Skip to main content Start of content

LANG Committee Meeting

Notices of Meeting include information about the subject matter to be examined by the committee and date, time and place of the meeting, as well as a list of any witnesses scheduled to appear. The Evidence is the edited and revised transcript of what is said before a committee. The Minutes of Proceedings are the official record of the business conducted by the committee at a sitting.

For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.

If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.

Previous day publication Next day publication
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
 
Meeting No. 46
 
Thursday, October 20, 2005
 

The Standing Committee on Official Languages met at 8:06 a.m. this day, in Room 308, West Block, the Chair, Pablo Rodriguez, presiding.

 

Members of the Committee present: Françoise Boivin, Paule Brunelle, Guy Côté, Jean-Claude D'Amours, Marc Godbout, Yvon Godin, Gary Goodyear, Guy Lauzon, Pierre Poilievre, Pablo Rodriguez, Hon. Raymond Simard and Maurice Vellacott.

 

Acting Members present: Hon. Don Boudria for Françoise Boivin.

 

In attendance: Library of Parliament: Marion Ménard, Analyst; Élise Hurtubise-Loranger, Analyst. House of Commons: Susan Baldwin, Legislative Clerk; Jean-Francois Lafleur, Legislative Clerk; Wayne Cole, Legislative Clerk.

 
The Committee proceeded to the consideration of matters related to Committee business.
 

Yvon Godin moved, — That, notwithstanding the decision of the Committee from October 6, 2005 to establish a deadline for the submission of proposed amendments to Bill S-3, amendments proposed by the government be considered by the Committee during the clause-by-clause study of Bill S-3.

 

Whereupon, Guy Lauzon appealed the decision of the Chair.

The question: "Shall the decision of the Chair be sustained?" was put and the decision was sustained on the following recorded division: YEAS: Don Boudria, Paule Brunelle, Guy Côté, Jean-Claude D'Amours, Marc Godbout, Yvon Godin, Raymond Simard — 7; NAYS: Gary Goodyear, Guy Lauzon, Pierre Poilievre, Maurice Vellacott — 4.

 

The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 7; NAYS: 4.

 

Guy Lauzon moved, — That, pursuant to Standing Order 97.1, the Standing Committee on Official Languages report to the House requesting an extension of thirty sitting days to consider Bill S-3 given that the workload of the past few weeks has prevented the Committee from giving the Bill the consideration it requires.

Debate arose thereon.

 

The question was put on the motion and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 7.

 
Pursuant to the Order of Reference of Wednesday, April 13, 2005, the Committee resumed consideration of Bill S-3, An Act to amend the Official Languages Act (promotion of English and French).
 

On Clause 1,

Raymond Simard moved, — That Bill S-3, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing lines 7 to 12 on page 1 with the following:

“(2) Every federal institution has the duty to ensure that positive measures are taken for the implementation of the commitments under subsection (1). ”

Debate arose thereon.

 

The question was put on the amendment of Raymond Simard and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 2.

 
By unanimous consent, the Committee reconsidered the amendment of Raymond Simard previously adopted which read as follows: That Bill S-3, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing lines 7 to 12 on page 1 with the following:

“(2) Every federal institution has the duty to ensure that positive measures are taken for the implementation of the commitments under subsection (1). ”

 

Jean-Claude D'Amours moved, — That the amendment be amended by adding after the word “subsection (1). ” the following:

“For greater certainty, this implementation is done while respecting the jurisdiction and powers of the provinces.”

Debate arose thereon.

 

The question was put on the subamendment of Jean-Claude D'Amours and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 11; NAYS: 0.

 

The question was put on the amendment of Raymond Simard, as amended, and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 7; NAYS: 4.

 

At 10:57 a.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 11:11 a.m., the sitting resumed.

 
Guy Lauzon moved, — That Bill S-3, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing line 13 on page 1 with the following:

“(3) The Governor in Council shall, after consultation of the Standing Committee on Official Languages of each House of Parliament and after approval of the recommendations of that committee by resolution of each House, make”

Debate arose thereon.

 

The question was put on the amendment of Guy Lauzon and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 7.

 
Raymond Simard moved, — That Bill S-3, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing lines 15 and 16 on page 1 with the following:

“other than the Senate, House of Commons, Library of Parliament, office of the Senate Ethics Officer or office of the Ethics Commissioner, prescri-”

Debate arose thereon.

 

The question was put on the amendment of Raymond Simard and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 
Paule Brunelle moved, — That Bill S-3, in Clause 1, be amended by adding after line 19 on page 1 the following:

“(4) The Province of Quebec is excluded from the operation of subsections (2) and (3).”

 

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it was contrary to the principle of the Bill, as provided on page 654 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice.

 

Clause 1, as amended, carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 2.

 

On Clause 2,

Raymond Simard moved, — That Bill S-3 be amended by deleting Clause 2.

 

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it proposed the deletion of the clause, as provided on page 656 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice.

 
Paule Brunelle moved, — That Bill S-3, in Clause 2, be amended by replacing lines 24 to 26 on page 1 with the following:

“shall take, as regards the Province of Quebec, such measures as that Minister considers appropriate to advance the equality of status and use of English and French in Canadian society and, as regards the other provinces and the territories, appropriate measures to advance that equality, and, without re-”

 

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it was contrary to the principle of the Bill, as provided on page 654 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice.

 
Pierre Poilievre moved, — That Bill S-3, in Clause 2, be amended by replacing line 24 on page 1 with the following:

“shall take appropriate measures to ensure”

 

By unanimous consent, the amendment was withdrawn.

 
Pierre Poilievre moved, — That Bill S-3, in Clause 2, be amended by replacing line 24 on page 1 with the following:

“shall take all reasonable measures to advance”

 

By unanimous consent, the amendment was withdrawn.

 
Guy Lauzon moved, — That Bill S-3, in Clause 2, be amended by replacing line 24 on page 1 with the following:

“shall, while respecting the jurisdiction and powers of the provinces and territories and after consultation of the Standing Committee on Official Languages of each House of Parliament and after approval of the recommendations of that committee by resolution of each House, take reasonable measures to advance”

Debate arose thereon.

 

The question was put on the amendment of Guy Lauzon and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 7.

 
Guy Lauzon moved, — That Bill S-3, in Clause 2, be amended by replacing line 24 on page 1 with the following:

“shall, while respecting the jurisdiction and powers of the provinces and territories, take the reasonable measures to advance”

Debate arose thereon.

 

The question was put on the amendment of Guy Lauzon and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 5.

 
Pierre Poilievre moved, — That Bill S-3, in Clause 2, be amended by replacing lines 26 and 27 on page 1 with the following:

“French in Canadian society and, may”

Debate arose thereon.

 

The question was put on the amendment of Pierre Poilievre and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 7.

 
Pierre Poilievre moved, — That Bill S-3, in Clause 2, be amended by replacing line 26 on page 1 with the following:

“French in Canada and, without re-”

Debate arose thereon.

 

The question was put on the amendment of Pierre Poilievre and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 7.

 
Pierre Poilievre moved, — That Bill S-3, in Clause 2, be amended by replacing line 27 on page 1 with the following:

“stricting the generality of the foregoing, shall”

Debate arose thereon.

 

The question was put on the amendment of Pierre Poilievre and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 6.

 

Clause 2, as amended, was negatived by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 7.

 

On Clause 3,

Paule Brunelle moved, — That Bill S-3, in Clause 3, be amended by adding after line 36 on page 1 the following:

“(1.1) Subsection (1) does not apply to a complaint in respect of a right or duty under Part VII made by a person resident in the Province of Quebec or made by a person resident in another province or a territory in relation to anything done or omitted to be done in the Province of Quebec.”

 

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it was contrary to the principle of the Bill, as provided on page 654 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice.

 

Clause 3 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 2.

 

The Title carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 2.

 

The question: "Shall the Bill, as amended, carry?" was put and was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 2.

 

ORDERED, — That the Chair report the Bill, as amended, to the House.

 

At 12:36 p.m., the Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.

 



Mark D'Amore
Clerk of the Committee

 
 
2005/10/27 1:15 p.m.