SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 196

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 12, 2023 10:00AM
  • May/12/23 10:17:09 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for this presentation. I am disappointed that the minister truly believes what she is saying. She said that she incorporated everything that was in the white paper into Bill C‑13. The white paper said that the central agency should be the Treasury Board and that it should have full power over the entire act. That was written in the white paper. The minister also said that in the process of developing the bill, she considered all the requests submitted by organizations representing official language minority communities. The Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada, or the FCFA, has made one clear request. The entire act needs to be overseen by the Treasury Board. Why did the minister not simply extend the Treasury Board's responsibility to encompass the entire act? I have other questions. Regarding immigration, the minister said that, coincidentally, since 2023, there has been a 4.4% target. In the Liberals' marketing strategy this year, they note that, coincidentally, just as Bill C‑13 was being introduced, they reached the target. In the bill, the only thing the Department of Citizenship and Immigration needs to do is set targets and indicators. We all know that we are behind and that we have some catching up to do. The FCFA recommends an increase of 12% to 20% to make up for lost time. Who will make the Department of Citizenship and Immigration fulfill its commitments? Who in this government will hold the department accountable so that it meets its immigration targets?
268 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/12/23 10:28:51 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, in response to your intervention, you are absolutely right, but there are so many things to say about that particular file. It is so very important. That is why we are so passionate and why we have been working diligently for many months. First of all, I would like to ask for unanimous consent to split my time with my colleague from Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, who is an excellent representative for his constituents.
84 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Speaker, I thank all my colleagues for their openness. I will therefore be sharing my time with the member for Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup. As I rise in the House today, I cannot help but feel disappointed. All that, for this? The Liberals tabled a white paper in February 2021 that clearly stated in black and white that the Treasury Board was to become the central agency responsible for implementing the Official Languages Act, as I pointed out in my question earlier. A few months later, in June 2021, the official languages minister at the time, currently the Minister of Foreign Affairs, introduced Bill C-32. An election was called two months later. What a coincidence. A lot of time was wasted, and we had to start over at square one. The new Minister of Official Languages introduced her bill, C-13, in March 2022. We were told that the bill solved all the problems and that it had to be passed as quickly as possible. The Liberals begged the opposition parties to co-operate and expedite the bill. It was referred to the Standing Committee on Official Languages, where we heard from witnesses so we could do our work effectively. All of a sudden, the Liberals moved a motion to cut off debate. We had to move so quickly that we wasted eight meetings discussing this problem that had been caused by the Liberals at committee. They are talking out of both sides of their mouths. They want us to move quickly, but they muzzled us for eight meetings. The opposition parties worked together to take the time needed. We reached out to the Liberals several times to try to get them to listen to reason. They wanted four meetings and we wanted twelve, so we split the difference and decided on eight. I think that is a good compromise. It shows that the opposition parties were acting in good faith. As for the Liberals, that is another story. The Conservative Party takes bilingualism in Canada very seriously. We worked hard in committee, as I mentioned. We took the time to listen to stakeholders across the country. We worked to respond to their concerns. I am talking about stakeholders like the Fédération des communautés francophone et acadienne du Canada, the Fédération nationale des conseils scolaires francophones, the Commissioner of Official Languages and many others. These people live with the reality of being a linguistic minority every day. The Liberals would have everyone living in these official language minority communities, particularly in New Brunswick, believe that they are responding to their demands.
451 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
I want to tell everyone living in those official language minority communities—whether it is in New Brunswick, the Northwest Territories or British Columbia—not to worry, because the Conservative Party of Canada is there for them and always will be. In committee, we received a pile of amendments from all parties. About 10 amendments were tabled by the NDP; the Bloc proposed over 80, and we tabled about 60. It comes as no surprise that the Liberals were ready. They had written a white paper, then introduced Bill C-32, followed by Bill C-13. They must have refined their bill, at least I hope so. However, they filed about 50 amendments, which is pretty interesting. In addition to the 50 amendments, it was clear that there was some dissension within the Liberal caucus. Among those 50 amendments, there were duplicates, which means that two Liberal members had tabled the same amendments. This goes to show how much time they are wasting. Are they even talking within their party? Are they talking to the anglophone members from Quebec? It is a mess. Then they want us to move quickly. They say this issue is so important. This is just one example of Liberal incompetence and inconsistency. Again this week in the House, the Liberals proposed amendments that could and should have been put forward in committee—but no, they are holding up the process. They claim that it needs to move quickly, but they are holding up the process. Worse, to hear the Liberals talk about official languages, the decline of the French language and the need to protect both official languages, it all seems to be so important to them. However, there was a vote at report stage yesterday, and the Deputy Prime Minister, whom we have been looking for in all the committees, and even in the House of Commons, did not even vote, even though we have a virtual application to do just that. The Minister of Justice, who is a Quebecker and is affected by this legislation, did not even vote. Worse yet, the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Quebec lieutenant, who is the main party involved and has responsibilities under this bill, did not even vote. Official languages and the decline of the French language are so very important to them—we had another clear demonstration of that yesterday. This government's lack of interest and disengagement is obvious again today. What day is it? It is Friday, the day when members have the least amount of time to speak. Who is in charge of the agenda? The Liberals are. Who chose to do this on a Friday? The Liberals did. What does that mean? It means that they do not want to hear about this, that they want to sweep it under the rug. That is obvious, because there is bickering within the Liberal caucus. This is just more smoke and mirrors, to create the illusion that the Liberals care about official languages. Let us talk about the stakeholders. We met several, but I want to talk about two in particular. The Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada, or FCFA, which represents 2.8 million French-speaking Canadians outside Quebec, was calling for six amendments. It was not a huge or unreasonable request. How many of those amendments were fully adopted? Not one was adopted. Good job, Liberals. The Conservative Party agrees with those recommendations and brought forward amendments along those lines. Unfortunately, the NDP-Liberal coalition ignored the FCFA. It did the same thing to the Commissioner of Official Languages. The Liberals and the NDP did not listen. The bill moved a step forward, but at a snail's pace. It is not that important, then. It was just one step forward. I think I would walk a long, long way for our official languages, but this bill, sadly, goes no farther than a single step. As parliamentarians, this was our chance to take concrete action to reverse the very real decline of French in Canada, and even in Quebec. It is deplorable that official language minority community stakeholders are not being listened to and get nothing but empty words. I am concerned about the future of Canada as a country bilingual in English and French. We must remember that we have a Governor General who is bilingual but does not speak French. When we talk about bilingualism in Canada, we are referring to the two official languages, the two founding languages. I was born a francophone in Canada, and my children speak French. I hope that my grandchildren will be able to speak French, here, in Canada. I am proud to be Canadian. I am proud to be a Quebecker. I am proud to represent the people of Portneuf—Jacques‑Cartier. I will fight tooth and nail for francophones in Quebec and across Canada. My ancestors fought that fight and I will continue fighting it. I am proud of our bilingual Canada, and I am not alone: More than 80% of Canadians value their bilingualism. I want to remind members of one thing. The Official Languages Act was introduced in 1969 and modernized in 1988. Who did that? The Conservatives. The Harper government was the first to recognize the Quebec nation in a united Canada. He understood Quebec and its unique linguistic reality, and he recognized that it was important for the country. Quebec has the largest pool of francophones in North America, and it must have the tools it needs to preserve its language and culture, which, by extension, will help francophone communities across Canada. Our leader, the member for Carleton also values the French language. He is educating his children in French and he speaks both official languages here in the House. He understands the challenges and is making an effort to protect and promote both of Canada's official languages. In closing, I would again like to reassure the official language minority communities. Unlike the Liberals, we have heard them very clearly and we will call for a single central agency and an enumeration of rights holders. We heard them. It is truly important to the Conservative Party of Canada that Canada remain an English-French bilingual country, and it will focus on reversing the decline of French and protecting both official languages.
1077 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/12/23 10:41:47 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Official Languages has very good questions and she is passionate about this issue, which is why she asks a lot of questions. She says that her government has doubled investments since 2015, but that is not the whole issue. Throwing money around, the way the Liberals are used to doing, is not necessarily the solution. We must have tools, such as empowering the Treasury Board as a central agency. It is important to put money into it, but that is not a magic bullet, and it is not a Liberal magic wand. Now, I do not understand this dogged determination to know a party's position ahead of time. I would like to remind the minister that, according to the procedures of the House, voting is a parliamentary right. If we want to respect House practices, we exercise our right to vote here. Even if I disagree with her way of doing things, I do appreciate my colleague and I would like to assure her that the Conservative Party will be here to vote.
179 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/12/23 10:44:06 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from La Pointe-de-l'Île. I was pleased to work very productively with him in committee. We are both interested in protecting French, which is in decline, and promoting both official languages. However, the Conservatives have a vision for Canada, while my colleague has a vision for Quebec. I completely agree with him. It is unacceptable that 20% of the money is going to English-speaking communities in Quebec. English is not under threat in Quebec and across Canada; French is. What is the proportion of anglophones in Quebec compared to francophone minorities outside Quebec? That would be 8%. Why is the Liberal government giving them 20%? If I had to speculate, I would say it was to buy the silence of anglophone MPs from Quebec. It makes me seriously wonder, and I am very much in tune with my Bloc Québécois colleague, whom I want to thank again for the work he did in committee.
169 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/12/23 10:46:02 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, yes, there is a problem with immigration. I would remind my colleague that this Liberal government has been in office since 2015. I cannot answer for them. The Liberals met the target this year, probably with the help of their marketing firm, making sure that they got good press and that everyone knew they met their immigration target. This has happened only once since 2003, so there is definitely a big problem. I want my colleague to know that we are going to do everything we can, once we are on the other side of the House, to ensure that official languages and the decline of French are a government priority.
113 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/12/23 10:58:37 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to return the favour and thank my hon. colleague, who is an active participant at the Standing Committee on Official Languages. He is doing a great job. The minister said she has a great relationship with Quebec's minister of the French language, Mr. Roberge. That is interesting because I saw Mr. Roberge make a statement about the massive investment in Quebec's anglophones. I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on that.
80 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/12/23 12:39:50 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, we can see how much the Liberals care about the Official Languages ​​Act. There are only three government members present to listen to our speeches. That is disappointing.
32 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/12/23 12:40:36 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would simply like to remind my colleague that we cannot do what we are not allowed to do either directly or indirectly. I want to apologize if I made a mistake. I am passionate about the French language.
41 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/12/23 12:41:04 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-13 
Mr. Speaker, I enjoyed the speech by my colleague from La Pointe-de-l'Île. I had the pleasure of working rigorously with him to improve Bill C-13. I would like to thank him for mentioning Gérald Godin. I think if someone were to dive into my family tree, they would likely find a connection between him and I in terms of passion for official languages and French, but not so much when it comes to our respective views on independence. I would like to ask an initial question related to what we saw in committee. I would like to hear my colleague's comments on the NDP's attitude, it being a member of the NDP-Liberal coalition. The NDP members prevented the bill from being improved. One thing they refused to do was to give all of the powers proposed in the bill to the Treasury Board as a central agency, as well as the rights holders. I think it is important to count the rights holders outside of Quebec rather than simply estimating their numbers. My second question is along the same lines as the Minister of Official Languages. What are my colleague's thoughts on the disappointment that Minister Roberge expressed when he discovered that far too much money was being given to English-speaking minorities in Quebec, when the common language of this province is French and English in Quebec is not in decline?
245 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/12/23 1:06:38 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to thank my colleague from Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, with whom I had the privilege of working on the Standing Committee on Official Languages. Indeed, we are unanimous and we have all worked towards the same goal, albeit in different ways. My colleague said she was proud of the result. I, for one, think we only got half the job done. We could have done a lot more, even though, as the saying goes, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. It had been a long time since the legislation had been modernized, so we should have used more aggressive means to obtain more immediate results. I had the opportunity to work with my colleague. In her speech, she often talked about access to education, but there is one amendment in particular on which I would like to hear her opinion. Why did she vote with the Liberals on the enumeration of rights holders? This is important because it gives us much more precise data than an estimate. We proposed an amendment to do what was provided for in the 2021 census and to put it into law so that future governments would be required to paint the most representative picture of reality possible, which has an impact on investments. Why did my colleague vote against this?
230 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/12/23 1:12:04 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have a quick question for my colleague. I was asking her about rights holders earlier. Now I have a question about the Treasury Board. The FCFA, which represents several organizations across Canada, asked that the Treasury Board be extended to the entire legislation. Why did my colleague vote with the Liberals again in the NDP-Liberal coalition?
60 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border