44th Parl. 1st Sess.
April 26, 2023 02:00PM
Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge my colleague's hard work and the historic result we are talking about today.
My question is, what is the next step?
Today, in its action plan for official languages, the government expressed its intention to grant core funding to francophone organizations and communities. These essential services and organizations, such as the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada, youth programs, newcomer services, support for francophone artists, and French-language legal services, are the backbone of the francophone presence in Canada.
We commend this initiative, but how can we guarantee that the funding will find its way to the organizations and communities that need it to enhance French-language proficiency across Canada?
Does the hon. member believe that it is essential to provide these communities and organizations with stable core funding?
145 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I have a question for my colleague.
The action plan for official languages was announced today. At the beginning of the announcement, it talks about promoting French in Quebec and ensuring its protection. However, there are no measures for Quebec. There are basically only measures to strengthen English in Quebec. We saw that 20% of the new funding will go toward supporting English in Quebec, when it is French that is endangered.
Can my colleague explain how this squares with the statement that the government is going to protect French in Quebec?
94 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/23 2:21:56 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, official languages have been a priority for our government since 2015, as evidenced by the record investments we have made. Today, my colleague, the Minister of Official Languages, announced the new action plan for official languages 2023–2028, an unprecedented investment of $4.1 billion to reverse the decline of French and support our official language minority communities through francophone immigration, the educational continuum and support for community organizations.
The voices of those communities were heard, and today we have delivered. I am proud of this plan, which will have a significant impact on the Franco-Ontarian community of Nickel Belt in Greater Sudbury. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the stakeholders across the country who work in community organizations and promote francophone culture, as well as the educational institutions in our communities across the country.
143 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/23 3:12:35 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Halifax West for her question and for her hard work.
This morning we unveiled our new action plan for official languages. It includes historic investments to protect and promote our official languages. With this plan, we are investing over $4 billion in targeted areas such as francophone immigration, the educational continuum and the shortage of bilingual workers.
Unlike the Conservative Party, which wants to cut access to local and French-language news, our government is once again standing up for linguistic minorities across the country.
93 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
moved:
Motion No. 1
That Bill C-13, in Clause 2, be amended by
(a) replacing, in the English version, line 39 on page 2 with the following:
ties, including by restoring and increasing their demo-
(b) replacing, in the English version, line 44 on page 2 with the following:
ties, including by restoring and increasing their demo-
Motion No. 2
That Bill C-13, in Clause 3, be amended by replacing lines 3 to 8 on page 4 with the following:
taking into account the fact that French is in a minority situation in Canada and North America due to the predominant use of English and that there is a diversity of provincial and territorial language regimes that contribute to that advancement, including Quebec’s Charter of the French Language, which provides that French is the official language of Quebec;
(b.2) advance the existence of a majority-French soci-
Motion No. 3
That Bill C-13, in Clause 4, be amended by
(a) replacing line 14 on page 4 with the following:
2.1 (1) The President of the Treasury Board is responsible for exercising
(b) replacing lines 17 and 18 on page 4 with the following:
(2) The President of the Treasury Board shall, in consultation with the other ministers of the Crown, coordinate the implementa-
Motion No. 4
That Bill C-13, in Clause 6, be amended by deleting lines 23 to 28 on page 5.
Motion No. 5
That Bill C-13, in Clause 7, be amended by replacing, in the French version, line 14 on page 6 with the following:
d) ces droits doivent être interprétés en tenant compte du fait
Motion No. 6
That Bill C-13, in Clause 14, be amended by
(a) adding after line 2 on page 11 the following:
33.1 In this Part, “employee” includes an employee who represents the employer, a person who performs for an employer activities whose primary purpose is to enable the person to acquire knowledge or experience and a person who has been placed by a temporary help agency.
(b) replacing lines 7 to 13 on page 11 with the following:
(2) A person appointed by the Governor in Council to the position of deputy minister or associate deputy minister or a position of an equivalent rank in a department named in Schedule I to the Financial Administration Act shall, on their appointment, take the language training that is necessary to be able to speak and understand clearly both official languages.
Motion No. 7
That Bill C-13, in Clause 16, be amended by
(a) replacing lines 3 to 11 on page 12 with the following:
use of both official languages, managers and supervisors are able to communicate in both official languages with employees of the institution in carrying out their managerial or supervisory responsibilities; and
(b) adding after line 15 on page 12 the following:
(3.1) Paragraph 36(1)(c) of the Act is replaced by the following:
(c) ensure that, if it is appropriate in order to create a work environment that is conducive to the effective use of both official languages,
(i) managers and supervisors are able to communicate in both official languages with employees of the institution in carrying out their managerial or supervisory responsibilities, and
(ii) employees are supervised by their managers and supervisors in the official language of their choice,
regardless of the linguistic identification of their position; and
(c) adding after line 27 on page 12 the following:
(5) Section 36 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (2):
(3) Nothing in subparagraph (1)(c)(ii) abrogates or derogates from the right of a person to hold a position or carry out managerial or supervisory responsibilities in a federal institution if they held that position or carried out those responsibilities in the institution immediately before the coming into force of that subparagraph.
Motion No. 8
That Bill C-13, in Clause 21, be amended by
(a) replacing line 19 on page 14 with the following:
(4) The Government of Canada shall estimate periodically,
(b) replacing line 31 on page 16 with the following:
these mechanisms shall take into account the obligations set
Motion No. 9
That Bill C-13, in Clause 22, be amended by replacing line 38 on page 18 to line 2 on page 19 with the following:
43 (1) The Minister of Canadian Heritage shall advance the equality of status and use of English and French in Canadian society, and to that end may take measures to
Motion No. 10
That Bill C-13, in Clause 50, be amended by replacing, in the French version, line 9 on page 44 with the following:
(2) Le ministre du Patrimoine canadien fait déposer un rapport de l’examen devant chaque
Motion No. 15
That Bill C-13, in Clause 71, be amended by adding after line 39 on page 75 the following:
(1.1) Subsections 16(3.1) and (5) come into force on the second anniversary of the day on which this Act receives royal assent.
858 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question and his work in committee.
Essentially, there are really two things here. We are talking about Bill C-13. Bill C‑13 is a major improvement to official languages legislation. There are new provisions concerning the central agency and immigration, and the commissioner of official languages will be able to impose monetary penalties.
My colleague mentioned the action plan. Since taking office in 2015, we have doubled the funding for the action plan. We recently added $1 billion to support official language minority communities across the country. These investments are extremely important for the organizations that will have access to them.
We also improved Bill C‑13 in terms of immigration, in collaboration with the Province of Quebec. I do not know why my colleague cannot acknowledge the fact that the federal government is working closely with the Province of Quebec to ensure the advancement of French across Canada, including in Quebec.
167 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, before I begin, I just want to say that I would have liked to debate the motion moved by my Bloc Québécois colleague. I think that we Conservatives would have agreed to it, because it is consistent with what we presented in committee, in that it is about shortening the review period. Instead of 10 years, as written, we wanted to shorten the period to five years, but the Liberals refused. My colleague in the Bloc Québécois had an even better idea, which was to reduce the review period to three years. When something is urgent, we need time to react. The faster we react, the easier it is to close the gap in order to halt the decline of the French language.
As a fervent defender of French, I am always happy to rise in the House of Commons to defend the language. My goal is obviously to halt the decline of the French language and to protect and promote both official languages.
Before I get into the nuts and bolts of the issue, that is, the government's proposed amendments to Bill C-13, an act for the substantive equality of Canada's official languages, at report stage, it is important to understand how we got here.
Earlier, my colleague mentioned that funding was doubled, but we lost eight years that could have been spent providing the tools needed to protect French here in Canada. This government has been in power for eight years and, for eight years, it has dragged its feet when it comes to official languages. It gives organizations the illusion that it is doing enough to protect bilingualism in Canada.
Way back in 2018, the Prime Minister pledged to modernize the Official Languages Act, a promise that was repeated in the 2019 and 2021 Liberal platforms. It will probably be repeated again in the next election campaign, the outcome of which remains to be seen.
In 2021, the government tabled a white paper on the reform of the Official Languages Act, titled “English and French: Towards a substantive equality of official languages in Canada”. Bill C-32 was tabled by the then minister of official languages, who is now the Minister of Foreign Affairs, but it later died on the Order Paper when the government decided to call an election.
When she was appointed after the 2021 election, the new Minister of Official Languages promised that she would present a new version of the Official Languages Act in her first 100 days. She almost kept her promise. Bill C-13 was tabled in March 2022 to halt the decline of the French language in Canada and promote our two official languages, English and French.
Why am I focusing on the words “English and French” when talking about bilingualism? It is because the government appointed a Governor General who is bilingual, but who does not speak French. The Governor General is our representative, and has some lovely qualities, but unfortunately, she does not speak French. That is a good representation of how much this government cares about defending the French fact.
If it were as important to the Liberals as they say it is, rather than just an election promise, we would not be here today debating Bill C‑13, since a reform would have been adopted long ago.
In rising in the House today, on April 26, at report stage of Bill C-13, an act for the substantive equality of Canada's official languages, I recall the many times the language minister rose in this chamber.
She stated:
I hope once again that members of the House will work with us because stakeholders across the country want this bill to be passed as quickly as possible and we have a lot of work to do.
She was right. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Official Languages tried several times in committee to shut down debate on this bill by limiting the number of witnesses who would appear before the committee and the amount of time that would be spent debating the amendments. The Conservative Party of Canada takes English-French bilingualism very seriously.
We had an incredible opportunity to modernize the Official Languages Act, something that has not been done since 1988. As parliamentarians, this was our chance to take meaningful action to reverse the decline of French, a very real problem in both Canada and Quebec.
We were good sports and reached out to find compromises to move this file forward. We took the time to listen to stakeholder organizations that are feeling the impact of the decline of French every day, and we took the necessary action to give Bill C-13 more teeth, as the minister has said. However, we were unsuccessful because of a lack of will on the part of the government.
At committee stage, the Liberals moved over 50 amendments, many of which were identical but were submitted by different Liberal members. Some Liberal members also monopolized the time for debate and kept the Standing Committee on Official Languages from moving forward. That shows three things: The Liberals are not working as a team, they are inconsistent and they are disorganized.
Now here we are today, April 26, 2023, at report stage, with about 10 government motions on the table, and that is after some were withdrawn. These motions do not amend the substance of the bill. They could easily have been put forward in committee, but the Liberals chose instead to draw out the process for passing the bill.
I heard my colleague talking earlier about moving forward as quickly as possible so that the bill can be passed as soon as possible, as all organizations are calling for. Unfortunately, this was not taken into consideration, which is why, today, we are talking about details that are wasting time and dragging out the debate.
In accordance with the normal legislative process, we will have to vote at report stage. That will be followed by another stage in the House of Commons. We do not know when this will happen, since the government has not revealed its strategy. However, we will have to return to the House, debate and vote. Then the bill will have to be studied by the other place, the Senate. This shows that the Liberal government is talking out of both sides of its mouth. It says it wants to move fast, but it is disorganized. Amendments were moved today. Amendments were moved in committee. I just want to point out that the Liberals moved 50 amendments.
They drafted a white paper, Bill C-32 and Bill C‑13. They submitted Bill C‑13 to committee and are submitting it again today. What does that show? It shows that the government does not necessarily want to fast-track Bill C‑13. I think that is unfortunate.
I also think it is unfortunate that the Bloc Québécois was unable to move its motion because the Liberals objected. I respect and accept your decision, but the decision was made based on the fact that it could have been debated in committee, yet that also applies to what the government just proposed.
Unfortunately, the act will not have a shorter review period that would allow us to make adjustments when we find out, on the day it takes effect after the bill receives royal assent, that it cannot ensure that concrete action will be taken to halt the decline of the French language in Canada.
I think that this is important, that we should be proud of this bill, proud of our French language and proud of our English language. Bilingualism is something for Canada to be proud of, something that makes us attractive and unique. We owe it to ourselves to respect the organizations that work hard every day to protect our official language minority communities.
With all due respect for my colleague, we in the Conservative Party of Canada will once again reach out and not obstruct the progress of Bill C‑13.
However, I hope the Liberal government does not have any more surprises in store for us that will slow the process down. We should pass the bill as soon as possible so we can move on to something else and give our organizations the tools they need to do what they do every day to protect the French language, halt its decline, and protect and promote English and French. We do not want to pit our two official languages against each other. We are proud of both.
1456 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, the Official Languages Act has been around for a while. The government wanted to modernize it and, when they did, it was because it had failed. The act did not ensure the survival of French throughout Canada, from coast to coast to coast, or ensure that francophone minorities are treated in the same way as the anglophone community in Quebec.
Can my colleague tell me how he reconciles the government's desire to table Bill C‑13 to try to slow the decline of French with its introduction of an action plan that will provide $280 million in funding to the anglophone community in Quebec to ensure its survival, as though English were threatened in Quebec, in Canada and across North America?
126 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I think my colleague and I have the same objective.
I had the pleasure of working harmoniously with the Bloc Québécois to advance Bill C‑13 and above all to stop the decline of French and protect it. In the Conservative Party, we have a more Canadian vision, that of protecting English and French in minority communities.
Now, what my colleague mentioned is not in Bill C‑13, but in the action plan for official languages, which was announced today. As if by chance, we are debating Bill C‑13 in the House today and the government decides to introduce its action plan. There is a marketing strategy there.
What I want to say is that we were not available for the reading of the action plan. There will be a briefing session tomorrow morning at 11 o'clock, and I will be attending.
The information I received is that 20% of the funding will be allocated to anglophone minorities in Quebec. The question we must ask is, on what criteria was that percentage based?
As my colleague mentioned concerning official languages, the situation of French outside Quebec is different from that of English in Quebec. I have fundamental questions about the percentage. We must not neglect our anglophone friends but there is no denying that additional efforts are needed for francophones outside Quebec.
234 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, the atmosphere in Quebec is electric these days. There is a movement, a collective awareness as the decline of French is picking up pace. There is every indication that is the case. Whether it is a question of which language is spoken at home, a person's mother tongue, the first official language spoken or the language of work, there is a rapid decline of French, especially in Montreal. This cannot continue. Language projection studies—even those from Statistics Canada, which is certainly not a loyal ally of French in Quebec—indicate that there is going to be a very rapid decline.
Bill 101 has been shored up and the mobilization continues. Quebec's French language minister has called for a national awakening. I think we need to continue to mobilize. The federal language law has long been the blind spot in Quebec's language debate, but I think that with the debates we have had on the federal language law, people are beginning to better understand what it is. It is pretty incredible. For 53 years now, since 1969, Pierre Elliott Trudeau's Official Languages Act has been essentially, if not solely, about strengthening English in Quebec.
The Official Languages Act came into being on the heels of the Laurendeau‑Dunton commission. The commission was the brainchild of André Laurendeau, an editorialist with the newspaper Le Devoir. He championed a model somewhat similar to the one used in Switzerland or Belgium, a territorial model based on collective rights. He also believed that the Quebec issue had to be a priority. Lester B. Pearson was in power at the time. In the meantime, André Laurendeau died.
When Pierre Elliott Trudeau came to power, he changed course completely. He introduced an institutional bilingualism model that gave individuals the freedom to choose their official language, English or French, but only where numbers warranted. Essentially, this model is the opposite of Quebec's approach, which is centred on protecting the future of French and making French the common language across Quebec's territory. The same approach is used around the world. This type of language planning model makes it possible to ensure the future of a language and genuinely protect Quebec's minority languages.
The other major principle of the Official Languages Act is really an aberration. I am talking about the principle of symmetry or equivalence between Quebec's anglophones and the francophone and Acadian communities. It was really an aberration from the start. The Laurendeau-Dunton commission conducted a very thorough investigation and found that, out of 14 language groups in Quebec, francophones ranked 12th in terms of average income. We were therefore at a great disadvantage.
Quebec anglophones were part of the Canadian anglophone elite, and they enjoyed over-funded institutions, like schools and hospitals. There was really institutional extreme overfunding in favour of the English. What Mr. Trudeau and the Liberal government of the day decided to do to help was to fund institutions, English-language educational institutions. This has frequently been denounced. The Bloc Québécois has always denounced it. In a case on signage brought by Alliance Quebec, even the UN ruled that anglophones in Quebec cannot claim minority rights because they are part of the Canadian majority. It is there in black and white. If Quebec were independent, we could then say that francophones form the majority, but until Quebec is independent, we are subordinate to the federal government, which passed official languages legislation that aimed to strengthen English in Quebec, the only francophone state in North America. It continues to do so.
If the federal language law was overlooked, it was mostly because the Liberal government, rather than directly confronting Quebec and intervening to challenge Bill 101 before the courts or using its power of disallowance, used a very effective strategy, which consisted of fostering the emergence of special interest groups in civil society, groups that it funded directly and that led court challenges and mobilized the population to defeat Bill 101. The government even established a court challenges program to defeat Bill 101.
These 60 or so groups are funded by the federal government. For a very long time, whenever French was being defended in Quebec, we were called racists, xenophobic or inward looking, when the complete opposite is true. Having a common language makes it possible for a nation to include newcomers. That is not at all what happened. This continued for a very long time. Bill 101 was undermined in almost every sector to which it applied.
Today we are seeing a more rapid decline of French. In this federal language law, part VII requires federal institutions to support the anglophone community in Quebec. The government is funding the anglophone community in Quebec.
We thought there would be a change when the government recognized that French is in decline and that it had a responsibility to protect and defend French everywhere, including in Quebec. The Prime Minister kept saying that when he was presenting his action plan, but almost all the new investments in Quebec, roughly $280 million out of $1.4 billion, will be used for protecting and promoting English alone. It is incredible. That is $56 million more a year that will be added to the $90 million that is being paid to bolster all these groups that have budgets. Anyone involved in groups advocating for French outside Quebec — I, myself, was involved in such a group in Quebec — knows that money is key, and in the case of this funding, it will contribute significantly to anglicizing Quebec.
I think we really need to take action. We saw the action plan. There was a last-minute agreement with the Government of Quebec regarding the French language in federally regulated businesses. That is an improvement, a step in the right direction. I said it before and I will say it again, because we want to promote the widespread use of French in every business sector. This is supposed to encourage the knowledge of French among business executives.
The Bloc Québécois supports any possible advancement of French in Quebec. That is why we are going to support this bill. However, there are still some asymmetrical elements in the rest of the bill. The principle of equivalence between anglophones and francophone and Acadian communities is still there, so this bill will continue to anglicize Quebec.
Fortunately, Quebeckers are beginning to organize. We will keep informing people. I plan to do a tour of Quebec, because not many Quebeckers really know how the Official Languages Act works or know that all the funding goes to anglicizing Quebec. I think that if we take a few years to rally public opinion and to get this legislation changed, and if the federal government stays as closed off as it has been throughout the debates, there is one question that Quebeckers will start asking themselves or that will become more and more clear in their minds: assimilation or independence?
1190 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech, his passion for the French language and the work he does in committee.
Earlier he made reference to the positive collaboration with the Government of Quebec. I also heard the leader of the Bloc Québécois say he was going to vote in favour of Bill C‑13. I wonder if my colleague will join us in calling on the Conservatives to vote in favour of Bill C‑13 and to see what we can do about this.
I would also like to know why the leader of the Bloc Québécois is voting in favour of Bill C‑13. What are the positive aspects of this bill?
126 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his efforts in committee. As a member representing a riding in British Columbia, I would point out that interest in learning French is very strong. Hundreds of thousands of students attend or have attended immersion schools.
The Liberal government likes to pat itself on the back for its efforts on behalf of francophone communities. However, francophone communities and francophone immigration lost ground during the pandemic. The federal government provided no support.
Here is my question. Is my colleague concerned that the bill will not make a difference?
94 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I think there are some good things in there for francophones outside Quebec. Will this reverse the decline of French? Unfortunately, I doubt it.
It was announced that most of the investments and improvements would be for immersion schools, while schools by and for francophones outside of Quebec lack funding. Even at the outset, a study by the federation of francophone parents outside Quebec lamented how the bulk of the funding was being distributed. I think that between 78% to 88% of the federal funding for schools goes to anglophones in Quebec and to teaching English in francophone schools in Quebec. There is very little funding for francophone schools outside of Quebec even though francophones are becoming increasingly assimilated.
Francophones are forced to fight for every inch. I am in awe of the francophones outside Quebec who fight for French every day. We will continue to support them. We will vote for the bill because every step forward for them is important. Personally, I think it will weaken Quebec. If we weaken French in Quebec, it will weaken French everywhere else in Canada, too.
187 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, we certainly support having an increase in francophone immigration. We have seen, for example, that more than 80% of student visa applications from francophone Africa are being rejected. I believe that is a real problem. We have spoken out about this many times, and our efforts seem to have paid off. We are told that the acceptance rate for francophone African students has increased.
I also hope that my NDP colleagues, who are supposed to support Quebec's self-determination and who regularly vote against measures in favour of Quebec's right to self-determination, will support these efforts. Charles Castonguay has studied this issue. The data indicates that francophone immigrants who settle outside Quebec are very quickly assimilated into the English culture.
Measures are needed to ensure that French becomes the common language in areas outside Quebec with a high francophone concentration; that would make it possible to integrate these newcomers. Otherwise, it is like putting water into a leaky bucket.
164 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I believe it would send a clear message if all parties, including the party leaders and the leader of the Conservative Party, vote in favour of Bill C‑13.
We must recognize that French is in decline. Bill C‑13 proposes measures that will stop this decline. We all worked on this.
We all have a chance to support this bill and especially to support the important work that must be done to protect the French language.
83 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge and thank my colleague for Churchill—Keewatinook Aski. We worked very actively on Bill C‑13, although we did not always see eye to eye.
I heard her say in her speech that she was satisfied with Bill C‑13 and that the central agency, the Treasury Board, would do the work associated with the act as a whole. She talked about language provisions.
I would like her to reassure me. Were these supposed to be the provisions with teeth that would halt the decline of French and protect and promote the two official languages? I have serious doubts about the effectiveness of Bill C‑13.
I would like her to tell us more about the role of the central agency, the Treasury Board.
138 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question and especially for his work.
With respect to the Treasury Board, we could certainly go much further in that area. I have to say that we have taken steps in the right direction with Bill C‑13.
We know that the government's approach to date has not worked very well. The Treasury Board must play a key role by working with the Minister of Official Languages to implement this bill and protect and defend French properly.
88 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I was rather surprised because, throughout the clause-by-clause study, my colleague voted against the proposal to consult Quebec on the matter of positive measures. She voted against the proposal to let Quebec be in charge of its language planning. She voted against allowing the Charter of the French Language to take precedence in cases where there is a conflict between it and the Official Languages Act. I could name a whole host of amendments.
I would also like to hear her opinion on something. In the official languages action plan, all of the grants are once again going to strengthen English in Quebec. How does she think that is going to help reverse the decline of French?
It is French that is threatened, not English. It seems as though the federal government is going to continue funding and subsidizing only groups that encourage the anglicization of Quebec.
151 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his hard work in defending the interests of Quebec, but also for his support of francophone communities outside Quebec.
We New Democrats are proud of the work we did with the Quebec government to finalize a bill that reflects the interests of Quebeckers. We supported the agreement that the Quebec government has with the federal government. It is clear that there is a lot of work to be done to support French, even in Quebec.
The federal government has a key role to play and must fulfill its obligation.
96 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, it pains me that I cannot ask this question in French. The hon. member reflected on her children, the next generation.
What is left for us to be able to promote bilingualism across the country in a way that will ensure that it is embedded, for our children and our children's children, to truly honour the French language from coast to coast to coast?
67 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
