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.
Minutes of Proceedings
Conservative
Bloc Québécois
NDP
The committee resumed its clause-by-clause study of the Bill.
The committee resumed clause-by-clause consideration on Clause 6 of the Bill.
The committee resumed consideration of the amendment of Bernard Généreux, as amended, — That Bill C-13, in Clause 6, be amended by adding after line 8 on page 5 the following:
“communication means any form of communication, including oral, written, electronic, virtual or other communications; (communication)
publication means any form of publication, regardless of the medium, including printed, electronic, virtual or other publications; (publication)
service means any form of service provided or made available, including oral, written, electronic, virtual or other services. (service)”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Bernard Généreux, as amended, and it was agreed to.
“re-establishment means, in relation to the demographic weight of French linguistic minority communities, a return of the demographic weight of all members of those communities whose first official language spoken is French to the level it had at the time of the census of population of Canada taken by Statistics Canada in 1971; (rétablissement)”
Debate arose thereon.
Marc G. Serré moved, — That the amendment be amended by replacing the word “re-establishment” with the word “restoration”.
By unanimous consent, the question was put on the subamendment of Marc G. Serré and it was agreed to.
Niki Ashton moved, — That the amendment be amended by adding after the word “1971” the following: “, namely, 6.6% of the population outside Quebec ”.
At 4:00 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 4:02 p.m., the sitting resumed.
After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of Niki Ashton and it was agreed to.
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Arielle Kayabaga, as amended, and it was agreed to.
“employee includes an employee who is an employer representative, a person who performs for an employer activities whose primary purpose is to enable the person to acquire knowledge or experience, a person who performs voluntary work for an employer, a person who has been placed by a help agency, and a contractor whose services are retained; (employé)”
Debate arose thereon.
Niki Ashton moved, — That the amendment be amended by deleting the words “a person who performs voluntary work for an employer,”.
After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of Niki Ashton and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Niki Ashton, Mario Beaulieu, Francis Drouin, Bernard Généreux, Joël Godin, Jacques Gourde, Angelo Iacono, Arielle Kayabaga, Patricia Lattanzio, Richard Lehoux, Marc G. Serré — 11;
NAYS: — 0.
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Mario Beaulieu, as amended, and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Niki Ashton, Mario Beaulieu, Bernard Généreux, Joël Godin, Jacques Gourde, Richard Lehoux — 6;
NAYS: Francis Drouin, Angelo Iacono, Arielle Kayabaga, Patricia Lattanzio, Marc G. Serré — 5.
“Section 3 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (2):
(3) For greater certainty, French linguistic minority community means a French-speaking minority community outside Quebec.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Joël Godin and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Bernard Généreux, Joël Godin, Jacques Gourde, Richard Lehoux — 4;
NAYS: Niki Ashton, Mario Beaulieu, Francis Drouin, Angelo Iacono, Arielle Kayabaga, Patricia Lattanzio, Marc G. Serré — 7.
Clause 6, as amended, carried.
On Clause 7,
Joël Godin moved, — That Bill C-13, in Clause 7, be amended by adding after line 13 on page 5 the following:“(a.1) language rights are to be interpreted so as to take into account the official languages dynamic in each province and territory;”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Joël Godin and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Mario Beaulieu, Bernard Généreux, Joël Godin, Jacques Gourde, Richard Lehoux — 5;
NAYS: Niki Ashton, Francis Drouin, Angelo Iacono, Arielle Kayabaga, Patricia Lattanzio, Marc G. Serré — 6.
“(d) language rights are to be interpreted by taking into account that French is in a minority situation in Canada and North America due to the predominant use of English and that the English linguistic minority community in Quebec and the French linguistic minority communities in the other provinces and territories have different needs.”
At 4:33 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 4:39 p.m., the sitting resumed.
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Mario Beaulieu and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Niki Ashton, Mario Beaulieu, Francis Drouin, Bernard Généreux, Joël Godin, Jacques Gourde, Angelo Iacono, Arielle Kayabaga, Richard Lehoux, Marc G. Serré — 10;
NAYS: — 0.
“3.2 (1) For greater certainty, the implementation of this Act shall be carried out in accordance with the jurisdiction and powers of the provinces and territories, including with the Charter of the French language.
(2) Where there is a conflict, the Charter of the French language prevails over the incompatible provisions of this Act.”
The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it was beyond the scope of the Bill, as provided on page 770 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Third Edition.
Whereupon, Mario Beaulieu 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: Niki Ashton, Francis Drouin, Bernard Généreux, Joël Godin, Jacques Gourde, Angelo Iacono, Arielle Kayabaga, Patricia Lattanzio, Richard Lehoux, Marc G. Serré — 10;
NAYS: Mario Beaulieu — 1.
Clause 7, as amended, carried.
Clause 8 carried.
Clause 9 carried.
Clause 10 carried.
On New Clause 10.1,
“10.1 Section 14 of the Act becomes subsection 14(1) and is amended by adding the following after that subsection:
(2) The choice of either official language by a person appearing before a federal court shall not be prejudicial to that person and, in particular, shall not affect the number of judges or other officers who hear the case, where the court in question sits with a panel of more than one judge or other officer.”
Debate arose thereon.
Joël Godin moved, — That the amendment be amended by deleting the following: “and, in particular, shall not affect the number of judges or other officers who hear the case, where the court in question sits with a panel of more than one judge or other officer.”.
At 4:47 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 4:48 p.m., the sitting resumed.
After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of Joël Godin and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Niki Ashton, Mario Beaulieu, Francis Drouin, Bernard Généreux, Joël Godin, Jacques Gourde, Angelo Iacono, Arielle Kayabaga, Patricia Lattanzio, Richard Lehoux, Marc G. Serré — 11;
NAYS: — 0.
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Mario Beaulieu, as amended, and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Niki Ashton, Mario Beaulieu, Francis Drouin, Bernard Généreux, Joël Godin, Jacques Gourde, Angelo Iacono, Arielle Kayabaga, Patricia Lattanzio, Richard Lehoux, Marc G. Serré — 11;
NAYS: — 0.
On Clause 11,
Patricia Lattanzio moved, — That Bill C-13, in Clause 11, be amended by replacing line 25 on page 7 with the following:“(2) Subsection 16(3) of the Act is replaced by the following:
(3) The Government of Canada must, when making appointments to the federal courts, ensure that federal courts are able to meet their duty under subsection (1).
16.1 The Government of Canada must take into account the importance of equal access to justice in both official languages when appointing judges to superior courts.
16.2 (1) A person who submits an application for appointment as a judge of a superior court shall indicate their skill level in both official languages.
(2) The Office of the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs shall evaluate, in respect of every candidate who indicated that they have skills in both official languages, the candidate’s ability to speak and understand clearly both official languages.
16.3 The Office of the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs shall provide the necessary language training to the judges of the superior courts.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Patricia Lattanzio and it was agreed to on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Niki Ashton, Francis Drouin, Angelo Iacono, Arielle Kayabaga, Patricia Lattanzio, Marc G. Serré — 6;
NAYS: Mario Beaulieu, Bernard Généreux, Joël Godin, Jacques Gourde, Richard Lehoux — 5.
At 5:22 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 5:27 p.m., the sitting resumed in camera.
It was agreed, — That, in relation to the study of language regimes in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, and Ireland, the proposed preliminary submission for the committee’s travel to the United Kingdom and Ireland during spring 2023 be adopted.
At 5:31 p.m., the committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.