting and protecting the French language is a top priority for our government. Today, I had the great pleasure and honour of tabling our bill to modernize and strengthen official languages. This means that we recognize the decline of French in Canada and even in Quebec, and that is—
61 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 2:56:26 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, defending and promoting French is and always will be a top priority for the Government of Canada.
In the bill, we recognize that we need to do more. We need to support French, whether as a language of work or a language of service. We are doing just that, not only in Quebec but across the country. We will always be there to defend French.
67 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 2:57:33 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada is intervening in its own jurisdiction. It is taking action to strengthen French as a language of work and a language of service, not only in Quebec but in francophone communities across Canada because the French fact is a Canadian fact.
We want to protect and promote French not only in Quebec but everywhere. We want more French. We want to speak French, read French and listen to French music. That is why we are taking action.
83 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 3:28:39 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am going to tell you about Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, which was previously the riding of Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia. I will come back to that a little later.
I am very pleased to be speaking about this matter today. I was listening to the speeches by my leader and my House leader this morning, and it was music to my ears to hear them stand up for Quebec. I feel sorry for our poor Conservative colleagues who are again going to listen to us defending Quebec and the nation that it is, because that is essentially the topic of the day.
As my colleague from Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot was saying, since 2006, we have been reminding the House that Quebeckers form a nation. The House reiterated it last June, when it acknowledged that Quebec forms a nation, and that French is its only official and common language. I believe that when acknowledging this unity and this desire to live together also means acknowledging that we aspire and have the right to a certain form of self-determination and control over our social, economic and cultural development.
As long as Quebec is part of Canada, our nationhood has real political implications. In order for consideration of our nationhood to be embedded in the political decisions made in the House of Commons, it is absolutely essential that we have the political weight to express it.
I am particularly interested in today's topic because my riding was targeted during the last electoral redistribution 10 years ago. As in 2012, the Chief Electoral Officer, or CEO, proposed a new redistribution of seats last October. This redistribution would add four seats in total but would take one seat away from Quebec, dropping our seat allocation from 78 to 77. This would be the first time since 1970 that a province would lose a seat in the House of Commons. I think that is totally unacceptable.
The only way to avoid this would be to change the formula for calculating the number of MPs and their distribution per province, in order to protect Quebec. Earlier, the member for Drummond introduced a bill in the House to guarantee that the number of members from Quebec cannot be less than 25% of the total number of members. I am sure that he explained the ins and outs of the nation clause that we want to integrate.
The principle we are asking the House to adopt today is simple. We want to protect Quebec's political weight. I have a hard time understanding how anyone could be against this. I said that it was important for me to speak. It is not just Quebec's voice that is being weakened, but the voice of eastern Quebec as well.
I want to look back at 2012, when the last boundary changes were made. Members for the region stood together to speak out against the elimination of a riding in our area of the country because that is what was proposed: to eliminate the riding that I represent today. The reasons were essentially based on demographics, since the population of the riding was less than the new quotient of about 101,000 residents that was established at the time.
The Chief Electoral Officer tried to balance the population counts of the eastern Quebec ridings with the Quebec average by eliminating that riding. The federal electoral boundaries commission for Quebec proposed expanding the boundaries of the already extremely large riding of Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques and those of the riding of Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine to make two huge ridings and thus eliminate the riding of Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia.
That would have created two geographically huge ridings, which would become two of the most heavily populated ridings in Quebec. The MPs at the time—Guy Caron, the NDP member for Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, François Lapointe, the NDP member for Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, and Jean-François Fortin, the Bloc Québécois MP for Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, a predecessor to whom I send my regards, presented a brief to the commission to show how terrible of an idea it was to do away with a rural riding.
I got that brief off the shelf and dusted it off because it contains some arguments that are still valid today and that, unfortunately, prove that there is a chance we might end up in the same situation we were in 10 years ago. Eastern Quebec may be targeted and lose its political weight in the House of Commons.
I want to review what happened. Fortunately, in 2012, my riding did not disappear. If it had, I would not be here, obviously. They just redrew the riding boundaries. We ended up losing Haute-Gaspésie and gaining part of Chaleur Bay, which is way over on the other side of the peninsula. That led to pointless confusion with people trying to figure out who their MP was every few years. Calling on one's federal MP is not an everyday occurrence. The outcome was a victory for MPs in the region who fought to retain their voters.
I would like to go over the reasons why I think rural ridings should not be changed. For one, the territory is huge. My riding alone is almost 15,000 square kilometres. It covers two administrative regions, four regional county municipalities, 56 municipalities and two indigenous communities. It is big, and that makes for challenges that are entirely unlike those associated with urban ridings even though our ridings are a little less populous.
In rural areas, MPs must deal with multiple interests and build a consensus to ensure a certain cohesion of regional points of view. In a riding like mine, when a debate involves the interests of the region, I have to consult my 56 mayors, my four reeves, my two indigenous leaders, the four chambers of commerce and all the agricultural and economic unions, and everything else that is part of it. Everyone deserves to be heard, but covering such a large area comes with certain challenges.
It is a whole different ball game in an urban riding, where some of my colleagues are dealing with a single mayor or a single provincial member. It is not at all the same.
I think that we must be respectful of natural communities, the boundaries of administrative regions and RCMs. We must not split them up. That is just what the 2021 redistribution proposed: splitting up the RCMs. I think we have to be aware of the realities that come with living in a certain political region, whether at the municipal, provincial or federal level. People in a given municipality or other local district are going to form economic, social and political ties just by virtue of sharing the same political community.
People often try to justify these redistributions based on demographic forecasts that show a new urban design based densification rather than sprawl. I understand that, but I think it is a bit excessive to base the redistribution on 20-year forecasts, when the boundary review exercise has to be done every 10 years anyway.
In addition, the Lower St. Lawrence and Gaspé regions saw positive net migration in 2021 for the first time in 20 years. I think that also needs to be taken into consideration. It is not the same phenomenon as before. Perhaps this can be viewed as a positive effect of the pandemic, which has allowed people to move to the regions thanks to teleworking, so that also needs to be taken into consideration.
I would also like to mention the importance of constituency offices in a region like mine. I may be one of the few federal MPs who have four constituency offices. The reason is simple. My riding is so huge that it would make no sense for someone from Carleton-sur-Mer to drive two hours to be able to get service at the Amqui office, or for the people of Mont-Joli to drive for an hour to get to the Matane office. That would be ridiculous. It is important to me to be able to deliver services to them.
Riding offices lend a human face to politics and bring people closer to elected officials. In a way, it is the front line, the first point of contact where we attempt to remedy the failures of the big federal machine. The number of immigration and employment insurance cases dealt with every week by riding offices proves that we need to provide this service to the public.
I would like to take this opportunity to recognize the work of my very dear colleagues at my riding office: Ariane, Marjolaine and Ghislain. Without them, I would definitely not be able to do this job, and the problems of many people in my riding would not be solved.
I am going to go straight to my closing remarks as I see that my time is running out.
The 2012 brief concluded as follows: Rural living is not a recognized constitutional right. It is a way of life, an economy, a set of values and interests which, in and of themselves, have a constitutional right to expression through the right to vote equity.
With these words, I will implore my colleagues from all parties to accept the idea that, for all the reasons I have just given, Quebec's voice, and especially the voice of eastern Quebec, must not be weakened.
1653 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 4:40:33 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, first of all, the current Quebec government has not decreased immigration that much. It has more or less stayed the same.
Second of all, as I was saying, we have two choices. If we increase immigration without sufficient means to teach these immigrants French and truly integrate them, francophones will become a minority in Quebec. If we reduce immigration, as the member said, our political weight will decrease.
I think Quebec, as a nation, should be able to set its own integration policies for newcomers. It should not be penalized for trying to make sure it can integrate the newcomers settling in Quebec.
105 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 4:43:58 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to react to the suggestions that were made by members in their questions to the member for La Pointe-de-l'Île.
This brings me to a question that I have for him. It has been suggested to us that instead of asking to increase Quebec's political weight or keep it stable, Quebec should instead increase its immigration intake. My colleague from La Pointe-de-l'Île just demonstrated that right now, we are not able to integrate or teach French to all newcomers, which also causes an internal problem.
To solve that, the Bloc Québécois is proposing a 25% threshold to be recognized as a nation. We could reconcile almost everything by doing that. That is what the Charlottetown accord proposed back in the day. That is what was proposed to Quebec. I would like to know what my colleague thinks of the fact that this was proposed to Quebec back then and that it seems unacceptable today.
170 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/1/22 5:03:56 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we are facing this concept of institutional completeness. We must recognize that the bills that have passed over the years have favoured bilingualism. Bilingualism treats both languages the same. The fact is, French is in an asymmetrical situation, and it is not true that the two languages are equal or will be considered equal.
Not enough resources are being dedicated to French across Canada. Schools and services are lacking. If I went to Winnipeg North, for example, I am not sure I would be served in French. I would be sad, but that might be the case. In Quebec, however, promoting bilingualism means killing the francophonie.
108 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
