Senator Plett: Would Senator Quinn take a question?

Senator Quinn: Yes.

Senator Quinn: Thank you, Senator Housakos.

I think the committee has done an excellent job. I commend all the members of the committee and the ex officio members who participated, as well as the various witnesses we had. We have been a part of that democratic process as members of the committee.

But I’ve also come to this conclusion: There has been a lot of discussion here about the Constitution, the roles of senators and our rights. I think we have done our due diligence in having heavy debate during committee and in this chamber. I’m at the point where I’m saying that I am not elected. If this is something so dear to my heart, I think some of my colleagues said, “Go and run.” Run in the election. But I think my more valuable contribution in this institution is — I think you and I spoke on this — trying to do the sober second thought and trying to add value but also recognizing that the elected government has the right to govern, and it’s our job to challenge. We’ve challenged, and the mitigating factor for me is that we — all of us — agreed to a message that included public assurance that the government will not do what it said it wouldn’t do.

After 32 years in the public service, I have great confidence in that institution and I believe that the House and this institution will follow through and hold people to account, as the electorate should.

Hon. Jim Quinn: My question is for Senator Cormier in his capacity as Chair of the Standing Committee on Official Languages, or OLLO.

The Official Languages Committee undertook an exhaustive pre-study on Bill C-13. However, recently, the House of Commons Official Languages Committee made substantial changes to the bill at the request of the Government of Quebec. As a government priority, I expect the bill to be in the Senate soon. My question is as follows: Given New Brunswick’s unique constitutional position as the only bilingual province and the Senate’s role to give a voice to official language minority communities, what is the committee’s plan to ensure the bill is reflective of the views of francophones in New Brunswick and support the development of French and English linguistic minority communities in Canada?

Hon. René Cormier: Thank you for your question, Senator Quinn.

I recognize your passion and dedication for New Brunswick, and I appreciate having received your very important question in advance, so I will make sure I answer it properly.

With respect to the current process of modernizing our country’s Official Languages Act, the OLLO committee has always been and will continue to be very sensitive to the issues affecting official language minority communities, such as francophones in New Brunswick. I can assure you that francophones outside of Quebec, along with the English linguistic minorities in Quebec, have been and will continue to be heard by our committee and their interests are taken into due consideration. Actually, they are at the core of Bill C-13.

For instance, between 2017 and 2019 our committee conducted a comprehensive five-part study on the perspective of Canadians on the modernization of the act, including those of official language minority communities. During that study, we heard from approximately 300 witnesses, including nearly 200 in committee sessions and in 100 informal discussions during our study missions, which were held actually in places like Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick. Last year, as you mentioned, our committee conducted a pre-study of Bill C-13 where we have heard from organizations and experts on some of the provisions that will directly support the vitality and development of French and English linguistic minority communities in Canada, such as those related to positive measures to be taken by federal institutions. I invite you, senator, to consult our final report, which details some of the witnesses’ comments and observations in this regard.

Finally, concerning New Brunswick, it is not forgotten in Bill C-13. The province is explicitly mentioned six times in the bill, namely in the preamble and Part VII. It is mentioned that the Constitution provides that English and French are the official languages of New Brunswick and have equality of status and equal rights and privileges as to their use in all institutions of the legislature and Government of New Brunswick, and that the Constitution provides that the English language linguistic community and the French linguistic community in New Brunswick have equality of status and equal rights and privileges.

[Translation]

Hon. Jim Quinn: Honourable senators, I’m rising to speak to this amendment and to the overall discussion we have been having. I have not prepared notes for this, but I feel that it’s time I rise and say a few things, and I am willing to do that.

I am on the Transport Committee, I have been on the steering committee, and we have heard about the number of witnesses we’ve had, the number of deliberations, amendments and things of that nature. We have heard that we sent 26 over, 18 were approved, 2 were amended slightly and 6 were not accepted.

The one I found the most difficult was 4.2(2) and the fact that we had been told by the minister “big guys and little guys out,” the little guys being the user-generated content.

So we have had many discussions here, and I have heard different points of view. I’ve also taken the time to speak with a number of colleagues on 4.2(2) and the bill in general. That’s the beauty of the Senate: the experiences of people across the spectrum, whether former public servants, lawyers, doctors. People from all walks of life are here, and it’s a wealth of information and points of view. I appreciate that.

In my deliberation, I assure you this has been a struggle back and forth for me in terms of whether I will support this bill and whether I will support these amendments. As a former public servant — and some of the people I’ve talked to I have great respect for. I’m very proud to have spent 32 years in the public service. I am very proud of those institutions and the institutions of government, whether it’s the public service, the chamber, the Senate or any other institution.

We passed with unanimity an amendment to the message that would go back eventually to the House in which we said “public assurance.” I’m one person who believes that we need to have clarity in our laws, and I would prefer very much that we have 4.2(2) in the bill. Having said that, we’ve made this message and the amendment to it, which is something the government leader and my leader worked together on to change a few words to give it a little more oomph. I can argue that message doesn’t carry much weight for anything, but as a former member of that institution and now part of this institution, and having worked closely with the other place while I was in the Privy Council Office, I have to believe and trust that the voters of this country will hold folks to account when the time comes for that event to happen.

We have been given the public assurance that user-generated content is out. I have to thank Senator Plett because I thought there were several points in his speech that really influenced why I wanted to get up now, but the last one was the one that really made me want to stand up. He said that the “blue wave is coming.” For me, that is an assurance that the democratic process in this country will eventually run its course. If people are upset with the government because they have broken their promise — that user-generated content is out and they, in fact, allow regulatory development that breaks that very public declaration, not only in committee but in other places — then the people will speak.

That is something that has weighed heavily on me, but I want to thank Senator Plett for helping to give me the confidence to stand up and speak now at this juncture.

I wanted to share those thoughts and ask you to reflect on that.

I want to thank my colleagues who took the time and had the patience of having a discussion with me on where we are today. Thank you.

Hon. Leo Housakos: Thank you, Senator Quinn. I want to put on the record that I have enjoyed working with you immensely on Transport and Communication. You made great a contribution.

Of course, the electorate will have the final word, but in between those four years, they are paying approximately $127 million a year for us to be here and do some legislative work, wordsmithing, and speak on their behalf, advocate and hold the government to account.

Do you not think it’s important that we fulfill our constitutional duty, especially on something that is as controversial as this? You were on the front lines and saw how controversial it was. You said in your speech that you were torn when it came to this bill.

So why would we fold as an institution at the feet of the government so quickly? On far less in the past, we have sent legislation back and insisted. Don’t you think that after all we’ve heard from so many witnesses on such a controversial issue, we should — not overrule the elected body; we should await the final democratic decision of the electorate — but don’t you think we have a legislative responsibility on behalf of all of those voices to insist at least one more time?