44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 10, 2023 02:00PM
- May/10/23 3:39:09 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 17th report of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development, entitled “Main Estimates 2023-24: Votes 1, 5, 10, 15, 20 and L30 under Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development, Vote 1 under International Development Research Centre, and Vote 1 under International Joint Commission”.
62 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise today to speak to Bill C‑13 on the modernization of the Official Languages Act.
As members know, this is a historic moment. It has been a long time since we have reviewed this legislation, 35 years to be exact. As the member for Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, I want to tell my colleagues that I did all of my schooling in English because there was no French school. We did not have this essential protection at the time. My children, however, were able to do all of their schooling, from kindergarten to grade 12, in French. What a change. That was made possible because of the first Official Languages Act in 1969. Thanks to that, my grandchildren will also be able to complete all of their schooling in French.
I want to tell my colleagues that this was a very long process. First, there was the Official Languages Act in 1969. Section 23 was added to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982 and changes were made to the act in 1988. Then, as members know, Bill C‑32, which sought to strengthen the Official Languages Act, died on the Order Paper. Now, we are back with Bill C‑13, which underwent a number of essential changes in committee.
As I see it, the most important thing is that the act will have to be reviewed every 10 years. We will not have to wait 35 years. The procedure has already been established. The Minister of Canadian Heritage, in consultation with the President of the Treasury Board, will have to undertake a review, a comprehensive analysis of the enhancement of the vitality of the communities. They will examine whether we have achieved our objective of protecting and promoting the French language. They will also examine whether sectors that are essential to enhancing the vitality of Quebec's francophones and anglophones, including health, immigration, employment and French-language education from early childhood to the post-secondary level, have been respected. A report will have to be tabled in the House of Commons. In my opinion, this is a well-regimented procedure.
Let us start with the Treasury Board. It is the most important machine in Parliament. Bill C‑13 would make the optional powers, duties and responsibilities mandatory, which is essential. The Treasury Board will have some meaningful work to do.
Other improvements were made in committee. They are very important to mention. Every community across the country asked that there be a central agency, a minister responsible, and we can now check that off the list. What is more, the minister cannot withdraw from their responsibilities or delegate them. The Treasury Board and the minister will have to ensure compliance.
As far as justice is concerned, Bill C‑13 confirms that justices of the Supreme Court of Canada have to be bilingual. Still today, the Conservatives do not agree with that and do not want that to happen. I do not understand it. In committee, progress was also made on appointing justices to superior courts and appeal courts. It is extremely important. We have to take into account people's needs in terms of access to justice. The Canadian Bar Association and the Fédération des associations de juristes d'expression française de common law have been asking for that for years.
Let us talk about immigration. In my opinion, this is the perfect example. When we started working on Bill C‑32, having a policy was important. When we moved on to Bill C‑13, ensuring that the policy had some content, some details, was important. Finally, in committee, we determined that not only did we need details, but we also needed to ensure that the demographic weight was restored and increased. It is going to be a game of catch-up and we will have to increase our newcomer target to 8% or 9% and then go back to our target of 4.4% or better.
Let us move on to real estate. I am quite pleased because this was a problem for 20, 25, 30 years across Canada.
I can say that now, because of the amendments that were made, the government has to consider the needs of the school community, which was not the case before. It is great to have a charter of rights that recognizes the right to education in French, but if land cannot be purchased, how and where are we supposed to build schools? It is not possible. Now, this will be guaranteed. It will no longer be an option, but an obligation, for the government to do something that is essential. It must consult the school boards about their needs.
I can cite examples such as the Jericho lands and Heather Street lands in Vancouver, Royal Roads in Victoria, Lagimodière Boulevard in Winnipeg, or Oxford Street in Halifax.
With respect to the language clause or the positive measures, the Standing Committee on Official Languages has made a lot of progress. It is not perfect, but it made a lot of progress.
When agreements are being negotiated, those involved, such as school boards or the organizations concerned, must be consulted. It is important to ensure that there is accountability, and that when money is earmarked for a certain organization or a certain location, it ends up there. Major progress has been made in that regard.
The Commissioner of Official Languages has been given significantly increased powers. Bill C-13 of course gives him the power to impose penalties and to make orders. This does not mean that violators will have to pay billions of dollars in penalties, but the idea is that anyone who has to pay $10, $100, $1,000 or $10,000 will be called out. That is very important. We are also giving the commissioner other powers and additional tools to do his job, which is to protect and promote the French language, and that is extremely important.
Now, I must say, there are areas where we did not accomplish as much as we would have liked, and that hurts. On enumeration, we were not able to get it done the way we wanted. Nevertheless, we added that question to the short form census two years ago, which means that everyone had to answer it. We still have that data, which will be good for 10 years. I am confident that if the Liberals are still in power in 10 years, we will be able to achieve and cement this. This is extremely important.
As I mentioned, the language clauses and positive measures are not what I would have liked, but we did make some progress, and I would like to thank the opposition parties for helping us.
I also realize that English-speaking Quebeckers have some concerns that deserve mentioning. However, I can assure you that our government is going to defend linguistic duality and the rights of anglophone Quebeckers in Quebec.
We will continue to provide funding, protect language and culture, and ensure the court challenges program is kept in place and adequately funded.
I am extremely proud to commend the government and the opposition for doing a great job and for the work done and the progress made on bills C‑32 and C‑13 at the Standing Committee on Official Languages. It truly is a team effort. I am very proud of the House and, as always, ready to answer questions.
1265 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague. That is a good question. First of all, the Liberals are out in left field because English is not in decline. I completely agree with my colleague.
We are missing three things that the Liberals failed to pay attention to. We need a central agency. We need to give the commissioner more powers, particularly for part VII, and we need to give the commissioner the power to issue orders.
I do hope that, at some point, the members of the Liberal caucus will be able to agree on official languages.
97 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am just trying to figure out the timeline. I know that 1988 was the last time the Official Languages Act was revised and, really, the review is long overdue.
I wonder if the member could explain why the modernization did not happen when the Conservatives were in power. Since 1988, it just seems long overdue, and I wonder why they did not see it as a priority to take leadership on.
74 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I talked about the preamble to reassure my community that the government will not have the power to take away the rights of the anglophone community.
With respect to the anglophone community, the English language is obviously not under threat in North America. Nevertheless, a community can face challenges without its language being under threat. The anglophone community has many cultural institutions. It has its own arts scene and culture. For a community to feel at home, for a community to flourish, it must have access to these types of cultural institutions, for example, not to mention its educational institutions.
The action plan for official languages will help the community maintain institutions that it considers to be important. I believe that the member opposite must recognize this.
129 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
