44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 12, 2022 10:00AM
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to have the opportunity to speak to Bill C‑13, an act for the substantive equality of Canada's official languages. This is an important bill.
As we know, along with indigenous languages, English and French are at the heart of Canada's history and identity. They are a major part of our country's social, cultural and economic vitality. Our government has always emphasized the importance of official languages in Canada, and we consider them to be not only a solemn responsibility, but also a way of recognizing the diversity and inclusion that define our country.
As a proud francophile, Quebecker and Canadian who represents the wonderful riding of Hull—Aylmer, I know how important that responsibility is. I represent what is likely the most bilingual riding in the country. Not only do my constituents speak both French and English, but they speak them well.
Part of this responsibility includes promoting the spirit of the Official Languages Act. The act is not only important to members here and federal public servants, but it is important to all Canadians. It is a reflection of who we are. Our world is changing fast, and linguistic realities are changing too. The linguistic context is in the midst of a major transformation, making an in-depth reform of this law necessary.
The reality is that bilingualism has been part of Canada's identity from the very beginning. In fact, it was in 1867, the year of Confederation, that English and French became the official languages of the Parliament of Canada.
In the 1960s, Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson, who also wore a bow tie, I might add, today being bow tie Thursday, established the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism. The commission made recommendations for measures to ensure that Canadian Confederation would develop based on the principle of equality between francophones and anglophones in Canada. Those same recommendations would later form the basis of the very first version of Canada's Official Languages Act, which passed in 1969, the year I was born.
For the first time, the act made English and French the official languages in Canada, not just of Parliament, but of Canada. It stated that Canadians had the right to access federal services in the official language of their choice.
In 1988, the new version of the Official Languages Act updated and clarified the linguistic rights of individuals and the obligations of federal institutions.
As the House knows, our government has taken important measures over the past few years, first by amending the official languages regulations for services to the public, and now with the Official Languages Act.
We held vast consultations with many stakeholders and we listened to what they had to say. Their comments were essential in the context of amending the regulations in order to make them more inclusive and representative of Canadian society.
These changes, which will be implemented over the next few years, will pave the way for the creation of some 700 new bilingual offices across the country. This is a big step forward in terms of providing services to Canadians in the official language of their choice.
Whether on the front lines or behind the scenes, our federal public servants provide these services. Every day, they communicate with Canadians in the official language of their choice. The government is committed to providing federal services in both official languages and to promoting a public service that fosters the use of French and English.
We have made significant progress because today's public service is much more bilingual than it was when I was born. Today, more than 90% of executives in the public service occupy bilingual positions. In surveys, most employees report that they feel free to use the language of their choice at work, but we know that the system is not perfect and that we must do better.
Bill C-13 marks an important step in the modernization and strengthening of the Official Languages Act. I would like to present the changes proposed by the bill.
The bill will do more than just give the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat the authority to monitor the compliance of federal institutions with their language obligations. In fact, it will require the department to do so.
What is more, the Treasury Board will work with the Department of Canadian Heritage to establish policies and regulations that will help federal institutions take positive measures to enhance the vitality of official language minority communities and promote linguistic duality in Canadian society. These policies and regulations will also help to hold federal institutions accountable in this regard.
It will now be easier to ensure that federal institutions meet their official language obligations. This will also help to increase the linguistic capacity of our public service.
What do these changes mean for Canadians? They likely mean two big things: a greater number of services for all Canadians in the official language of their choice and greater emphasis on the needs of Canada's official language minority communities.
For the past 50 years, the Official Languages Act has not only given Canadians basic language rights but also shaped our country's identity. We are a country that respects and celebrates diversity and inclusion.
I think Canada made a unique choice, not on purpose, but out of necessity. The French arrived in the New World, the North American continent, and, thanks to the kindness and hospitality of the indigenous peoples, they survived frigid winters and came to understand that no one could go it alone here, that everyone had to work together.
When the British arrived in North America some time later, instead of absorbing the different societies, as they had done in many other countries, they made room for the French. They allowed the French to keep their culture, their education and their system of laws, and francophones were able to keep their identity as francophones. This makes Canada a country unlike any other.
I do need to point out a certain character trait that Canada has developed over the years, decades and centuries. We tend to accommodate others rather than simply forcing them to adopt our point of view. I think this is reflected in Canada's official languages, and we must promote them, especially for Canadians who belong to minority communities across Canada.
The Official Languages Act is more than just a law. It is a reflection of our country's evolution and a part of our Canadian identity. This bill strengthens bilingualism across the country to make sure that Canadians can access services in the official language of their choice.
I call on all members to work together and support this important bill.
1127 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Hull—Aylmer for his speech. It is always a pleasure to remind him that I am one of his constituents when I spend the week in Ottawa. I stay in Hull, a sector of Gatineau, and he is my MP. I therefore regularly receive his always interesting and pertinent, if lengthy, newsletters in the mail. I just want to give my regards to my MP.
My colleague quite correctly highlighted the fact that Canada has been officially bilingual since its foundation, but that the Official Languages Act was adopted in 1969. We learned that this was the year of his birth, which is a fun bit of trivia.
He also noted that over 90% of senior executives in the public service are bilingual. In fact, I spoke last weekend with a high-ranking official from an important department who spoke perfect French despite having an English-sounding last name.
In his speech, my colleague talked about the various milestones, including how Prime Minister Pearson established a commission to study bilingualism and biculturalism and how the Official Languages Act was passed in 1969 under Prime Minister Trudeau. However, he forgot to include one thing in his historical overview and that is that, in 2015, the year he and I were both elected, his party's election platform provided for a review of the act. It took more than six years before his party delivered on that review.
Does he think his government was slow to act?
253 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/12/22 6:45:23 p.m.
- Watch
I have a small correction to make. I did not learn French; I come from a community with Acadian roots.
20 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. We agree on several things, including on the fact that French is in decline across the country, including in Quebec.
My question is on the very tangible and important measures that our Bill C‑13 proposes in order to protect the French fact in official language minority communities from coast to coast to coast. The purpose of the bill is to allow communities to speak and celebrate French across the country.
My colleague just proposed an amendment that will delay the implementation of our bill. Does he not think that urgent action is needed and that we must act now to protect the French fact in Canada?
117 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question from my hon. colleague, but I have to say that there is something kind of ironic.
Although I agree with what she said about promoting French in official language minority communities, I find it ironic that she accused me of wanting to delay a bill, when it took the Liberals seven years to introduce Bill C‑13. They are the ones who decided to call an election rather than adopt the previous bill they had introduced in the House, Bill C‑32.
I proposed an amendment that would allow us to go further, to take into account all of the advice that was given by the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada and by Quebec, for example, and to give us more time to design a better bill. I am not asking for seven years. I am asking for it to be sent to parliamentary committee so that we can improve it and pass a better bill.
I think it is worth taking a few weeks to come up with a better bill for the good and the future of French in Canada.
199 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
I thank my colleague for his question, which raises concerns and deserves to be discussed in committee.
This is exactly what we are here in the House to discuss. However, I remind members that Canada was essentially founded on two languages: French and English. Quebec chose French as its language. Quebec was right to do so because Quebec is certainly the minority in North America based on language. Quebec has chosen to speak French. However, for years, there has been a major decline in French. I believe that my Bloc Québécois colleagues agree.
We are surrounded by anglophones on all sides. All the songs and shows are in English. The posts on Facebook and TikTok are in English, and most of the content our young people are watching and listening to is in English. This is a problem that must be taken seriously. Unfortunately, Bill C-13 sidesteps this issue. It does not do enough to ensure that we can stop the decline of French.
Yes, we want to end this decline in francophone minority communities outside Quebec, but also and especially in Quebec, the bastion and cradle of Canada's francophonie. To do that, I think it is worth working even harder and putting more pressure on the Liberals to obtain further measures to ensure that Canada stays Canada, with two official languages, one of which is a strong French, in a Quebec that is increasingly francophone, and with francophone communities outside Quebec that will be proud and that will have the resources to continue to exist, to grow, to prosper and to develop in French.
271 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague for the quality of her French.
That is the beauty of Canada. If the House did not allow everyone, including our anglophone colleagues, to speak in French, if there were not a strong contingent of francophone members in the House, our colleague would not have chosen to address the House in French. She would not have chosen to learn and speak French and to communicate with her community in French. I salute her and every one of my colleagues who make an effort to learn French. Many of my Conservative and Liberal colleagues are learning the language and making an effort to speak French in the House. It is worth it. Let us continue that trend.
It is true that language clauses are one of the weak points of Bill C-13 that we have identified. We need to go further. That is why we are once again asking the Liberals not to wait seven years, but to actually listen this time, and to refrain from tabling a bill that is convenient for them and does not land them in too much hot water. They need to really listen to what people are saying and adjust Bill C‑13 to accommodate at least some of their requests.
214 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Mégantic—L'Érable for his speech.
However, I would like to apologize to you, Mr. Speaker, because I just assumed that you had learned French, but you are a francophone by birth from an Acadian community.
On that note, I would like to ask my colleague from Mégantic—L'Érable what he thinks about the importance of passing Bill C‑13 today to help minority language communities. Like Acadians in Nova Scotia, these communities do not all necessarily have access to francophone educational institutions ranging from early childhood to post-secondary education to ensure that the French fact is strengthened in these communities.
122 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I will try to be brief, although it is difficult. I think my colleague is sincere in his desire to strengthen the importance of French.
He tells us that he wants Bill C‑13 to be passed quickly, but quickly passing a bill that has no teeth is like trying to bite into an apple without teeth: It does absolutely no good.
We need to give the Official Languages Act some teeth, and we need the Treasury Board to be able to enforce what is in the act. If we can give the act some teeth, we can pass it quickly. However, as long as it has no teeth, there is no point in letting an apple rot on the shelf.
125 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I speak to Bill C‑13 today as an Acadian, as someone who worked in education for some 30 years and as someone who has spent a great deal of time in his life promoting the French language in Nova Scotia and across Canada.
I would like to thank the new minister and the former minister for their hard work over the past several years. As a former president of the Canadian Branch of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie and the current and founding president of the Liberal caucus of official language minority communities, I can say that these have been interesting years for pursuing my work.
I will start with a few very important points. My colleague Raymond Daigle, a former deputy minister, told me that in the early 1960s, he read an article saying that, if the trend continued, the French language would die out in Nova Scotia. I am not sure if that would have happened in my community or in yours, Mr. Speaker, but that is what the article predicted.
To be honest, my father also told me that, in the early 1960s, the parish priest and the community were discussing the possibility of eliminating the only French course in our schools, which would have meant the complete elimination of French. It was totally unacceptable. My father and the community stood up to defend their right, but they had no tools to help them. Then, in 1969, like a gift from the heavens, the Official Languages Act arrived.
Since there was no French school, I did all my schooling, from kindergarten to grade 12, in English. Then I went to the Université de Moncton, in French.
That law came along and made it clear that the Parliament of Canada was going to operate in French, and that federal institutions representing the Government of Canada and Canadians could choose to use either French or English. This amounted to exceptional protections for the people of Canada and my part of the country.
What happened after 1969? In 1982, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was enacted, giving Canadians certain privileges and rights.
Section 23, on education, is an essential part of this charter. Paragraph 23(1)(a) has to do with language of instruction for people who learned French first and still speak it. Paragraph 23(1)(b) has to do with language of instruction for people who studied at a French school. Subsection 23(2) has to do with the right of a person who has one child in school in a given language to have all their children be instructed in the same language.
I will talk about this later, but no one ever counted the parents and children who studied in French. Our government is the one that did this for the first time this year, and it is very important.
In 1982, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms added this right to education. The provinces signed, but then they suddenly started asking questions: What powers would they have? Would it be necessary to build a small French classroom, and how many students would it have to accommodate?
This issue was brought before the courts several times. In 1990, the Mahé ruling changed the world of French education in Canada. A parent from Alberta was demanding the right not only to a French education, but also to schools managed “by us, for us”, which was a major difference. The Supreme Court ruled in his favour.
All of a sudden, francophone school boards were cropping up across Canada. In Nova Scotia, the francophone school board was created in 1996. I believe that there are now 28 francophone school boards across Canada, 174,000 students studying in French as a first language—not in immersion—and 700 schools for students with French as a first language. That is exactly what has happened.
There were other rulings after that, of course. There was Doucet-Boudreau on new schools in Nova Scotia, and Arsenault-Cameron on travel distances in Prince Edward Island.
In 2005, I became the superintendent of the Conseil scolaire acadien provincial. We needed to accomplish two major tasks. We needed to ensure quality education and get schools and community centres built. We had to work with the provincial government and the Department of Canadian Heritage. We have made a lot or progress.
However, I should point out that some parents were hesitant. Their children did not speak French. They had lost it. They were Acadians: the LeBlancs, the Samsons, the Fougères, the Landrys, the Arseneaults, the Béliveaus. We see names like that in Quebec and all over the place. These parents wondered if their children would lose a year or two of schooling because it would take a year or two to learn French.
That is when the school board, under my leadership, developed a four-year program for all these incoming students. It was not formal school. It was informal. The idea was for them to play in French, have fun in French and learn French. It was great. Parents started sending us their children. It gave the school and the teachers an opportunity to build relationships with families in the community. Before we knew it, our student population jumped from 4,000 to 6,000, which is where we are now, and it is really amazing.
Then, in 2015, I became the MP for Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook. Chezzetcook is the second-oldest Francophone community in Nova Scotia. That was my opportunity to do something. For 32 years, I was active on the ground. I was a salesman, I talked, I pushed, I convinced the government, Canadian Heritage and others to support us. In 2015, I became a decision-maker. When I was active on the ground, I blamed the decision-makers. They were not moving fast enough. I told them to hurry up and pass bills to help us. Now that I am a decision-maker, I have to work fast. That is exactly what we have done.
What have we done since 2015?
We did not sleep as the opposition member claimed. We got straight down to work. What projects have we completed?
I remember the Translation Bureau. During their 10 years in power, the Conservatives cut, and cut and cut staff, sending texts to consulting companies for translation, saying that they did a good enough job, that it was okay, that it did not need to be perfect. We were the best in the world at translation. People came from all over to see how we did it. All of that had to be rebuilt.
Then the Conservatives started cutting the funding for court challenges. There was no money to do anything. We could not challenge anything to enforce our rights. What did we do? We brought it back, to ensure that people would have access to that program once again. Earlier I mentioned the number of students. That is very important. Appointing bilingual judges to the Supreme Court is another of our achievements of the past six years.
In reality, Bill C‑13 is the culmination of many things we have done in addition to things we have heard and arguments that were brought forward. I thank the minister for taking all of this and putting it in a bill that will certainly make Canadians proud of this very important legislation.
Now let us talk about what is in the bill. There are some major changes. For example, stakeholders told us that we should ensure that the central agency is a department and that there is coordination. Who is better placed to do that than the Treasury Board Secretariat, which takes care of this for all the departments? The TBS monitors, evaluates, observes and does the necessary follow-up. It will be responsible for accountability. That is a major improvement we are making. What is more, the discretionary power it had is now mandatory. That is a major change that is going to help people a lot.
Next, we looked at the commissioner's powers. How can we ensure that he has more tools in his tool box? We gave him the authority to impose penalties. We gave him the authority to enter into compliance agreements with different parties and to make orders. If we were to look at Air Canada today, we could use these measures, impose penalties and ensure that Canadians travelling with Air Canada are able to communicate in the language of their choice. That obligation is also there.
Let us talk about positive measures. We saw in Gascon that positive measures were not adequately defined. They were not clear enough or descriptive enough. The judge stated that tools were needed to make them much clearer. That is what Bill C-13 does. It truly establishes very positive measure that will help advance this file.
Concerning bilingual judges, my colleagues know that we have appointed three. It has been done. The Conservatives are still against this. It is now enshrined in this impressive new law.
In terms of francophone immigration, it is important to note that immigration is very important in Canada. There is a labour shortage, but the situation is even worse in francophone communities where we had a target of 4.4%. That target was not met, but it must be. We are losing our demographic weight. That is serious and that is why Bill C‑13 proposes to implement a national strategy that will make it possible to establish clear objectives, targets and indicators and to follow up.
With regard to language of work and language of service in federally regulated businesses, our government is the first to recognize that there is a decline in French in Quebec. We must support French, not just outside Quebec, but within Quebec and internationally. That is exactly what we are proposing. Federally regulated businesses must co-operate to ensure the ongoing promotion of French.
As everyone knows, it is the government's responsibility to provide bilingual services. We must be leaders in that respect. During the pandemic, we saw that there were service shortcomings. We are therefore fixing things through Bill C‑13, to ensure the use of both official languages in emergency situations and everyday operations. We have also changed the regulations pertaining to services in French. There will now be 700 additional bilingual offices across Canada. These are major changes.
I have given a broad overview of the situation, but there are still some questions, which is reasonable. There are discussions to be had. That is why we have committees, especially the Standing Committee on Official Languages. Each committee is independent, so there will be discussions and debates to be had there.
Stakeholders make some good points. It is important to mention it. For instance, the fact that the Treasury Board can delegate its coordination responsibilities worries me. It does not worry me in the current situation; it worries me if the Conservatives ever come into power once again. We could lose all the progress we have made regarding bilingual judges and court challenges. That is a major point, and I think the committee has to discuss it further.
There is also the matter of language clauses. My colleague and current Minister of Health was the first to include a language clause for school day care, so it is certainly possible. It is true that we have policies in place that provide tools and improve processes. We could look at ways to ensure results. I have worked on the ground. The money comes, but we have not been consulted and we do not get our share. Something has to be done to achieve this goal, and what I propose is to make language clauses mandatory and to put a system in place to contact organizations and school boards if provincial governments drag their feet. We have seen that before, provinces that do nothing and fail to contribute their share of infrastructure funding, which puts everything on hold. We have to find ways to remedy that.
The third element that I think is very important is positive measures. As I explained earlier, Justice Clément Gascon said that these measures really need to be defined.
Bill C‑13 does an exceptional job. In fact, I would like to congratulate the team that has done the work to give it some teeth. This means we can ensure that there will be major changes on the ground.
Allow me to provide some examples.
We could be a little more specific and say “required positive measures”. However, that can change, depending on the situation. Positive measures does not mean after-work drinks. In fact, it is something that has to happen on the ground.
Here is an example. British Columbia was trying to find some land for 20, 25 years. There was no land to build a francophone school.
Now, thanks to the federal government selling off a piece of land, the school board will be a to build a francophone school because it is important for official languages.
Halifax just went through the same thing. The Conseil scolaire acadien provincial, for which I once served as director general, was also looking for land. The Government of Nova Scotia was able to purchase land for the school board when Canada sold some real estate.
As members can see, everything works well when the rules are clear and when they promote substantive equality between French and English in Canada.
I want to conclude with some important points.
First, the Government of Canada is a leader. It has to be one. Otherwise, who will?
Second, we must resist ongoing assimilation and find ways to quash it. That is very important, but no one is even asking the question.
Third, I am very proud of the changes that have been made in terms of education. When I was director general, it was said that public school was only meant for kids aged five to 18. People did not think we had to worry about them.
Our government made a change by adding students in junior kindergarten and post-secondary school. I wonder why they were not included from birth until death. I do not like the word “death”, so I will replace it with “adult maturity”.
I would like to close with a little quote whose author's name escapes me: The history of French in Canada is still being written.
This bill will take us a long way. I know my grandchildren and my colleagues' grandchildren will benefit from it for a very long time.
2476 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is extremely important. I too studied at the Université de Moncton. I had done all of my schooling in English because there was no French school. I did not have a choice. That was the turning point in my French-language academic career.
Earlier, I talked about bilingual Supreme Court justices. This is very important. Court challenges are very important. Real estate and land sales are very important. These are investments that we are making in communities and community centres. This is the core and the anchor of the community. We need to continue investing in these regions and in these communities to ensure the advancement of French.
112 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I always appreciate my colleague's passionate speeches. I know that in Acadia, people were forced to defend French, sometimes even with fists. It is one of the biggest pockets of resistance outside Quebec.
I do not think that the bill is going to reverse the decline among francophones outside Quebec or in Quebec. This trend is accelerating. We in Quebec support francophone and Acadian communities, we always have, and we will continue to do so more and more.
To go back to the positive measures that my colleague was talking about, what would he say if, all of a sudden, English was supported by positive measures? I think that he knows that.
All Acadian organizations are supported. It is essential to keep them operating. In Quebec, even before the Official Languages Act, francophone institutions were underfunded. Basically, anglophones in Quebec were the dominant majority.
The Official Languages Act came along and funded English in Quebec because it was the minority language. However, this is in no way comparable to the situation of francophone minorities outside Quebec.
179 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the member is always interesting to listen to; I like his style.
The member mentioned the 4.4% target, and I know in my riding of Port Moody—Coquitlam there is a strong francophone community, but a lot of the older generation are moving away and moving out. The young people, the kids, are the ones who want to learn French, and their parents want them to learn French. We had difficulty finding a school like École des Pionniers. We actually had to move outside of the community, because we could not get support for the French school in our community.
How does the federal government propose to support young immigrant children who are coming and would like to take up French in provinces outside of Quebec?
131 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, that is a very good question.
I thank the member for speaking French. I thank him for his service. I know that he spent part of his working life supporting and protecting Canada. That is definitely very important.
I think I would like to talk about positive measures. Provinces and territories have responsibilities with respect to French and English. If we do not institute positive measures, if we do not set out the steps to be followed, sometimes the steps will not be followed.
That is why it is so important to support requests for things like community centres. These are opportunities for people to learn the language, whether they are francophone, anglophone or francophile. Ultimately, a bilingual Canada is a strong Canada.
125 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to see that there is a crowd here this evening, just as there has been at the other late debates we have been having over the past few weeks. As I have told the House before, I am an actor. I used to act in movies, plays and television shows. I did a lot of theatre work, and the theatre works well when there is a full house. However, sometimes things do not go as well and no one shows up.
As I rise this evening, it feels like I am doing the fifth showing of a play that got really bad reviews because there are hardly any people here.
Those who know me know that I often rise in the House to speak and that I sometimes speak loudly. I get all worked up. This evening, I am in a different kind of mood.
The main reason I am here is to talk about language. I have been fighting for the French language for the past 20 years. It is one of the main reasons why the members of the Bloc Québécois are here. We could resolve one issue right away, I think. If we want to permanently resolve the issue of the French language in Quebec, there is only one solution and that is independence. There is no other way.
The Bloc Québécois got elected. We are here and we will debate to try to improve the bill, but, in the end, there is only one solution.
I was saying earlier that I was not in the mood to celebrate because, sometimes, I feel a little bit as if I were suffering from a broken heart. Before I begin, I would like to recognize someone who is here with us tonight and who has been a great fighter for the French language. I have been fighting for the last 20 years, but he is perhaps the foremost expert on the French language at this time. I am talking about Mario Beaulieu, the member for La Pointe-de-l'Île, who is here tonight.
362 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I have been working tirelessly for the past 20 years to achieve one reality: to make sure French survives in Quebec, to make sure it thrives.
The member for La Pointe-de-l'Île has been part of every struggle. I have been at his side for some of them, but he has been doing it a lot longer than I have. He was also far more engaged when he was president of the Société Saint-Jean-Baptiste de Montréal. We held countless demonstrations and organized countless shows, all with the goal of keeping French alive.
It is worth noting that there are a few experts who really know the issue, and the member for La Pointe-de-l'Île is certainly one of them. We French speakers make up 3% of the population on this American continent. Right next to us is the United States of America, the most powerful hegemonic culture in human history. We are bombarded with their films, music and culture, and we have to block it out. Unfortunately, Bill C‑13 really does not get the job done.
I say that I am in a strange mood because the member for La Pointe‑de‑l'Île and I have fought and have attended many protests. I remember protesting against English signage on Sainte‑Catherine Street. I even brought my kids with me. My daughter, who is now 18 years old, was three at the time. I have pictures of her in front of the Best Buy on Sainte‑Catherine Street. I was dragging her along. I am surprised no one called child protective services. I have pictures that were taken in front of Payless ShoeSource and other stores that did not provide French versions of their names.
Today, when I talk to my 13-year-old son and 18-year-old daughter about fighting for our language, they look at me like I am fighting for a lost cause, as though the fight were already over, as though everyone has already moved on to something else. They watch YouTube, TikTok and that sort of thing. We were saying yesterday how critical Bill C‑11 is to support our creators. My kids watch videos and consume American culture. My son learned English from TikTok. Being able to speak three, four, five or eight languages is a great thing. That is wonderful. However, in the context in which we live, bilingualism is dangerous.
I was saying that because Mario and I were spokespeople for Mouvement Montréal Français—
444 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Yes, all right, Madam Speaker.
Along with the member for La Pointe-de-l'Île, I was the spokesperson for Mouvement Montréal Français. That was quite a long time ago.
I organized a protest called J'aime ma langue dans ta bouche, or “I like my tongue in your mouth”.
The point of keeping French alive is to make the French language the place where everyone comes together in Quebec, the place where people meet, the crossroads for all the people who live in Quebec. People come here from all over the world. They come to our province. They adopt our country. They come to Quebec. They come to Montreal. They come to Quebec City. They come to Matane. They come to Rimouski. They come to Sept‑Îles. We must therefore ensure that the French language becomes the meeting place par excellence for all the people who live in our province.
When we put on that show, I remember, we had no fear. We put on a 12‑hour show. I went a bit overboard. It started at noon and ended at midnight. It seemed interminable, but we were sending a strong message. I invited people from all over to that show, artists who had been in Quebec for two years, six months, 12 years, 20 years. I invited them to come celebrate Quebec culture, celebrate this language that we all share. It was amazing. It is still available on social media.
I remember very well that there was a Tamil music group called Ananda Prasad. It was at the Lion d'Or, on Papineau, in Montreal. These musicians came in traditional costume. It was beautiful. They were also on stage at Lion d'Or. Behind them, I had put up a photo of Serge Fiori. They had instruments from southeast Asia. It was beautiful. They sang Comme un sage by Harmonium. It was so beautiful with the accents of that music. On that stage at Lion d'Or, it was like a meeting between us and them, between the language and the people from around the world. It was magnificent. It was extraordinary.
We organized this event for a year or two, and then I loosened up. The event was cut from 12 hours to two hours. Afterwards, we realized that there was no point holding this event at the Lion d'Or because this venue is located in the Plateau Mont-Royal neighbourhood. We wanted to convince people of this idea of making French the place where everyone comes together, but everyone in Plateau Mont-Royal already believes it. At least, everyone believed it 10 years ago. Today, perhaps not quite as many do.
We then moved the event to Côte‑des‑Neiges, where 91 different languages are spoken. We held the event in a park. We set up a stage. I remember it. Yann Perreau was there, as well as Catherine Major and other artists from all over. It was really incredible. We tried to entice people, to get people to say that our language is magnificent and our culture is extraordinary. We wanted them to adopt it, to join this adventure that was important to us, the adventure of making this little corner of America a francophone land.
Today, we realize that it did not quite work. We see it. Language is not just a string of useful phonemes. It is not just “pass me the butter”, “are we going to the movies tonight” or “I am taking my car to the garage”. It is not just about utilitarian things. A language conveys more than that. It tells about who we are, our values and our history.
I want to say this. As members know, Serge Bouchard is an anthropologist who wrote books. He died a year or two ago. He wrote extraordinary things. He had a radio show on Radio-Canada where he talked about language, culture and all sorts of other subjects. He talked about something absolutely fascinating in one of his books. It shows how a language or even a word can say so much about who we are. That is what is at stake here. That is what we could lose.
In Quebec, when you say “orignal”, the French word for moose, it brings to mind all sorts of images. It says something.
We all have uncles, fathers, grandfathers or brothers who went hunting in the fall. They came back with moose antlers. They put them on the hood of their car and drove around town. Everyone in Quebec who is over the age of 40 remembers that. The word “orignal” is therefore part of Quebec culture. It is a Basque word. It is so extraordinary to think about. The French word for moose comes from the word oreinak, which means deer. How did we come to be using it? The story is fascinating. The Basques came to fish in the St. Lawrence River before the arrival of Jacques Cartier, Champlain and the French. They met the Innu from the Lower North Shore. They came to fish, stopped on the beach and spent time with the Innu. They talked and traded. Just imagine.
Imagine them sitting and eating on the beach, somewhere around Blanc‑Sablon or further north. My colleague from Manicouagan would know more about that. Imagine that one day a moose walked out of the forest. The Innu surely had a word for moose. They have been here for 20,000 years, so they certainly had a word for moose. There was probably a Basque man who called it an oreinak, or something like that. I can imagine it. This story comes from Serge Bouchard, but it is really interesting to think about. The Innu adopted the word oreinak, which transformed into orignal, the French word for “moose”. When Champlain arrived 200 or 300 years later, he had never seen a moose before. The Innu he met told him that it was called an orignal, a moose. It is fascinating. History is so rich and incredible. Who wants that to disappear? Who wants to lose that? Who wants to lose this rich history?
The word bécosses is part of our history. I do not know if anglophones will get the reference. The word bécosses, which means “outhouse”, is part of the vernacular in Quebec. It comes from the English word “back-house”. Way back when, people did their business in a small shed behind the house. This is important stuff. It is part of Quebec's history.
There are so many fascinating elements to that story. A carpenter once told me that when toilets started to be installed indoors, they were elevated. That is why they were called “the throne”. There was a time when people were proud to show that they had a toilet inside their home instead of in a shed out back. It was important to them. It was social progress of a sort to go from the “back-house” to “inside the house”, so to speak. In effect, it was like a throne.
We chuckle at the word bécosses, but it tells a story. We use it because of anglophones. The anglophones came along 200 years ago, conquered us, won on the Plains of Abraham, and we have been stuck with them ever since. It is what it is.
In short, culture speaks. We share it and we want that to continue. What peoples of the world would want to see their culture disappear? Who would want to lose that? Who does not want their children to speak their language? Who does not want their children to remember where they come from, where their ancestors come from, what their history is and what I just described? That is a part of who we are. It is extremely important. It defines us. We cannot unravel that.
These meetings occurred with the Innu and with the people who were here when we arrived, and when the anglophones arrived. Now, there is immigration from everywhere in the world and each new arrival enriches us. However, in Quebec, we must succeed in making the French language the meeting place par excellence and the place where we all connect. It is really extraordinary when we think about it.
I do not have much time left. I am going to treat myself. I brought a copy of the book L'homme rapaillé by Gaston Miron. The last time I spoke—
1456 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Excuse me, Madam Speaker.
I listened to the member's speech. He has the same name as some of my relatives who live near Montreal: my uncle Gaston, who recently passed away, my aunt Cédia and my cousins Diane and Francine.
The member spoke about the need to offer support to the francophone community in Quebec. For me, it is very important to do so across the country. There is a francophone community in my riding of Barrie—Innisfil. When I speak to students, I talk to them about the importance of French. There are many opportunities in French, not just in Canada and Ontario, but around the world.
Could the member speak about the importance of French for the youth of our country?
127 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I completely agree with my colleague. My struggle was for the survival of French in Quebec, but I also want French to thrive everywhere, not just in Canada.
I think the latest figures show that there are 500 million French speakers around the world, a number that is growing because many countries in Africa still speak French, which is thriving in that part of the world.
The struggle is here in North America. I therefore share my colleague's concerns. While I am fighting for French in Quebec, I am fighting for French everywhere.
97 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, my Bloc Québécois colleague gave a very spirited speech. I appreciate his fight to preserve the French language in Quebec. I also thank him for understanding that a large percentage of francophones are in Africa.
However, I have the impression that my colleague across the aisle does not understand that francophones outside of Quebec are also a minority. Does he understand that Bill C‑13 is not just about French in Quebec, but about French everywhere in Canada? There are francophones in my riding, London West.
Can he comment on francophone minority communities?
101 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
