Manitoba Committee Hansard — 27 September 1983 (Public Expenditures Committee, Sitting 40, 32nd Legislature, 2nd Session)

32-2-pe40

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

ISSN 0542-5492 Second Session - Thirty-Second Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba STANDING COMMITTEE on PRIVILEGES and ELECTIONS 31-32 Elizabeth 11 Chairman Mr. A. Anstett Constituency of Springfie/d VOL. XXXI No. 40 - 2:00 p.m., TUESDAY, 27 SEPTEMBER, 1983. Printed by the Office of the Queens Printer. ProVInce of Manitoba

MANITO BA LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBLY Thirty-Second Legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation Name ADAM, Hon. A.R. (Pete) ANSTETT, Andy ASHTON, Steve BANMAN, Robert (Bob) SLAKE, David R. (Dave) BROWN, Arnold BUCKLASCHUK, Hon. John M. CARROLL, Q.C., Henry N. CORRIN, Brian COWAN, Hon. Jay DESJARDINS, Hon. Laurent DODICK, Doreen DOERN, Russell DOLIN, Hon. Mary Beth DOWNEY, James E. DRIEDGER, Albert ENNS, Harry EVANS, Hon. Leonard S. EYLER, Phil FILMON, Gary FOX, Peter GOURLAY, D.M. (Doug) GRAHAM, Harry HAMMOND, Gerrie HARAPIAK, Harry M. HARPER, Elijah HEMPHILL, Hon. Maureen HYDE, Lloyd JOHNSTON, J.

Frank KOSTYRA, Hon. Eugene KOVNATS, Abe LECUYER, Gerard LYON, Q.C., Hon. Sterling MACKLING, Q.C., Hon. AI MALINOWSKI, Donald M. MANNESS, Clayton McKENZIE, J. Wally MERCIER, Q.C., G.W.J. (Gerry) NORDMAN, Rurik (Ric) OLESON, Charlotte ORCHARD, Donald PAWLEY, Q.C., Hon. Howard R. PARASIUK, Hon. Wilson PENNER, Q.C., Hon. Roland PHILLIPS, Myrna A. PLOHMAN, Hon. John RANSOM, A. Brian SANTOS, Conrad SCHROEDER, Hon. Ylc SCOTT, Don SHERMAN, L.R. (Bud) SMITH, Hon. Muriel STEEN, Warren STORIE, Hon. Jerry T. URUSKI, Hon. Bill USKIW, Hon. Samuel WALDING, Hon. D. James Constituency Ste.

Rose Springfield Thompson La Verendrye Minnedosa Rhin eland Gimli Brandon West Ellice Churchill St. Bon iface Aiel Elm wood Kildonan Arthur Emerson Lakeside Brandon East River East Tuxedo Concordia Swan River Virden Kirkfield Park The Pas Rupertsland Logan Portage la Prairie Sturgeon Creek Seven Oaks Niakwa Radisson Charleswood St. James St. Johns Morris Roblin- Russell St. Norbert Assiniboia Gl adstone Pembina Selkirk Transcona Fort Rouge Wolseley Dauphin Turtle Mountain Burrows Rossmere lnkster Fort Garry Os borne River Heights Flin Flon lnterlake Lac du Bonnet St.

Vital Party NDP NDP NDP PC PC PC NDP IND NDP NDP NDP NDP NDP NDP PC PC PC NDP NDP PC NDP PC PC PC NDP NDP NDP PC PC NDP PC NDP PC NDP NDP PC PC PC PC PC PC NDP NDP NDP NDP NDP PC NDP NDP NDP PC NDP PC NDP NDP NDP NDP

LEGISLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA THE STANDING CO MMITTEE ON PRIVILEGES AND ELECTIONS Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 YIME - 2:00 p.m. LOCATION - Ste. Anne, Manitoba CHAIRMAN - Mr. Andy Anstett (Springfield) ATTENDANCE - QUORUM - 6 Members of the Committee present: Hon. Messrs. Desjard ins and Penner; Hon. Mrs. Smith Messrs. Ans tett, Brown, Eyler , Graham, Lecuyer and Scott WITNESSES: Mr. Norbert Ritchot, Private Citizen Mrs. Joan Chaput, Private Citizen Ms. Cecile Mulaire, Private Citizen Mr. Robert Freynet, Private Citizen Mr. Maurice Prince, Association des pro canadiens Mr. George Leger, Private Citizen Mr.

Eugeme Kirouac, Bureau d'admin istration de la Caisse populaire de La Broquerie Mr. Raymond Boily, Private Citizen Mr. Alfred Laurencelle, Comite de centenaire de La Broquerie Mr. Lionel Joyal, Private Citizen Ms. Beatrice Freynet-Boi ly, Private Citizen Mr. Armand Desharnais, Comite cultural de St. Pierre Mr. John Loewen, R.M. of Ha nover Dr. Archambault, Private Citizen Mr. Rino Ouel let, Comite de parents des ecoles franc;:ais de La Broquerie Ms. Michelle Freynet-Arbez, Private Citizen MATTERS UNDER DISCUSSION: Proposed Resolution to amend

Section 23 of The Manitoba Act. MR. CHAIRMAN: Committee come to order. The next person on our list is M.J. Fisette, Federation des Aines Franco-Manitobains, M.J. Fisette, please; Delores Legal; Norbert Ritchot. Please proceed. MR. N. RITCHOT: Monsieur le President, mesdames, messieurs les membres du comite. Pourquoi tant de cris de la part des opposants a I'

article 23? Pourquoi sont-ils pris de panique? Ont-ils peur de devoir sortir de leur contort de maitre et seigneur? Messieurs, depuis 90 ans, nous acceptons, nous endurons, nous tolerons, et nous esperons qu'un jour 758 les anglo-manitobains vont comprendre que d'autres sont differents d'eux, que d'autres ont une langue differente, des priorites differentes.

Apres 90 ans d'attente, nous realisons qu'encore aujourd'hui, trop nombreux sont ceux qui ne voient pas l'avantage d'ouvrir leurs horizons en apprenant une deuxieme langue, ou tout au moins en acceptant que d'autres puissent vouloir vivre un peu differemment d'eux, si ce n'est qu'en utilisant une langue differente de la leur. 11 est heureux que nous ayons actuellement un go uvernement provincial do nt au moins certains membres font preuve de conscience professionnelle, de justice, d'integrite et de leadership.

Puissent-ils se meriter ces memes qualificatifs lorsque ce conflit sur !'article 23 sera finalise de fac;:on definitive et irreversible. Au gouvernement Pawley, je dis bravo et tenez bon dans votre cheminement d'i ntegrite face a ce debat politique. J'a ppuie vermement la resolution qui a ete negociee en mai dernier par la Societe franco-manitobaine et le gouvernement Pawley pour amender !'article 23 de I' Acte du Manitoba. Merci, beaucoup. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Are there any questions for Mr. Ritchot from members of the committee? Seeing none, thank you very much for your presentation here today.

Gerard Desrosiers, Gerard Desrosiers; Gabrielle St. Hila ire-Mulaire, Gabrielle St. Hila ire-Mulaire; Gill es Hebert, Gill es Hebert; Lucienne Boucher, Lucienne Boucher; Mayor Roger Smith, Town of Ste. Anne; Joan Chaput. MRS. J. CHAPUT: Mr. President, members of the committee ... MR. CHAIRMAN: Could you wait one moment please until the copies are distri buted? Please proceed. MRS. J. CHAPUT: Mr. President and members of the committee. I do not want to come up here and reiterate the facts once again.

We are all very aware that Canada is legally a bilingual country, and we have committed an injustice in denying the Francophones of Manitoba their language, at one time in education, as well as in provincial and federal services. You are aware of the background history and laws better than I. What I would like to present is my point of view as a unilingual Anglophone, and also an educator in our public school system. I believe a second language can only enhance our country and add quality and interest to our culture.

I have travelled in Europe and am convinced that countries with more than one language and culture are more open-minded, more interesting and more receptive to growth. I believe it is a step forward in wiping out prejudices and in understanding others in a very small world.

Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 I look at the development of a second language as a skill that can be learned, an improvement in education just as a Master's Degree is a sign of additional education compared to a Grade 12 graduate. I can unde rstand that times may be awkward within the next 10 to 20 years, but we are establishing our laws for the future. The current trend is sending thousands of youngsters into our Immersion programs, and it is likely that in 20 years the majority of graduates will be fluent in both languages and, therefore, will not reflect any bias in job choice or alternatives.

Teaching and living in Ste. An ne has been a rewarding experience, giving me an opportunity to witness two cultures and two languages working harmoniously together toward the same goals. But neither am I blind to the arguments, the misunderstandings, and the prejudices arising from the language di fferences. How ever, I grew up in a very unilin gual Fort Garry and these same feelings existed based on what side of Pembina Hig hway you lived on.

People will always find some issue to allow segreg ati on, di fferences and prejudices to flourish, but there is no reason to. stifle one of two national languages, or deprive Francophones of comparative educational, provincial, and federal services in their mother tongue. I believe that a law which truly gives Manitoba a chance to be bilingual, to express ourselves in our chosen official language must be supported and applauded.

In closing I would like to state that I, and many other unili ngual Anglopho nes, do not see the Francophones and their language as a threat, but rather as a challenge to broaden our personal kn owledge and our understanding of the world and the people who inhabit it. Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Ques tions for Mrs. Chaput from members of the committee? Mr. Doern. MR. R. DOERN: Did I understand you to say, Mrs. Chaput, that you are a teacher? MRS. J. CHAPUT: I am. MR. R. DOERN: May I ask what subjects you teach? MRS. J. CHAPUT: At the present, I am a guidance counselor at the High School in Ste. Anne here.

MR. R. DOERN: I was just wondering, as a professional educator, whether you think that the teaching of His tory may be as helpful in understanding another people, as well as the study of langua ges? MRS. J. CHAPUT: Definitely . Definitely , it's just as helpful, but I think studying the othe( languages brings home the present differences in culture. MR. R.

DOERN: I wonder if you might also recognize that some people have fairly extensive knowledge of other countries, for example, Russian, Ch inese, French, German, etc., etc., and maybe an appreciation of those people, and yet speak little or no language from that area? MRS. J. CHAPUT: I can appreciate that, but in my own personal experience - I studied His tory all through 759 high school and I cannot say that I really understand another culture, another country, until I was able to get to know the language, the background and the beliefs of the people.

My travelling, of course, aided that a great deal and not everybody has that opportunity, but I think studying a language can enhance that. MR. R. DOERN: Thank you very much. MR. CHAIRMAN: Further questions for Mrs. Chaput from members of the committee? Seeing none, thank you very much for your presentation here today. Gill es Normandeau; Pierre Palud; Claudette Lavack; Cecile Mulaire. Please proceed. MS. C. MULAIRE: Monsieur le President, membres du comite. Je m'adresse a vous avec confiance car je crois a votre sens de la justice. Je suis une canadien ne-franc;:aise.

L'arrivee de mes ancetres dans ce pays n'est pas d'hier; les Gagnon sont arrives au Canada en 16 40. Et pourtant je ne peux pas dire que je me sens "chez nous" dans ma province du Manitoba car partout ou je va en dehors de I"T'on petit village, je dois me servir d'une langue qui n'est pas la mienne. Voyez-vous, messieurs et dames, la langue franc;:aise pour moi, ce n' est pas seulement un outils de communication. Elle fait

partie de toute ma personne. Je ne pourrais m'en detacher sans que ea fasse mal ... Je peux en parler une autre bien sOr, mais c'est la langue franc;:aise qui traduira le plus totalement ce que je ressens, ce que je pense, ce que je suis. Et si vous etes surpris que je puisse parler, lire et ecrire le franc;:ais alor s que la loi in terdisait son enseignement durant mes annees d'ecole, c'est que je l'ai apprise malgre la loi, clandestinement. Mes parents savaient qu'ils etaient dans la verite et une loi illegale ne pouvait leur en lever ce dr oit fondame ntal de demeurer fideles a eux-memes.

Vous n'etes pas sans vous rendre compte que nous sommes une race fiere et tenace. Nous avons survecu ces annees de tyrannies, d'ecrasements, de luttes qui durent depuis 93 ans. Nous ne liichons pas et nous sommes determines plus que jamais a exiger un droit qui nous revient.

Ce n'est pas un cadeau que nous vous demandons ma is nous vous offrons une opportunite d'exprimer votre sens du "British Fair Play." J'a ppuie avec force et conviction la resolution pour amender !'article 23 de I'Acte du Manitoba telle que negociee au mois de mai entre les gouvernements federal, provincial et la Societe franco-manitobaine . . . Je me permets de raver . . . tout comme Martin Luther King, je fais un reve . . . que peut-etre un jour, justice sera faite et qu'avec mes compatriotes, je pourrai enfin dire: "Je suis bien, je suis chez-moi dans ma province." MR. CH AIRMAN: Thank you, Ms. Mulair e.

Any qu estions for Ms. Mulair e from mem bers of the committee? Mr. Doern. MR. R. DOERN: Based on your origina l open ing statement, I was wondering whether you think it is

Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 realistic that some time in the future all Manitobans, or all areas of Manitoba, will be bilingual. MS. C. MULAIRE: Je ne vous demande pas de devenir bilingue, je vous demande de respecter les droits des francophones. On ne demande pas aux anglophones d'apprendre le franvais s'ils ne veulent pas. Mais on voudrait que nous, les francophones, on puissent au moins avoir des services et pouvoir se servir de notre langue partout au Manitoba. MR. R. DOERN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: Further questions? Mr. Graham. MR. H. GRAHAM: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Through you to Ms. Mulaire, you stated that you weren't able to receive instruction in French when you went to school. Was that correct? MS. C. MULAIRE: Nous avons eu !'education en fra nvais. Mais c'e st pas a cause des lois du gouvernement. C'etait parce que les professeurs et les parents le donnait. C'etait ajoute au programme. MR. H. GRAHAM: Ms. Mulaire, would it surprise you if I told you I knew people who wrote departmental exams in French in the Province of Manitoba 40 or 50 years ago? MS. C. MULAIRE: J'ai rien a repondre. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Graham. MR. H. GRAHAM: No, that was all I wanted. MR.

CHAIRMAN: Further questions by members? Mr. Lecuyer. MR. G. LECUYER: Monsieur le President, Madame Mulaire, est-ce que les examens du ministere dont on vient de faire etat - est-ce qu'on parle plutot, est-ce qu'on parle pas a ce moment-la d'e xamens de Conversational French en douzieme annee? MS. C. MULAIRE: Qui existaient dans ce temps-la? Probablement. MR. G. LECUYER: Merci. MR. CHAIRMAN: Further questions for Ms. Mulaire? Seeing none, Ms. Mulaire, thank you very much for being here today and making your presentation to the committee. Robert Freynet, please proceed. MR. R.

FREYNET: Monsieur le President, membres du comite. Les yeux du pays entier sont sur le Manitoba. L'image qu'on projetera sera-t-e lle une image de tolerance et de justice ou une image de conservatisme regressif? Certains disent que !'article 23 coOte trop cher. Mais cet argument pali quand on considere qu'il s'agit de restituer des droits constitution nets illegalement refoules 760 depuis pres d'un siecle. D'autres craignent d'etre forces a apprendre deux langues. Avec !'article 23, on ne nous enleve aucune liberte, mais au contraire, on nous en donne une autre.

Une fois que les services en franvais seront instaures, je suis certain que la controverse act uelle s'e teindr a. Ce qui est penible, c'est de prolonger cette angois se de transition ressentie par la province entiere avec ses audiences publiques et autres tactiques de retardement. Si le Manitoba est en fait cons tit utionn el lement bil ingue tel que decrete a l'unanimi te par les neuf juges de la cours supreme du Canada, declarons-le sans hesitation et instauront les services en franvais. Je ne demande pas pour la generosite, mais je demande pour la simple justice.

L'in itiative courageuse et positive du gouvernement provincial doit etre applaudie. J'e ncourage les membres de tous les partis de la legislature d'appuyer !'entente conclue en mai entre la Societe franco-manitobaine, la province et le gouvernement federal sans la diluer davantage. Avanvons avec confiance et concluons cette affaire sans plus de delais. Merci. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Freynet. Questions by members? Mr. Doern. MR. R.

DOERN: I was just wondering if you could com ment on whether or not you bel ieve tha t a constitutional amendment, which is not an ordina ry piece of legislation, but something that is sign ificant and historic, should have widespread public support. MR. R. FREYNET: Je pense que en ce qui concerne les droits de la minorite, j'ai pas !'impression qu'on a besoin du support de la majorite. Ca sera en fait la tyrannie de la majorite puis la constitution est la pour proteger les droits d'une minorite aussi bien que les droits d'une majorite. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please.

As I mentioned this morning, displays from the gallery are not permitted, either in the Assembly or its committees. Mr. Doern. MR. R. DOERN: I was also wondering whether you could understand that some people who are following the whole constitutional process in our province are somewhat suspicious of the fact that it appears to have been ham mered out beh ind closed do ors. I was wondering whether you had any doubts or concerns about the process by which this has come forward in the public. Are you satisfied with the government's handling of the issue, or do you think it could have beer. better handled? MR. R.

FREYNET: Je pense que le gouvernement s'est adresse a la bonne institution quand ils ont negocie avec la S.F.M. et je suis derriere la S.F.M. entierement. Elle me represente. MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Chairman, maybe I can put my question in a slightly other way. Aside from the SFM, do you think that some members of the public feel that a deal was struck behind closed doors and that the

Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 whole matter should have been more in the open and more open in the sense of involving more people or involving the entire population of Manitoba, rather than one segment? MR. R. FREYNET: Je pense que ces audienc es publiq ues-ci offrent amplement d' opportunite pour s'exprimer. MR. R. DOERN: Right. Thank you very much. MR. CHAIRMAN: Further questions by members of the committee? Seeing none, Mr. Freynet, thank you very much for your presentation here today.

Sister Therese Cloutier; Raymonde Graham; Roger Lafreniere; Elaine Tougas, Elaine Tougas - keep helping me, Larry, I'll learn yet. Therese Bouchard, Therese Bouchard; Normand Roy, Normand Roy; Father Laval Cloutier; Raymond Boi ly; Gerald Fontai ne; Daniel Tougas; Maurice Prince. Mr. Lecuyer. MR. G. LECUYER: Je remarque que j'ai vu sur la lisle M. Maurice Prince et je me suis demande si il y avail deux M. Maurice Prince parce que j'ai vu M. Maurice Prince se presenter aux audiences a Winnipeg et en autant que je m'en souvienne, il n'est pas permis de se presenter une deuxieme fois aux memes audiences. MR. M.

PRINCE: Monsieur le President, est-ce que je pourrais ... MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, order please. Only members are allowed to speak to points of order. Mr. Doern. MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Chairman, we had a discussion of this the other day, and I just want to point out for your consideration that the Franco-Manitoban Society has had representatives, I believe, at every hearing, all eight. Manitoba 23 has been listed in all eight areas of the province. Mr. Eric Maldoff made a statement, when he spoke, that he would be prepared to come back from Montreal with his entourage and make a submission later on.

I also see this morning, I don't know if he's here now, Mr. Magnet, who was from Ottawa, who was present. I don't know whether he intends to speak. it would seem to me to be in order for Mr. Prince to speak, especially in view of the hearing in Ste. Anne, and especially in view of his interest in the issue, and I think I'm looking forward to hearing from him. He should certainly stimulate some debate and interest. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Desjard ins. HON. L DESJARDINS: Mr.

Chairman, on the same point of order. it's not a question of the group that is represented. it is clearly - and in all the years that I have been a member of the House - the rules that you only have a chance to speak once in a presentation such as this. We are not going to different centres in Manitoba to give everybody a chance to speak more than once, it is to accommodate the people in different areas, especially when you have a list of 102 briefs that 761 are people who have asked to speak. I think it is a very dangerous precedent if we were going to Jet the people start over, then it becomes a debate.

I would think, Mr. Chairman, that the committee would be very pleased if Mr. Prince would table another document or add to his original statement, but I don't think it would be proper to start the second round at this time. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Lecuyer. MR. G. LECUYER: Monsieur le President, je ne fais qu'attirer !'attention sur cette question. Je me plierai volontier a la decision des membres du comite. Mais il demeure que le point souleve par M. Doern, c'est que c'est la meme personne qui parle pour le meme organisme a la deuxieme reprise.

Si cet organisme represente un groupe quelconque, il n'y a aucune objection a ce qu'un membre ou un autre membra de cet organisme se presente. Dans les autres milieux ou nous nous sommes presentes jusqu'a maintenant, il y a personne qui a parle a deux reprises - la meme person ne ne s' est pas presentee deux fois. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Penner, I saw your hand earlier, did you wish to offer some contribution to the point of order? HON. R. PENNER: Yes, just very simply. My point has already, in fact, been made by Mr. Desjardins . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: There is not need to repeat it at this point. HON. R.

PENNER: . . . if a person is allowed to come twice then it becomes, as you say, or has been said, a debate, that a person appears in rebuttal, in effect, and I think we ought not to permit that. We're here to hear individual citizens, it doesn't matter how many come from the same organization, each individual citizen may approach the matter differently and has the right to do so, whether or not they belong to the same organization, but this is not the case here. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Doern. MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Chairman . MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. That would be your second turn. Mr. Graham was first then. Mr. Graham.

MR. H. GRAHAM: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I realize you have a rather difficult decision to make here. However, I would point out that at the hearings in Bran don the reeve of a particular muni cipal ity presented a brief and Mr. Penner started questioning him on his role as President of the Union of Manitoba Municipalities, at which time he informed committee that he would be making another brief on behalf of the Union of Manitoba Municipalities. Mr. Penner was in full agreement to leave the questions on that until he appears the second time. Now, I realize there is a difference here.

We have a person appearing, apparently representing the same association, so there is a distinct difference, but it doesn 't prevent the same person

Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 appearing twice before the comm ittee if he's representing a different group. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Doern, to the same point of order. MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Chairman, I don't think there is a procedure that has been established. Mr. Prince obviously gave his name, his name was accepted, he wasn't told anything to the contrary, he has come here now to present his brief. He spoke the first time to the Legislature in English. This time, I understand, he's going to make his presentation in French. This is his organiza tion, or an organization he belongs to.

I'm not sure that its superior for one organization to have eight different spokesmen, because there are already two organizations that have had different spokesmen on eight occasions creating the impression that there are 16 briefs. I don't know why the government members are afraid to hear from him, and I don't know why they are concerned . . MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. Order please, Mr. Doern. Contributions to points of order should address the deba te or should address the Chair and not engage in debate.

Suggestion of people being afraid then engages in debate and sets a tone to a point of order that makes it difficult for the Chair to then rule. Could you address the rule please? MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Chairman, I wasn't debating, I was decribing the actions of the government members. MR. CHAIRMAN: That was my problem. I would ask you to desist from imputing motives in any way and describe only your contribution to the point of order. MR. R. DOERN: Well, I have already made my points, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: Contrary to the suggestions of some members, it is not a difficult decision.

I would point out to me mbers tha t in 19 80, when the Sp ecial Comm ittee on the Constitution held heari ngs, an individual was allowed to speak a second time; but at that time, under the ruling of the Chair at that hearing, that individual was only permitted to add additional information for the informa tion of the comm ittee. Simila rly, the Standing Committee on Agriculture, this past April, allowed a representative of the CNR to make additional presentations to the committee after the Western Transportation Initiative had been tabled in the House of Commons and the committee was still holding its hearings.

Certain ly, though, the committee would not normally, except in those special circumstances, allow the same person to make a presentation to the comnutlee lwt<.:e, representing the same organization. The suggestion that someone can represent both a rural municipality and the Union of Manitoba Municipalities is obviously clear and isn't relevant to the situation. The fact that a mul titude of indi vidua ls might represent one organiza tion, or very local chapters, or portions of that organiza tion, has also been allowed in the past.

I cite locals of Manitoba Pool Elevator, National Farmers Union and all sorts of other provincewide organizations; that has been allowed. 762 The precedent tha t has been establis hed in committees has been to allow individuals to make second presenta tions only where additional new information was being provided to the committee. The information we do not have at this point is whether or not Mr. Prince is going to be providing new additional information to the committee.

The second point that should be made is that I am advised that the Clerk's Office - and I raised this with them when I reviewed the list for this hearing - had advised Mr. Prince that the committee would have to deal with the question of whether or not he would be all owed to ma ke a second presenta tion. So any suggestion that placing his name on the list guarantees his right to speak, I would certainly not entertain. I'm going to ask the Clerk if we have a copy of the transcript of the meeting at which Mr. Prince first spoke, and then I would like to ask Mr.

Prince what he has to offer, in addition to that brief, to the committee here today and, if there is substantive new information to be added, I feel I must allow the brief to proceed. Mr. Prince, can you advise the committee in very short capsule comment whether or not you have new information to provide to the committee, or if this is essentially the same brief you made in Winnipeg, but to be made in French today, rather than English, as it was in Winnipeg? MR. M.

PRINCE: Monsieur le President, le memoire que j' ai a presenter aujour d 'hui est entier ement different; c'est-a-dire que !'information que je veux donn er au comit e est com pletement dif ferente, absolument differente. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Prince, is the brief you are going to present today suppl ementary to the brief you provided; is it based on new information? MR. M. PRINCE: I would like to have it considered as an addendum to what I've already presented. In other words, what I have to present here today is entirely different from what has been presented the first time. On a point of information, Mr.

Chairman, when I made the reservation with the Clerk for the province, I asked whether I would be permitted to speak because I had already spoken and, at that time, I was not told that I could not appear. As a matter of fact, I had already made arrangements for somebody else to speak and that person would have been here had the Clerk told me that it wasn't possible for me to speak. MR. CHAIRMAN: La die s and gentlemen on the committee. I'm prepared to allow Mr. Prince to speak on the caveat that there is no repetition of information already provided to the committee.

If that occurs, I shall interrupt and suspend the brief. Please proceed. MR. M. PRINCE: Monsieur le President, membres du comite legislatif. La semaine derniere, le Premier ministre du Manitoba, I'H onorable Ho ward Pawley annoncait au Manitobains qu'au ssitot que les aud iences publi que s seront terminees et que le travail du comite legislatif sera accompli, le projet d'amendements a !'article 23 sera

Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 presente sans delais a la session d'automne de la legislature manitobaine pour une troisieme lecture. Le statui manitobain sera im mediatement envoye au gouvernement canadien pour fin d'amender !'article 133 de I'Acte du Canada. L'executif de !'Association des Pro-Canadiens du Manitoba, inqu iet de l'avenir des Canadians d'expression francaise, etablit dans I'Ouest et en particulier au Manitoba, ont decide d'informer le go uvernement du Canada de la situation telle qu'appreciee par les descendants d'un des peuple fondateur de notre pays - le Canada.

Je vous lis la lettre en date du 26 septembre 19 83 expediee a I'H onorable Pierre Elliott Trudeau, Premier Ministre du Canada avec copie a I'Ho norable Brian Mulroney, Chef de !'Opposition, a M. Ed Broadbent, Chef du Parti federal Npd, a I'Honorable Ho ward Pawley, Premier Ministre du Manitoba et a I'H onorable Serge Joyal, Secretaire d'Etat du Canada.

Honorable Premier Ministre, Le 6 septembre dernier I' Association des Pro Canadiens du Manitoba presentait au Comite Legislatif de la Provinc e du Manitoba un memoir e fais ant connaltre notre position sur les amendements proposes a !'Article 23 de I'Acte Constitutionnel du Manitoba. Les amendements proposes a I'

Article 23 par le procureur general du Manitoba, I'H onorable Roland Penner, sont le resultat d'une entente secrete negocies par la Societe franco-manitobaine en concert avec le Gouv ernement du Manitoba et le Secretaire d'Etat du Canada, I'H onorable Serge Joyal. Honorable Premier Ministre, l'avenir d'un Canada Uni et Bilingue est en jeu! La position du Gouv ernement Federal va a l'encontre des droits lingui stiques et constitu tion nels des Manitobains d'e xpres sion francaise; ces droits sont enchas ses dans I'

Article 23 de I'Acte du Manitoba de 1870 et ces amendements proposes enlevent de facon permanente et irreversible le droit a tous les Manitobains a !'usage d'une des langues officielles du Canada. En 1980, le Gouvernement Federal pr6nait un Canada Uni et Bilingue d'un ocean a !'autre et trois ans plus tard ce meme gouvernement negocie a la cachette les droits innes des Manitobains d'expression francaise dans une entente secrete qui enleve a la langue francaise son statui de langue officielle au Manitoba et par ce fait enleve a la Saskatchewan et a !'Alberta la langue francaise parce que ces trois provinces faisaient

partie des Territoires du Nord-Ouest, autrefois un vaste pays habite par les autochtones, metis et canadiens, et c'est ce pays qui fut sujet de negociations en 18 69-70 entre le Canada et le Gou vernement Provisoire de Louis Aiel pour !'entree des Territoires du Nord-Oue st dans la Confederation Canadienne. L'entente tripartite secrete de 1983 trahit les droits constitutionnels de tous les canadiens etablis a l'ouest des Grands Lacs depuis le debut du dix-neuvieme siecle. Honorable Premier Ministre, !'Article 23 de I'Acte du Manitoba de 187 0 et !'

Article 13 3 de I' Acte de I' Am erique du No rd Br itannique de 18 67 sont identiques. L'Article 133 reconnalt aux citoyens du Quebec leurs droits constitutionnels aux deux langues officielles du Canada, l'anglais et le francais, et par ce fait, au Manitoba comme au Quebec, les Manitobains ont un dr oit cons titut ionnel aux services qui en decoulent dans la langue de leur choix et ce sans aucun amendement a !'Article 23 de I'Acte du Manitoba. 763 En 197 1 le projet de fusionnement du Gou vernement N.P.D. du Manitoba supprimait la Ville de Saint-Bo niface de la Carte du Canada . . .

Saint-Bon iface, la plus grande ville d'expression francaise a l'exterieur du Quebec . . . Saint-Bon iface, la ou la vie sociale, organisee a l'exterieur des forts, prit son essor en 1818 . Aujour d'hui, en 19 83, le Gouv ernement Npd du Manitoba est consequent avec ses actions du passe en propos ant au Go uvernement Canadien des amendements a I'

Article 23 de I' Acte du Manitoba; des amendements qui enlevent a la langue francaise au Manitoba et dans I'Ou est Canadien son statut de langue officielle. Nous croyons fortement Hon orable Premier Ministre, que le Gouv ernement Canadien se doit de proteger sans compromis politiques, les droits constitutionnels des deux peuples fondateurs du Canada. Veuillez agreer Ho norable Premier Ministre, nos salutations les plus distingue es.

Monsieur le president, nous avons inclus avec le do cument que je viens de vous lir e les pieces informatives suivantes: le memoire de !'Association des Pro-canadiens du Manitoba au comite legislatif du Manitoba en date du 6 septe mb re 1983, "Constitutionally speaking".du procureur general du Manitoba, l'honorabie Roland Penner (notez bien en anglais seulement) en date de juillet 1983, un depliant intitule "Facts about French Language Services" (notez bien en anglais seulement) distribue par la poste a tous les manitobains, extrait d'un sondage C.R.O.P. de 1982, commande par le Secretariat d'Etat du Canada sur l'identite preferee des canadiens etablis a l'ouest des Grands Lacs - publie dans "La Li berte" en date du 10 juin 1983.

Monsieur le president, je cite quelques !ignes sur la question de notre identite. "Dans l'ouest, les francophones preferent etre appeles candadiens ou canadien s-francais, et ce, dans une proportion plus large comparativement aux aut res provinces." Ensuite un

article publie le 2 septembre 1983 en page 19 de l'hebdoma daire "La Libe rte" concernant les raisons pour la fermeture du Consulat francais a Winnipeg. Je cite deux oaragraphes. "Mais les arguments economiques etaient les plus forts. 'La raison de la fermeture est simple, explique M. Vannlli, le gouvernement francais veut comprimer ses depenses publiques.' Huit consulats francais ont ferme dans le monde. Dans les statistiques, Winnipeg etait un des postes avec le moins de francais immatricules. Com bien? 900. les trois-qua rts immatricules au Manitoba.

L'autre quart en Saskatchewan. 'Toutefois, ces statistiques correspondent pas au nombre de francais vivant dans ces deux provinces,' souligne I' ancien consul, qui vient de quitter le Manitoba. 11 estime qu'environ 4 000 personnes francaises, ou d'orgine francaise, resident dans ces deux provinces." Monsieur le president, j'aimerais ajouter ici que les canadiens d'expresssion francaise qui sont etablis au l'vianitoba, la statistique de la province est donnee comme etant 86 000 et en Saskatchewan, je crois, si ma memoire me sert bien, je crois que le chiffre est autour des 60 000.

Monsieur le president, la conclusion est facile a tirer, c'est que sur 150 000 canadiens d'expression francaise, il y en a seulement 4 000, si on prend le gros chiffre qui est donne dans !'article, qui sont vraiment immatricules au consulat a travers du Canada.

Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 Le dernier document que nous avons ajoute est le suivant, c'est une resolution qui a ete passee par I' Association des Pro-canadiens du Manitoba a sa reunion du mois de mai. Je vous lis la resolution et ensuite vous pourrez me questionne r.

"ATTENDU QUE le Gouv ernement Provisoire de Louis Riel a la Riviere Rouge en 1869 - 1870 a negocie les conditions pour I' entree des Territoires du Nord-Ouest dans la Confederation Canadienne, ET ATTENDU QUE les negociations entamees par le Go uvernemen t Canadien avec le Gouv ernement Provisoire de Louis Riel a la Riviere Rouge ont eu pour resultat la fondation de la Province du Manitoba avec I'Acte Constitutionnel du Manitoba de 1870, ET ATTENTU QUE I'

Article 23 de I'Acte du Manitoba de 1870 enchii sse la langue fran.;; aise comme une des langues officielles de la nouvelle Province du Manitoba, ET ATTENDU QUE I' Acte Cons titutionnel de la Sakatchewan en 1905, I' Acte Constitution ne! de I' Alberta en 1905, I'Acte Constitutionnel des Territoires du Nord Ouest en 1877 et I'Acte Constitutionnel du Territoire du Yukon en 1898 donnent a la langue fran.;; aise le statut officiel tel qu'etabli par les Articles 133 et 93 de I'Acte de I'Amerique du Nord Britannique de 1867, IL EST RESOLU que nous, les soussignes, sommes opposes a tout amendement a !'Article 23 de I'Acte du Manitoba de 1870, qui dimin uerait ou changerait !'intention des Peres de la Confederation sur la question des langues officielles du Canada telles qu'enchii ssees dans les Articles 133 et 93 de I'Acte de I'Amerique du Nord Britannique de 1867, ET IL EST AUSSI RESOL U que nous, soussignes, sommes opposes a tous les amendements a I'

Article 23 de I'Acte du Manitoba de 18 70 negocies par la Societe franco-manitobaine avec l'honorable Roland Pen ner, Procureur General du Manitoba, lesquels amendements ont ete presentes a une assemblee tenue le 15 janvier 1983 au College de Saint-Bonif ace afin de renseigner l'auditoire du contenu dudit document, et nous ajoutons que si lesdits amendements sont ratifies dans un amedement a la Constitution Canadienne, ces changements a !'Article 23 de I'Acte du Manitoba affecteraient le statut historique et officiel de la langue fran.;; aise au Manitoba et dans les autres Provinces et Territoires du Canada tel qu'enchiisse dans les Articles 133 et 93 de I'Acte Constitutionnel de I'Amerique du Nor d Britan niqu e et se faisant etabl ieraient un precedent au detriment de la population d'expresssion anglaise dans la Province de Quebec et la population d'expression fran .;; aise au Manitoba et ailleurs au Canada en limitant l'une des langues officielles du Canada a des endroits ou districts ou le nom bre le justifie." Merci, monsieur le president.

MR. CH AIRMAN: Questions for Mr. Princ e from members of the committee? Mr. Lecuyer. MR. G. LECUYER: Merci, monsieur le president. Monsieur Prince vous dites que le statut des langues officielles etait, faisait

partie de I'

Article 23 de I' Acte du Manitoba tel que adopte en 18 70 et vous allez plus loin, vous dit es bi en plus, vous di tes que sans amendements cet

article contient des garanties de services en langues fran.;; aise. Pourquoi alors dites vous que cette proposition d'amendements enleve tout statut officiel alors que dans l'amendement propose, I'

Article 23 demeure intact sauf on y ajoute des services et le premier

article dit, tel que presente en chambre, dit: "le fran.;; ais et l'anglais sont les langues officielles du Manitoba". Alors voulez-vous m'expliquer, Monsieur Prince, comment l'amendement propose enleve le statut officiel de la langue fran.;; aise au Manitoba. MR. M. PRINCE: Bien premierement, Monsieur Lecuyer, Monsieur le president, j'aimerais souligner le fait que au Quebec, comme j'ai dit tantot dans le memoire, I'

Article 23 est I'

Article 133 sont essentiellement, ont essentiellement le meme contenu et puis si au Quebec, I'

Article 133 donne aux citoyens du Quebec les droits aux services, il en reste pas moins qu'ici au Manitoba, !'Article 23 devrait essentiellement nous donner ces services la. Mais ce qu'on semble trouver, c'est que nous avons un gouvernement qui pour des raisons difficile a comprendre veut pas nous donner de services en fran.;; ais. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Lecuyer. MR. G. LECUYER: Merci, Monsieur le president. Peut etre que je devrais, m'arreter ici parce que il me semble que je n'arriverais jamais a comprendre cette logique.

Comment, Monsieur Prince, vous dites enleve le statut official de la langue fran.;; aise et enleve des services alors que specifiquement ecrit dans les Articles 23(1) a 23(9), on precise justement les services qu'on ajoute a !'Article 23 sans l'avoir modifie d'une virgule. Alors pourquoi pouvez-vous maintenir, est-ce que vous voulez pas plutot employer le mot "ajoute" plutot qu'enleve? MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, order please. Order please. The question was argumentative and invites debate when it asks why and asks for a justification of a position.

For that reason, I have to rule the question our of order. 764 Are there any questions for clarification? Mr. Lecuyer. MR. G. LECUYER: Peut-etre j'ai fait ma question trop longue. Alors je la repete et esperons sans appeler d'arguments. Tout simplement, Monsieur Prince, voulez vous m'expliquer comment dans votre

interpretation l'amendement propose enleve, est-ce que vous ne voulez pas plutot dire ajoute puisque I'

Article 23 lui meme n'a pas ete modifie d'une seule virgule. MR. L. PRINCE: Monsieur le president, Monsieur Lecuyer, I'

Article 23 tel qu'amende 23(1) deviant sujet a tous les conditions ou tous les amendements et puis I'

Article 23 comme tel nous garantie tous droits et tous services. Mais le moment ou on diminue !'article, ou on limite !'article en disant que !'Article 23 refere a tel numero, c'est .;;a que .;;a veut dire. La, vous avez la exactement ce que vous avez fait a I'

Article 23. MR. G. LECUYER: Dernier commentaire, Monsieur Prince, vous avez dans votre presentation fait reference

Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 au 4 000 franc;:ais immatricuh�s au consulat, non pas a travers le Canada mais de Winnipeg. Est-ce que vous realisez, Monsieur Prince, que les 4 000 en question sont de s ressortissants de la France avec des passeports de la France et non pas des canadiens franc;:ais du Manitoba et de la Saskatchewan? MR. L. PRINCE: Monsieur le president, si je peux repondre. C'est que je n'ai pas invente I' article.

L'article est la, I'

article est la publie dans La Liberte et !'article est tres clair. C'est que !'article dit 900 qui sont immatricules entre le Manitoba et la Saskatchewan. Neuf cents, c'est a dire trois quarts au Manitoba et un quart en Saskatchewan. Le chiffre de 4 000 est un chiffre qui n'est pas donne par le gouvernement franc;:ais, mais plutot un chiffre donne par le consul franc;:ais et il dit que le chiffre de 900 est errone. Alors on peut conclure que le chiffre de 4 000 est attribue a 4,000 franc;:ais immatricules au Canada. C'est precisement ce que j'ai dit, Monsieur Lecuyer. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Lecuyer.

Further questions by members? Mr. Desjardins. HON. L. DESJARDINS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to di rect Mr. Prince que !'article ici sur ce qui est presentement devant la chambre 23(7)3 dit ceci: "Le present

article n'a pour effet de porter atteinte aux droits garantis par I'

Article 23. Est-ce qu'il semble pas que c'est une garantie c;:a qu'il est pas question de porter atteinte aux droits garantis. MR. L. PRINCE: Monsieur le president, est-ce que je peux poser une question a Monsieur Desjard ins. MR. CHAIRMAN: Questions of mem bers are not permitted. Mr. Desjardins. Mr. Prince, do you have an answer to the question? MR. l. PRINCE: Yes. L'

Article 23 devient sujet aux amendements. Est-ce que Monsieur Desjardins peut nous assurer que e'en est pas le cas. MR. L. DESJARDINS: Monsieur le president, c'est tres clair. J'ai seulement qu'a repeter ce que je viens de dire. Le present

article n'a pas pour effet de porter atteinte aux droits garantis par I'

Article 23. MR. L. PRINCE: Monsieur le president, je pense que Monsieur Desj ardins et moi- meme, on ne se comprendra pas sur la question de !'Article 23. MR. L. DESJARDINS: Est-ce que je pourrais, Monsieur le president, poser une autre question. Monsieur Prince represente I' Association des Pro-canadiens. Est-ce qu'on pourrait avoir quelques renseignements sur cette association, le nombre, combien etait present a la reunion dont vous avez mention, Monsieur Prince, qui a propose la resolution et qui la seconde, c'est surtout le nombre qui m'interesse. MR. L.

PRINCE: La resolution a ete adoptee comme j'ai dit au mois de mai et nous etions approximativement 765 une vingtaine de personnes. 11 y avait une demoiselle Lafortune qui a avance la resolution. Ca a ete seconde par une Madame Forbes. MR. l. DESJARDINS: Et le nombre des membres, s'il vous plait, Monsieur le president. MR.l. PRINCE: Le nombre, nous n'avons pas, comme j'avais explique au comite legislatif a la premiere seance du 6 sept embre, nous avons pas un membership qui est imma tricul e, si vous vou lez. No us avons un membership qui est loose.

C'est des gens que quand on a une cause a defendre, on contacte nos gens et puis on y va . MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Desjard ins. Further questions from members. Mr. Doern. MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Chairman and Mr. Prince, the Franco-Manitoban Society purports to represent all Franco-Manitobans. In your judgment, what percentage does your organization represent? · MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Penner, on a point of order. HON. R. PENNER: This is another case of a member of the comm ittee att empting to put to a witness extraneous information which is not related to the brief, and which is not a matter of fact and simply invites debate.

The Societe franco-manitobaine does not claim to represent every Franco- Manitoban, and to say that is to put an untruth to a delegate and invite the delegate to comment on that when it hasn't arisen in his own brief or in anybody else's brief. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Doern, on a point of order. MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Chairman, on the point of order, I wish the Attorney-General would be more objective. Mr. Desjard ins asked how many members belonged. I didn't see the Attorney-General object to that. - (Interjection) - Well, I didn't hear you object to that. I am asking Mr.

Princ e if he can ind icate the percentage or number of Franco-Manitobans that his organization represents. MR. CHAIRMAN: To the point of order, I think it should be apparent to members by now - we're well into the fourth week of these comm ittee hearings - tha t questions which contain

preambles which contain any kind of argument or allegation are going to invi te comment or points of order from other members. The nub of your question, Mr. Doern, was, how many people does Mr. Prince's organization represent, or how many does he feel he represents? The difficulty with the question - and I can appreciate the nature of the 1bjection - was the suggestion which preceded it about the SFM purporting to represent people. I hate to have to be in the position as Chair to almost write questions tor members but, if those kinds of

preambles are going to continue to be used, they are going to continue to be ruled out of order. I would appreciate it if you would rephrase your question, asking only that portion to which you want an answer.

Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 Mr. Doern. MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Chairman, I will rephrase it, but I also wish that the Attorney-General would supply us with a list of officially government- approved questions MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, order please. Order please. If the member wants to ask questions, the member has the right to ask questions. The Chair will not allow the Attorney-General or anyone else to dictate what those questions will be, but the Chair will make certain that those questions are in order.

If the member has problems with the way the Chair is conducting the meeting, the member knows where the door is, or the member can have himself put on the committee and challenge the Chair. Order please. Demonstrations of support for the Chair, as all other demonstrations, are banned. Mr. Doern, please proceed with your question. MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Chairman, the Franco- Manitoban Society purports to represent some Franco-Manitobans -i n line with the Attorney-G eneral's advice - how many Manitobans who are French-spe aking would you say that your organization represents? MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Prince. MR. M.

PRINCE: During the 1980 Quebec Referendum, our organization contacted the public and we have a li st on hand of somewhere around 5,200 tha t immediately answered our call. I think that in itself shows that we certainly do have some people that have some confidence in what we represent. MR. R. DOERN: So you would agree with Mr. Penner tha t the SF M do es not represent all Franco Manitobans? MR. M. PRINCE: Wholehe artedly. MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Chairman, I would also like to know whether your organization receives any federal or provincial funding? MR. M. PRINCE: No, we don't, Mr. Chairman.

As a matter of fact, we find that the moment we receive funding, we're not the ones that make the decisions. MR. R. DOERN: Are you suggesting that he who pays the piper calls the tune? MR. M. PRINCE: Well, that's a proper way to put it, that's for sure. MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Chairman, I would also like to ask Mr. Prince what the basis of his objection was in regard to the secret agreement? Is your complaint as a Manitoban, or a Franco-Manitoban, or both? MR. M.

PRINCE: My complaint is that the vast majority of Manitobans of French expression are aware of their heritage, and everyone of those people live in all kinds of areas of Manitoba, all kinds of different areas of 766 Manitoba, and these people feel perfectly at home where they are. They feel perfectly Canadian wherever they are. I kno w ho w I feel when I visit, whether it's Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia, Quebec, Nova Scotia, I feel perfectly at home, and I don't think that those people would appreciate being in a ghetto. Does that answer your question, Mr. Doern? MR. R. DOERN: Mr.

Chairman, I would also like to ask Mr. Prince, in view of the manner in which the agreement was handled whether he thinks that an open agreement, openly arrived at, would have had a better chance of public acceptance? MR. M. PRINCE: I would certainly say so. I would honestly feel that the input would have been there without all this hubbub and divi siveness. MR. R. DOERN: My final question, Mr.

Chairman, is: you cited a number of examples where the government had failed to translate pamphlets and brochures into French, in spite of its forthcoming legislation or its proposals, are you also aware of the fact that the governmen t apparently fai led to translate its amendment to The Municipal Act last summer, which enab led muni cipa li ties to hold referen dums or plebiscites? MR. M. PRINCE: I am aware of it and I find it almost unbelievable that

Article 23, which has been restored, so to speak, with the Forest case, I would have believed that this government would have immedia tely started translating all its statutes and would have immediately presented its statutes in the both the official languages of Manitoba. I find it hard to believe that this hasn't been done. MR. R. DOERN: Are you suggesting then that the so called injustices and lost rights that many Franco Manitobans feel were a hardship for them; have, in fact in general, been re-establis hed and that this legislation, rather than helping Franco- Manitoba ns, is in fact harming them? MR. M.

PRINCE: A Monsieur Doern, j'aimerais lui repondre cette question la en franc;:ais pour la simple raison que je veux lui donner exactement ce qui me sort des tripes, exactement ce je sens. Je suis pas un chia leux, vous m'ent endr ez pas mentionner le passe que j'avais pas si, puis que j'avais pas c;:a, puis que j'avais des trous dans mes souliers et puis tout ce que vous voulez. Je ne suis pas interesse la-dedans je regarde au futur, je regarde qu'est-ce qui m'arrive demain, c'est c;:a qui est important et puis je veux que la constitution du Manitoba respecte ces droits la.

Je ne veux pas la voir amend er, c'est aussi si simple que c;:a. MR. R. DOERN: I will make this my last question. You are then sayi ng tha t the proposals and the - (Interjection) - Mr. Chairman, I would appreciate not being interrupted by the Attorney -General, who is inclined to snide remarks and caustic comments when people are trying . . . MR. H. GRAHAM: On a point of order.

Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 MR. CHAIRMAN: Order. Mr. Doern . . . MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Chairman, I'm not exaggerating, I ... MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please, order please. Order please. Mr. Doern, when the Chairman calls for order, I expect you to observe as do all members of the committee. Mr. Graham, to a point of order. MR. H. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order.

I think it's highly improper for members of the Legislative Assembly, whether they're members of this committee or not, to be making remarks about other members of this committee or members of the Assembly, and I think it's highly in order and I would ask you to ask Mr. Doern to withdr aw those remarks. MR. CHAIRMAN: I was going to rule the question out of order, because the

preamble contained a statement with which he was going to ask the delegation to agree. We've already suggested that questions framed in that fashion are out of order. Now, I don't like interrupting on every question, so I let a lot pass. MR. R. DOERN: I want to raise a point of order . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: There is a point of order before the committee now, I'm addressing it, I'm ruling on it, and when I'm done, if you have a new point of order, I will gladly entertain it. Mr.

Penner's interjection was certainly inappropriate and those kinds of exchanges certainly generate the kind of outbursts that are sometimes described as intem perate from Mr. Doern. If Mr. Doern can't show more self-c ontrol, and Mr. Penner can't desist from making those kinds of gibes, then we are going to have them continue in the committee. I was about to call Mr. Penner to order and ask you not to phrase your question that way when Mr. Graham raised his point of order. I appreciate his support, but certainly Mr.

Penner has the right to call to the Chair's attention the fact that a question is improperly phrased. He does that by way of a point of order, rather than a call from his seat. I think all members know the rules. If you want me to continue to enforce them, I need your assistance and your co-operation. I appreciate Mr. Graham's interjection at this point to allow me to require that from all members, whether they are members of the committee or members of the Assemb ly. Mr.

Doern, would you rephrase your question and I will take it that it is the consensus of the committee that I not allow any more of these, and from hereon in I will interrupt every question, which I consider to be even in the slig htest way beyond the bounds of clarification. Mr. Doern. MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Chairman, in line with Mr. Prince's last answer, are you suggesting Mr. Prince that these proposals have been hotly deba ted for months, rather 767 than enr ich ing and ext ending righ ts to Franco Manitobans, are in fact having the opposite impact? MR. M. PRINCE: I honestly . . . MR.

CHAIRMAN: Order, order please. Mr. Doern, you're supplying ... MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Chairman, that's my last question. I'm not going to rephrase. MR. CHAIRMAN: lt may well be your last question. MR. R. DOERN: Well, I think your biases are showing. MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, if the Chair's bi ases are showing, that's the Chair's problem and the members of the committee know what to do with a biased Chairman. MR. R. DOERN: They do. MR. CHAIRMAN: it's improper to ask a question which provides the answer and asks the witness to then confirm yes or no. Questions are supposed to be for clarification of the brief.

If the brief was clear to the member, then there's no need for those questions, but to ask leading questions with the answer assumed in the question, does not expedite the business of the comm ittee, but serves only to invite debate and questions from other members. Could you rephrase the question, please. MR. R. DOERN: I'll try once more, Mr. Chairman. I simply asked Mr. Prince what he thinks the effect of the government propos als will be on Franco Manitobans? MR. CHAIRMAN: Good question. Mr. Prince. MR. M. PRINCE: Division and guaranteed assimilation. MR. R. DOERN: Thank you. MR.

CHAIRMAN: Further questions from members of the committee? Mr. Graham. MR. H. GRAHAM: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, through you to Mr. Prince. Mr. Prin ce, in your presentation you made several references to a secret agreement. I presume you're referring to an agreement that was signed by the Franco-Manitoban Society, the Government of Manitoba and the Federal Government. Ha ve you seen that so-called secret agreement? MR. M. PRINCE: Mr. Chairman, to Mr. Graham, the agreement was presented in draft form the first time on January 15 ,'83.

The final agreement, that is to say the nitty-gritty - exactly the final agreement - was presented on the 24th of May, Victoria Day, at St. Bonif ace College, roughly an hour-and-a-half before it was adopted by the SFM. At that time, I certainly felt that if it took me - and I don't consider myself stupid - I honestly felt that anybody that knew what was in

Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 that agreement would have had to study that agreement not for two days, not for three days, possibly for months. I honestly felt and I still feel today that the lawyers, constitutional lawyers, that answered the questions - Mr. Robert summed it up quite nicely when he said, "I have here on the stage three lawyers and not one of them are of the same opinion. " Now, he wants me to go along with an agreement that I saw for an hour and-a-half, while everybody's talking, and I don't even have the chance to study it.

So I honestly feel that the agreement was not known by anybody except the people that presented it. MR. H. GRAHAM: Through you, Mr. Chairman, to Mr. Prince, could you tell me, as a mem ber of the Legislature, who it was that signed the agreement on behalf of the Franco- Manitoban Society. Was it one signature, two, three, four? MR. M. PRINCE: I have no idea whatsoever because I don't think that anybody other than the people that signed the agreement have seen the agreement. MR. H. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, through you to Mr.

Prince, have you at any time seen any reports or any activity wher e the government ha s table d tha t agreement in the Manitoba Legislatur e? HON. R. PENNER: On a point of order. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Penner, on a point of order. HON. R. PENNER: Yes, just referring to your previous ruling about extraneous material that is being referenced back and forth, and I've listened to them, about an agreement and that is extraneous material or information, not rooted in fact, and there is no such document. MR. CHAIRMAN: Further to the point of order, Mr. Graham. MR. H. GRAHAM: No, not on a point of order, Mr.

Chairman, I wanted to ask a further question. MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, Mr. Prince made reference to a secret agreement. The witness before the committee believes there's a secret agreement and Mr. Graham certainly has the right to ask questions to clarify the witness's understanding of this secret agreement. Mr. Graham. MR. H. GRAHAM: Mr. Prince, would you know who signed that agreement on behalf of the Province of Manitoba? MR. M. PRINCE: If I'm to belie ve the newspapers, apparently it's the Honourable Roland Penner that would have signed the agreement. MR. H. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, through you to Mr.

Prince, would you know who would sign that agreement on behalf of the Federal Government? MR. M. PRINCE: Again, I would feel that it must have been somebody from the Secretary of State and it would have had to have been the Honourable Serge Joyal. 768 MR. H. GRAHAM: Mr. Prince, would you think it would be proper for the government to table that document in the Legislature or before this committee, so we could all take a look at it? MR. M. PRINCE: I honestly believe that the document should be tabled and further studied. MR. H. GRAHAM: That's all. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Penner. HON. R. PENNER: Mr.

Prince, in answer to Mr. Graham, you have made a statement, sugges ting to this committee that you have read in the newspapers that I, as the Attorney-General of the Province of Manitoba, have signed some document. I would ask you, since you alleged to this committee that you've read that in the newspapers, that you table that with this committee. I ask you that because there is no such newspaper report, any more than there is such a document. You've made that allegation. Are you prepared to table it? MR. M. PRINCE: Mr. Chairman, to Mr.

Penner, I've dr awn a conclusion based on in formation in the newspapers, because I've never seen any other name on the part of the government associated with the proposed amendments other than the name of the Honourable Roland Penn er, so it was normal for me to assume that either Mr. Penner or Mr. Pawley would have signed the agreement. HON. R. PENNER: Well, then for clarification, what you're saying is that since either my name or the Premier's name have been names . MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. HON. R. PENNER: .. . that you've seen associated MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. Mr.

Penner, you are falling into the same trap for which I called Mr. Doern to order. You're providing an answer to a question when asking it. Could you perhaps phrase the question in another way, so it clarifies Mr. Prince's statement? HON. R. PENNER: Yes, thank you very much. Your assumption then is just that, an inference? MR. M. PRINCE: An inference based on news received in the newspapers. HON. R. PENNER: Of whose name is associated with this resolution? MR. M. PRINCE: Correct. HON. R. PENNER: Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Graham. MR. H. GRAHAM: A further question, Mr. Chairman. Mr.

Prince you have said you have seen a document that was presented at a meeting in St. Boniface. I just

Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 heard the Attorney-General say there was no such agreement. Could you tell me if there was no agreement, why we are holding these meetings? MR. M. PRINCE: Mr. Chairman, I guess that's the $64 question. If there's no agreement, obvi ously, we have no business being here. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Penner, on a point of order. HON. R. PENNER: I don't think it's proper, and this is a point of order, for my statements to be distorted. The whole series of questions related to some alleged signed secret agreement - of course, there was an agreement.

We've cons tantly talked about the agreement of May 17 th and that is what is before the committee; that is what was before the Legislature; that is what is before the public. All of this smoke and mirrors has been about some alleged signed secret agreement. I don't want my statements to be twisted nor should they be. I believe that's a genuine point of order. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Doern, to the same point of order. MR. R. DOERN: I think it's only natural to assume that an agreement is, in fact, a written agreement. I don't see any problem here.

If the Attorney-General now wants to put it on the record to correct us and help us that this was only a verbal understanding, then perhaps he should make that statement and we'll choose our words accordingly. MR. CHAIRMAN: To the same point of order, Mr. Penner. HON. R. PENNER: I have made it many many times in the presence of Mr. Doern. Mr. Doern knows that, and his last statement is an attempt to mislead the committee. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. Order please. Mr. Penner, I'm sure, is aware of the fact that a delibe rate suggestion of mi slead ing is an un parlia men tary expression.

I would ask him to withdr aw that. HON. R. PENNER: I withdraw the statement that it's mislea ding, and subs titute the statement tha t it's inaccurate. MR. CHAIRMAN: Certainly di fferences of opm1on between members will occur at many times. Despite the severity of the difference or the importance or signif icance of the difference, it still remains a difference of opinion. Unfortunately, committee hearings, which are intended solely for the purpose of hearing the public and not hearing members, may allov.' those differences to stand on the record for some time until they can be clarified in deba te or otherwise.

But certainly the committee process is not designed during the hearing stage to allow those differences of opinion to be clarified. Further questions for Mr. Prince? Seeing none, Mr. Prince, thank you very much for your presentation. MR. M. PRINCE: I would like, Mr. Chairman, to thank you for being impartial. lt was a pleasure for me to be here today. 769 Thank you very much, Sir. MR. CHAIRMAN: Gerard Gauth ier, Gerard Gauthier . Valerie Vielfaure, Valerie Vielfaure. Donald Boulet, Donald Boulet. Nicole Fontaine, Nicole Fontaine. Gi lbert Legal, Gil bert Legal. Norbert Piche, Norbert Piche.

Jean Paul Lemoine, Jean- Paul Lemoine. Yvette Fluet Gagnon, Yvette Fluet-Ga gnon. Carole Therrien, Carole Therrien. Doris Hogue, Doris Hogue. Hu bert Bouchard. We may actually finish tod ay. Reeve Mar!ene Puzianowski. Marlene Puzianowski, please. George Lager. Please proceed. MR. G. LEGER: Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I have elected to add ress you in English, even though . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. Could you perhaps just wait a moment until the movement has ceased, then everyone will still be able to hear you. Please proceed. MR. G.

LEGER: I have elected to address you in English, even though French is my mother tongue, as a gesture of acco mmodation lo th ose who canno t read ily understand French; also to symtoliz e how little there is to fear from the extension of a few French Language Services, as English will always remain the first language of communication in this province. By now, you have heard, I am sure, a wealth of legal, historical, financial, practical and logical opinions for the amendment or non-amendment of

Article 23 of The Manitoba Act. I would like, therefore, to limit my remarks in support of the amendment in commenting on the character of French-speaking Manitobans. What manner of people are we who have optimistically withstood the erosion of our culture and endured so much psych ological pain as second-cl ass citizens throughout these many decades? We insist in remaining ourselves in the face of overwhelming odds and not fade into oolivion, as was expected so many years ago. What has contribu ted to our remarka ble determination? The answer lies, in part, in the collective psyche of Franco-Manitobans.

Born out of frontier hardships and isolation, the early French and Metis developed an open and simple honesty towards their fellow men. Their common faith unified and nurtured them. They praised hardiness and camaraderie, and shared a fierce love of the land.

This was a vi brant and colourful people of cherished folklore and traditions unique in North America, who welcomed other settlers in the spirit of accommodation and trust. lt was unimaginable to them that these same later settlers in growing numbers would some day outlaw French as a viable language of government in the province that they, themselves, had begun. This was done in spite of the fact that French-Manitobans had been guaranteed language rights in fundamental laws of their country and province.

Once the language of the land ceases to be an official institution and vehicle of cultural expression, a lethal blow is adminis tered to its people. They, as members of an unofficial language group, are alienated from the land of their birth. Their only apparent recourse is to

Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 be assimilated and to adopt the culture of the dominant group. But in an adopted culture, can one ever be truly whole, or is a part of the soul and spirit forever dead? After close to 100 years of suppression, we French Manitobans have continued to rally around our cause and to resist assimilation, because our culture and language is inextricably tied to Manitoba. Our lang uage and culture was, in large part, created in this province. The language is French, yes, but Manitoba French with an accent and totalit y uniqu ely Manitoba n .

Our traditions are French, yes, but adapted and formulated here in Manitoba since its inception and before. Our religion is universal, yes, but tempered and inspired in a land our forefathers Christian ized and wrestled from the wild erness. Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, we French Manitobans cannot turn our backs on our heritage because we would betray our uniq ueness as Manitobans. The legislators that sought to abolish French in 18 90 did not understand us, and we did not understand their fear and hate towards us.

We saw and continued to see their treachery as an aberration of human conduct, an action alien to the virtues of tolerance and justice that Manitobans and generals have dearly held. The latest insult to our integrity is of course the current campaign of suppressi on, exem plified by th ese hearings, and to plan the City of Winn ipeg referendum. Here a large majority is asked to rule over a small one on a question of justice properly answerable only in the courts of the land, a referendum to be held after months of media propaganda directed at a small minority affected is hardly fair game. We have asked, Mr.

Chairman, and members of the committee, for our day in court, for justice, for equality. Instead, we are maneuv ered into a crap game with loaded dice. Personally, I am of the opinion that we French Manitobans should officially boycott this upccming referendum and play no

part in it whatsoever. But if proof of our good will is still needed, we will be good citizens to the end and vote we will. However, make no mistake, we will endure, win or lose. Meanwhile, the questions remain. Why, we wonder, was a language so important in the development of this province outlawed? Why discredit and suppress a founding people whose fundamental rights are so wholly Canadian? These are questions our present legislators must deal with. If the eyes of the nation are presently upon us, then so too is its conscience.

The concept of founding peoples on which the unity of Canada rests so precariously will again be tested here. Let us not foresake our nation and our self-respect and let us instead be so generous as to allow for some diversity in our midst. lt is with this hope that I approve of the re�:.uiutio1 1 to amend

Article 23 of The Manitoba Act as negotiated last May. Thank you. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, P. Eyler: Are there any questions from the committee for Mr. Leger? Seeing none, Mr. Scott. MR. D. SCOTT: Monsieur le president, SI Je peux demander une question en franc;:ais qui ne semble pas vraiment ma premiere langue et en reponse a votre presentation en anglais, ta deuxieme langue. Est-ce que tu penses que une des raisons, que la raison pour les franco-m anitobains qui etaient peur , qui avaient le prejudice contre . . . si on en parle franc;:ais, si on a demande les droits qui etaient garantis sur la

section 23 de le droit. Tu comprends ou est-ce que mon franc;:ais, c'est peu etre un peu meilleur si je te demande en anglais. no MR. G. LEGER: Pouvez-vous me traduire, s'il vous plait. MR. D. SCOTT: All right, okay. Is one of the reasons that you have expressed the force of the majority of the population upon Franco-Manitobans to comply and to live in English, even though they did have their ling uistic rights, are you saying that, basically despite that one, has been able to maintain somewhat of a culture even though a great number of your population has been assimilated? MR. G.

LEGER: Well, to begin with, I wouldn't say that the greater part of French Manitobans have been assimilated, at least I don't think that's the case. But the point that I'm trying to make is that seeing the French Manitoban's self-conscientious ness, if you will, is so uniquely Manitoban tha t they're not losing a lang uage and culture that is extraneous to Manitoba, but that their culture is so uniquely and inherently Manitoban because it was, by and large, created here that their loss of this somehow aliena tes them from their home. Because it's the loss of a culture which is grounded in this place.

I think this is the fine difference I'm trying to make between, say, someone forgetting a culture from an outside country. MR. D. SCOTT: Ok ay. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Are there any further questions for Mr. Leger? Seeing none, then on behalf of the committee, I would like to thank you, Mr. Leger, for taking the time to come here today. Gerard Tetrault; Armand Frechette; Gilb ert Fournier; Hermance Grang er. Eugene Kirouac. Do you have a written brief to distribute to the mem bers, Mr. Kirouac? You may proceed. MR. E. KIROUAC: Monsieur le president, membres du comite.

Depuis que le gouvernement manitobain a indique qu'il sou haitait enc hasser certains dr oits des francophones dans la constitution, une vive opposition se fait entendre dans la province. Cette opposition, signe d'une democratie bien importante, ne me semble pas toujours bien inspiree. Lorsque l'on fait etat du nombre miniscule de franco-m anitobains dans le but de decrier !'entente du 17 mai, l'on oublie que la province manitobaine n'aurait pas vu le jour sans la part d'un metis francophone.

Cette obligation legale de la province envers sa population francop hone echappe a certains et a d'autres sert d'argument pour exclur e tout encha ssement de dr oits dans la cons ti tution. Ces dern iers di sent que lorsque le

Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 Manitoba est devenu province, il n'y avait aucune garantie de services pour les francophones et qu'en consequence il ne devrait pas y en avoir maintenant. Les cours et le parlement devrait etre bilin gues, c'est tout. Si le gouvernement optait pour cette solution, il etait force pour quelques raisons de le faire, une injustice aussi grande que celle 1890 serait commise a l'endroit des franco-manitobains.

Ce serait nier la premiere injustice, dire qu'elle n'a aucune fa�;on nuit au dev elop pement et a l'epano uis sement de la francophonie, c'est pour cela que j'appuie !'entente conclue le 17 mai, je la trouve interessante pour les francophones. Elle leur permettera de recommencer a vivre en fran�;ais au Manitoba sans pourtant enlever quoi que soit a la majorite. Y aurait-il une solution plus equitable que celle-ci, j'en doute, Monsieur le president. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Are there any questions for Mr. Kirouac? Seeing none, then Mr.

Kirouac, I would like to thank you on behalf of the committee for coming here today. · MR. E. KIROUAC: Merci. MR. CHAIRMAN, A. Anstett: The next person on our list is Antoi nette Bissonette, Antoi nette Bissonette; Lalonde Tetrault, Lalonde Tetrault; lrma Gauth ier, lrma Gauthier; Leo Nadeau, Leo Nadeau; Rachel Ouellet, Rachel Ouellet; Raymond Boily, Raymond Boily; Aime Tetrault. Ramond Boily. MR. R. BOILY: Oui. I would like to point out, my name is mis spelt on there. lt should be "ly." MR. CH AIRMAN: 8-0-1- L-Y? What's the proper pronounciation? MR. R. BOILY: Boily. MR. CHAIRMAN: Boily. Thank you. MR. R.

BOILY: Monsieur le president, membres du comite. Depuis trop longtemps les manitobains d'expression fran�;aise se sont retrouves dans cette meme situation intenable etant que d'un cote si nous revendiquions vigour eusement nos droits en matiere de langue, nous etions vus comme des agitateurs et des fanatiques. Mais que de l'autre, en cessant de revendiquer ces memes droits, nous en etions de facto dechus, disait on, faute d'usage ou de nombre suffisant. Nous avons maintenant depasse l'etape ou ces droits sont en question. La cour supreme du pays en a decide en notre faveur.

Le gouvernement du Manitoba doit maintenant faire suite a ce geste en enchassant dans la constitution les amendements a !'article 23 tels que negocies au mois de mai par la Soc iete franco manitobaine et les gouvernements provincial et federal. Certains s'objectent a ce projet pretendant que le coat en serait trop eleve, parlant comme si les services en fran�;ais seraient un cadeau fait a la min orite francophone et defraye par la majorite anglophone.

Quoi de plus faux, au contraire, les manitobains fran�;ais 771 ont toujours et contin uerons a contribuer sur un pied d'egalite aux revenus de la province, et de ce fait, ont droit en retour a recevoir ces memes services. Nous ne sommes pas des mendiants. Nous ne revendiquons que ce qui est n6tre. Dailleurs depuis quand la justice d'une cause est- elle mesuree par le prix de la solution qu'elle necessite. D' autr es veu lent que ces amendements soient innaceptables a la majorite.

A ceux-ci, je reponds que l'ampleur de !'opposition est exageree et qu'ils sous estime le bon sens, !'intelligence et le sens de "fair play" de la majorite de la population manitobaine. Je re viens moi -meme du recent congr es de la Manitoba Federation of Labour, congres auquel j'ai assiste en tant que delegue. Je n'y est rencontre aucune manif estation d 'anta gonis me envers les prop os d'amendements a I'

article 23. De fait, tous les orateurs qui ont adresse la question l'ont fait pour appuyer le gouvernement dans son projet. L'antagonisme, il etait reserve pour le projet de referendum que propose la ville de Winnipeg et certaines municipalites. Je demande done au comite d' appuyer la resolution telle que negociee au mois de mai. Merci. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Boily? Questions? Any questions by members? Seeing none, thank you very much for your presentation here today. Aime Tetrault, Aime Tetrault; Hu bert Balcaen; Albert Rousseau, Al bert Rousseau. Alfred Laurencelle. MR. A.

LAURENCEL LE: Monsieur le president, membres du comite. Je me presente Alfred Laurencelle de La Broquerie. Ce qui fait l'objet de vos deli berations aujourd'hui est l'avenir de notre peuple. Au meme

titre que notre histoire. La langue fran�;aise fait

partie de l'etre collectif des franco-man itobains. Elle est une part precieuse de notre passe conserve a coups de lutte et de replis, a force de perseverance et de deter mina tion. Nos an cetres ont paye le prix de cette resistance et aujourd 'hui nous sentons toujours l'urgence et la necessite de proteger ce trait essentiel de notre identite collective. 11 ne suffit plus de savoir resister a la mort collective, il faut encore embrasser et vite la vie. Nous sommes de ceux qui ont compris que la veritable qualite de l'etre humain est inscrite dans sa fidelite, sa sincerite et son amour pour ce qu'il est.

Oblig ez nous a devenir etranger a nous-memes en nous imposant des sentiments de culpabilite face a notre langue et notre culture tout en esperant creer un Canada plus humain ou doit regner la paix, l'harmonie et !'unite. Est-ce devenu une diformite de croire que pour mieux comprendre, aimer et apprecier les autres, il faut d'abord se connaitre, s'aimer et s'apprecier soi meme tel que l'on est. Ecoutez les propos de ceux qui veulent s'en prendre a notre volonte d'exister et vous aurez vite compris que l'unite d'un pays ne se biHit pas en s'attaquant a la vie d'un de ces peuples fondateurs.

Un peuple ne fait pas de testament parce qu'il n'est jamais fait pour mourir. Combien de fois avons-nous ete abandonnes a la merci de la majorite pour defendre nos droits. Combien de fois s'est-on piu a nous accuser d'etre un

Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 fardeau pour le tresor public. Combien de fois a-t-on voulu faire croire aux canadiens que nous etions un embarras pour I' unite du pays. Combien de fois avons nous vu nos concitoyens nous reprocher d'etre de veritables semeurs de troubles. Notre resistance, mes chers amis, il a fallu la mener paisiblement en tenant compte du respect des autres et toujours avec l'espoir qu'un jour quelqu'un comprendrais que nous sommes dans nos droits et que notre determination s'est value un serieux engagement de la part de nos dirigeants.

Enfin le 17 mai 1983, nous allions gouter un peu aux fruits de nos labeurs. Certains auraient meme cru, voulu croire que c'etait une belle page dans l'histoire des canadiens -franc;:ais, une page malheureusement qu'il faudra probablement dechirer avant meme de l'avoir lu et qui n'aura qu'abime nos bonnes relations si on l'abandonne aux mains de ceux qui se laissent aveugler par des gens qui n'ont soif que de pouvoir. On ne cultive pas une fleur en lui refusant toutes les formes d'entretien sous pretexte que c;:a colite trop cher en esperant qu'elle continuera a participer a la beaute de la nature.

A ceux qui ont peur de payer de leurs sous les services en franc;:ais, sachez que nous en avons investi de !'argent et du temps. Nous en avons trop inv esti pour abandonner la lutte tout simplement sans qu'il vous en coute un peu. Deja un des deputes a reussi a garnir le fonds anti-bilinguisme de 15,000$00 en solicitant la province. C'est si peu lorsqu'on songe a ce qu e les canadie ns-franc;:ais ont du payer pour s'assurer une education franc;:aise.

Monsieur le president, membres du comite, nous estimons qu'il est grand temps de redonner justice aux franco-manitobains en profitant de I' occasion qui vous est offerte. Nous appuyons fortement la resolution pour amender !'article 23 tel que negocie par !'Association provinciale des francophones du Manitoba, la S.F.M., et les deux gouvernements au mois de mai dernier. Je vous remercie. MR. CH AIRMAN: Thank you , Mr. Laurencelle. Questions by members of the committee? Mr. Lecuyer. MR. G.

LECUYER: Je crains que si je devais poser une question a Monsieur Laurencelle, j'aurais a la phraser en termes poetiques alors je m'abstiendrais. MR. CHAIRMAN: Further questions by members of the committee? Seeing none, thank you very much for your presentation here today. MR. A. LAURENCELLE: Thank you for your kind attention. MR. CHAIRMAN: Carmen Catellier; Louis Fefiola; Denis Fontaine; Denise Perron; lrene Du puis; Janine Kirouac; Father Gi rard Clavette; Susan Cameron; Roberte Boily; Yvonne Lagasse; Cecile Berard; Oscar Gagnon. Lionel Joyal. Procedez. MR. L.

JOYAL: Monsieur le president, membres du comite, Madame. C'est avec l'ame remplie d'amertume et de trepidation que je prend la parole aujourd'h ui. 11 est necessaire 772 d'enchasser nos droits dans la constitution. 11 ne faut pas laisser cette responsabilite a la bonne volonte des gouvernements, qui ne sont que passages et souvent presque malhon netes. Je parle avec raison de cause. Mon grand pere est arrive au Manitoba en 1882. il avait tous les droits dans une province bilingue, c'est a dire les services en franc;:ais. En 1890, il les a presque tous perdus. En 1916, mon pere perdit ce qui restait de nos droits.

Lorsqu'on parle de cacher les livres franc;:ais quand l'inspecteur faisait ses visites d'ecole, vous direz que c'est de la vieille histoire, mais moi, je m'en rappelle avec rancoeur. En 1949, j'etais dans ma onzieme annee, l'inspecteur nous intimidait en nous disant que Louis Riel etait un traitre et nous avions peur de le contredire. En connaissez vous beaucoup de traitres qu'on honore la memoire avec une statue dans les terrains du parlement? QueUe trahison! Quel traitre! Finalement, mes enfants commencent a connaitre un peu de justice.

Mais c'est avec peine et misere et en se battant continuellement qu'on finit par obtenir quelques services. L'ancien Premier min istre de la Grande Bretagne, Clement Attlee, declara: "La democratie n'est pas uniquement le gouverement d'une majorite, mais un gouvernement de majorite respectant les droits des minor ites ." On ne fait pas de plebis cites sur les minorites. Diogene le cynique, philosphe grec, cherchait en plein jour avec un fanal allume, un homme juste. 11 n'en trouverait pas au Manitoba. Mais il prendrait le risque de, non pas se le faire voler son fanal, mais plutot se le faire bruler.

Allons nous avoir un seul homme d'etat qui va defendre la constitution du Manitoba, qu va soutenir la loi et la justice sans se preoccuper des retom bees politiques? J' ose esperer que oui. Cet hommme passerait dans l'histoire comme un sauveur, non seulement du Manitoba, mais du Canada tout en tier.

En terminant, je veux vous lire la pensee d'un grand canadien: I have no accord with the desire expressed in some quarters that by any mode whatever there should be an attempt made to oppress the one language or to render it inferior to the other; I believe that it would be impossible if it were tried, and it would be foolish and wicked if it were possible.

The statement that has been made so often that this is a conquered country is "a propos de rien." Whether it was conquered or ceded , we have a Constitution now under which all British subjects are in a position of absolute equality, having equal rights of every kind - of language, of religion, of property, and of person. There is no paramount race in this country, there is no conquered race in this country . . . " These, my dear friends, are the words of our first Prime Minister of Canada, the Conservative, Sir John A. Macdonald. Thank you. Merci, beaucoup. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Monsieur Joyal .

Questions for Monsieur Joyal from members of the committee? Seeing none, thank you very much for your presentation. Next on our list, Beatrice Freynet- Boily.

Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 MS. B. FREYNET-BOILY: Monsieur le president, membres du comite. Depuis presque un siecle deja, le peuple franco manitobain a ete victime de genocides lingu istiques et cultur els im pardonnab les. En effet, la loi inconstitutionnelle de 1890 marque le debut d'une ere de persecutions et d'injustices perpetrees sur le peuple franco-m anitobain qui malheureusement se continue encor e 93 ans plus tard.

C'est pourquoi le gouvernement du Manitoba n'a plus le droit de reculer devant le defi qui se presente aujourd'hui celui de retablir le bilingui sme selon !'entente conclue dans I' Acte du Manitoba de 1870. 11 ye n a encore, Monsieur le president, qui s'opposent a l'idee de restaurer le caratere bilingue du Manitoba en affirmant que le nombre de franco- manitobains ne jusitifie le coOl qu'un tel geste pourrait entrain er. Quel affront a la population franco-m anitobaine quand l'on constate le prix qu'elle a dO payer precisement a cause de cette loi infame de 1890.

En effet, ce geste inconstitutionnel en plus des lois de l'epoque qui regissaient !'im migration a donne naissance au phenomene monstrueux de I' assimilation qui a tellement mine les rangs de la popula tion francophone qu'aujourd'hui elle menace la survivance de ce peuple dont la contribution a l'epanouissement de cette province demeure un fait incontestable de noire histoire. Monsieur le president, une societe telle que celle dans laquelle nous vivons exige que toute personne ou organisme qui entrave une loi quelconque doit subir le peine qu'entraine une telle hate.

Done, les legislateurs de 1890 ont pose un des gestes les plus ignobl es dans l'h istoir e de notre provi nce en violant les droits fondamentaux d'un des deux peuples fonda teurs du Manitoba. 11 appartient don e au gouvernement de cette province de remettre au peuple francophone I' heritage lingui stique qu'il leur fut si impunement enleve en 1890. En acceptant ce defi, nous pourrons tourner une des pages les plus sombres de notre histoire pour marcher vers l'avenir dans la route meme que les peres de la Confederation avait su si bien tracer pour tous les canadiens. Merci, Monsieur le president. MR.

CHAIRMAN: Questions by honourable members? Seeing none, thank you very much for your presentation. MRS. B. FREYNET-BOILY: Merci, Monsieur le president. MR. CHAIRMAN: Use Desharnais; Roland Gauthier; Carmelle Gagnon, Carmelle Gagnon; Georgette Gerardy, Georgette Gerardy; Andre Frechette, Andre Frechette; Michel Lavergne; Armand Desharnais. Procedez, Monsieur Desharnais. MR. A. DESHARNAIS: Monsieur le president, que nous ayons vecu au dela de 90 ans prives de nos droits linguistiques et culturels ne signif ie pas que nous soyons resignes de vivre dans cet etat.

Au contraire, nous sommes tres tiers de notre langue et notre culture fran<;:aises et nous voulons avoir l'opportunite de les transmettre a nos descendants. Pour ce faire il nous taut !'occasion de pouvoir transiger en fran<;:ais au moins dans les services essentiels. 773 Nous ne voulons rien enlever aux anglophones ni aux grou pes ethniq ues et nous les encour ageons de s'epanouir dans leur cultur e propre. Certa ins anglophones argumentent contre le bill 23, donnant pour raison le coOt supplementaire des services en franvais.

J' aimerais signaler que des commervants importants de Winnip eg et meme de Steinbach ont toujours a leur emploi des personnes capables de nous servir en franvais. lis ne le font certainement pas a pert e. Le fait du bilinguisme au Canada constitue un attrait touristique important. Nos voisins du sud, par exemple, qui n'ont pas de culture propre aiment visiter des peuples qui vivent leur culture dans son originalite. Folklorama en est un exemple marquant.

Le Comite culture! de Saint-P ierre-Jolys, de concert avec les autres organismes culturels de la pronvince, travai lle au developpement de nom breux talents artistiques chez les notres en leur donnant !'occasion de s'exprimer publi1 uement. Deja plusieurs de nos artistes evoluent sur scene avec succes tandis que d'a utres ont expose leurs creations dans des competitions d'art visuel. - 11 nous fait done plaisir d'appuyer !'entente conclue en mai 1983 entre nos representants de la Societe franco-manitobaine et les gouvernments federal et provincial. Le Comite culture! de Saint-P ierre-Jolys.

Armand Desharnais, president. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Merci Monsieur Desharnais. Are there questions from members of the committee. Puisqu'il n'y en a pas, je vous remercie Monsieur Desharnais et le comite culture! de Saint-P ierre. MR. A. DESHARNAIS: Merci beaucoup. MR. DEPU TY CHAIRMAN: Leonard Desharnais, Leonard Desharnais; Jacques Trudeau; John Loewen. For the members of the committee who do not have the additions that were put on the list, would you please add the following: No. 103, John Loewen; No. 104, Lawrence Berard; No. 105, Omer Fontaine; No. 106, Aime Gauth ier. Would you please proceed Mr. Loewen. MR.

J. LOEWEN: Mr. Chairman, we thank you for the opportunity to express our views on what we feel is a very important issue which affects our daily lives. I' m here today at the unanimous request of the Council of the Rural Municipality of Hano ver to express simply its views on the proposed amendment to

Section 23 of The Manitoba Act. The Rural Munici pal ity of Hano ver is a rural municipality of approximately 7,500 population situated approximately 30 to 35 miles southeast of the City of Winnipeg, adjacent to the urban communities of the Town of Steinbach and the Village of Niverville, and surrounded by the Rural Municipalities of Ste. Anne to the north, LaBroquerie to the east, DeSalaberry to the southwest, Tache and Ritchot to the northwest. As you can see, Mr. Chairman, we are surrounded by municipalities which, by virtue of their names, are Canadians of French origin. We are not opposed to the providing of special services to min ority groups in Mani toba and we

Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 recognize that Canadians of French original are a group of special status in Canada. Ho wever, we fear if the rights and privileges of this group of Canadians are extended, spelled out and enshrined in the Constitution, this will take away from the inclination and urgency for the government to provide assistance to other ethnic groups in Manitoba. Therefore, we, the Council of the Rural Municipality of Hanover are in favour of maintaining The Manitoba Act of 18 70 and

Section 23 thereof, as we understand it. The act says: "Either the English or the French language may be used by any person in the debates of the Ho uses of the Legislature, and both those acts and lang uages shall be used in the respective records and journals of those Ho uses; and either of those languages may be used by any person, or in any pleading or process, in or issuing from any court of Canada established under The British North America Act, 19 67, or in or from all or any of the courts of the province.

The acts of the Legislature shall be printed and published in both those languages." The amendment, as proposed, Mr. Chairman, will further exten d Fre nch Language Services in the Provi nce of Manitoba and would entrench the se additional services into the Constitution. This is to what we, the Council of the Rural Municipality of Ha nover are opposed. We are opposed to either increasing or decreasing the rights of Canadians of French or English origin.

As we realize this is a highl y emotiona l and contentious issue, we feel tha t the timing of this amendment is very poor and that, if passed, will have a dividing effect on the people on Manitoba and seriously hurt the unity of the country. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, we would strongly urge this committee and the Government of Manitoba to retain the provisions of

Section 23 of The Manitoba Act of 18 70. Respectfully submitted, John Loewen, Reeve of the Rural Municipality of Han over. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Loewen. Questions from mem bers of the committee? Mr. Desjardins. HON. L. DESJARDINS: Mr. Loewen, I want to make sure that I unde rstand this brief.

You are saying on Page 1, and I quote, "We are not opposed to the providing of special services to minority groups in Manitoba and we recognize that Canadians of French original are a group of special status in Canada." Then you go on to say, "H owever, we fear if the rights and privileges of this group of Canadians are extended, spelled out and enshrined in the Constitution, this will take away from the inclina tion and urgem,y ior me government to provide assistance to other ethnic groups of Manitoba." Are you actually seriously saying that you recognize that they have certain rights; they have a special status?

You don't oppose that, but we should not extend these rights because then it might make it more difficult for others to get any help. Is that what you actually are saying or am I misunderstanding this? MR. J. LOEWEN: The way we understand

Section 23, it does give equal status in the Provincial Legislature 774 and activites flowing from that Legislature to both the French and the English. We feel, however, that the chances of other ethnic minorities who do not fall in the same category as the French, as we say they have a special status, it is our feeling - and I'm talking for the people of our municipality I feel - that this might take away from the inclina tion and the urgency of providing some of those rights that we have enjoyed. MR. CHAIRMAN, A. Anstett: Mr. Desjardins. HON. L.

DESJARDINS: Could you explain to me by granting rights that you recognize to a group would make it more difficult for other minorities to get, as you say, from the inclination have begun to provide assistance to these ethnic groups? What would be the reason for that? MR. J. LOEWEN: Well, I guess the feeling is that there will be a subtle influence on people in authority.

I think most Canadians recognize and realize that we are basically a nation of two official lang uages, but in Manitoba there has been a great deal of debate over the past years, as you are well aware, about the privileges of the French-speaking Canadians, Canadians of French origin. I guess it is our feeling that this debate has assisted the other minorities in obtaining privi leges that they otherwise might not have. That's our feeling. HON. L.

DESJARDINS: So you're saying it's better not to extend or recognize these rights that you seem to recognize because, with our fight, it helps you to get certain rights if we have to keep on fighting? MR. J. LOEWEN: No, I don't agree with that at all. I didn't say that either and the brief doesn't say that. HON. L. DESJARDINS: Well, th at's the way I understand it and that's why I'm asking the question. MR. J.

LOEWEN: The brief doesn't say that at aiL The brief says that we feel the French language is already provided for, the protection tha t it needs in The Manitoba Act of 1870. lt was the Legislature of 18 90 that was struck down that provided for English only. We feel it then goes back to 1870. That is the law in Manitoba today and it seems to us that it provides the guarantees, and the courts have inforced this by striking down that 1890 legislation. We feel the guarantees are there right now. HON. L. DESJARDINS: The guarantees to what? MR. J.

LOEWEN: The provision of French services are required by the act of 18 70. HON. L. DESJARDINS: We have the gua rantee but not the rights and we don't have the services. Do we have the service? Do you feel that the French-speaking people have the proper services now? Is that what you're sayi ng? MR. J. LOEWEN: Well, Mr. Chairman, it seems to me quite explicit in

Section 23. lt's very explicit and says

Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 what services shall be provided in French and English, and we approve of that. We have no quarrel with that. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Scott. MR. D. SCOTT: Thank you . Mr. Loew en, your

interpretation of

Section 23, are you taking a narrow

interpretation that the French lang uage via

Section 23 is only to be used in the Legislature and in the courts? MR. J. LOEWEN: I believe that is what it says. MR. D. SCOTT: That's what is says. Are you aware that in the Supreme Court decision on the Blaikie case, and I'm paraphrasing this now, but it contains ... MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. The awareness of Mr. Loewen of extraneous material related to court decisions elsewhere is not relevant to the brief that has been presented. Questions for clarification of the material in the brief only please. MR. D. SCOTT: Mr. Chairman, with all due respect, in Mr. Loewen's presentation - his presentation is based on an understanding of

an act that is, in his feeling, one that is restrictive and not expansive, and has no princple of growth, and I'm wondering if his position may be somewhat different, if he recognizes that the

interpretation of that through the courts is one, not of restricting French simply to the Legislature in the courts, but sees that as a principle of growth. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please, Mr. Scott. What you're really saying is, you're wondering if Mr. Loew en's position will change if you provide him with additional information that might influence him. The purpose of this hearing is for him to provide you with information that might influence you. Do you have a question for clarification please? MR. D. SCOTT: Okay then.

You said the timing of this is very poor, Sir, that we should not be bringing this forward at this time. If the French people of the province, or if their government as well, feel that the French people of the province have rights that are historic rights and have been deprived, when is a good time to go forward to recognize those rights as a government? MR. J. LOEWEN: I believe, Mr. Chairman, that the Canadian people of French origin ha ve made tremendous strides in furthering their culture in my lifetime, and I'm a young fellow.

I think it's heading in that direction. lt seems to me when this thing came out and hit the news it was a spontaneous reaction from far too many people, rightly or wrongly, but that's the way it is, to go ahead with a subject as volatile as this at this time; that's my feeling. MR. D. SCOTT: So are you saying then that if, under a Constitution or under a law, a group of people in society have a right that, if that right is not necessarily popular in society, to enforce that right, that you should not go ahead with it? MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. Mr.

Scott, could you rephrase the question so as not to provide the answer within the question? 775 MR. D. SCOTT: You said you were opposed to any increase or decrease in the services that are provided presently, as are presently allowed in

Section 23, and your

interpretation of

Section 23 is just to the Legislature and to the courts. , MR. CHAIRMAN: Question, please. MR. D. SCOTT: Basically, I'm trying to get at - and it's difficult with the narrowness of the question I'm allowed - is that as long as the French people are quiet and do not try and enforce their rights and recognize their rights and go through the courts, then everything is copacetic or okay, is that the . . . MR. J. LOEWEN: The brief doesn't say that, Mr. Chairman. I've said quite clearly ... MR. CHAIRMAN: Perhaps, Mr. Loewen, you might want to reread your brief for the benefit of Mr. Scott. Mr.

Scott, do you have a question on the brief, to clarify the contents of the brief please? MR. D. SCOTT: Perhaps I'll come back after reading through the question. MR. CHAIRMAN: Ok ay, Mr. Scott, I'll keep your name on the list. Mrs. Smith. HON. M. SMITH: Mr. Chairman, to Mr. Loewen, in Paragraph 5, on the first page, you say that you fear that if the rights and privileges of one group are extended and enshrined in the Constitution that that would take away from the inclina tion and urgency for the government to provide assistance to other ethnic groups.

I just wonde red if you had any evidence that fed that fear of actions or policies? MR. J. LOEWEN: No, Mr. Chairman, as this hasn't happened yet it is just something that our people fear and feel might happen, and have expressed their views to me in that respect. This is the reason we put it in there. HON. M. SM ITH: Mr. Loewen , if you had some satisfaction on that issue, would that reduce the fear? Some arguments, I guess, that show that often the rights of other minority groups are - I need guidance, I don't know whether I am overstepping here.

But education rights and heritage languages have often been extended following the greater privilege for French. I'm just wondering if perhaps quite the opposite might not be true. MR. J. LOEWEN: Of course, it's a hypothetical question, it's impossible to answer at this point. HON. M. SMITH: I understand that. MR. J. LOEWEN: My people, my forefathers, felt that they were slighted in years back, too, and I think they were in the education system; agree with that. So we're not new to this , I don't think.

That is why we say in our brief that we feel, whatever has been provided in 1870, at a time when 50 percent of the people in

Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 Manitoba were of French origin, if it was good then, perhaps it's good today. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Smith. HON. M. SMITH: That's fine. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Graham. MR. H. GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, through you to Reeve Loewen. I notice in your brief you say the Rural Municipality of Hanover is a rural municipality of 7,500 people. Is that not an unusually large number? We've had many brie fs from mun icipal people representing 1, 000, 800, 1, 200. Is that an unusually large number of people for a rural municipality? MR. J. LOEWEN: Mr.

Chairman, we do things in a big way in this part of the province, but that is, in actual fact, the number of people. There are a number of villa ges in the municipality, but they are part of the municipality. MR. CHAIRMAN: lt's different than western Manitoba. Mr. Graham. MR. H. GRAHAM: Mr. Loewen, do you know of any other rural munici pality in Manitoba tha t has a population that large? MR. J. LOEWEN: I would suspect, Springfield. MR. CHAIRMAN: Right. HON. R. PENNER: The R.M. of Portage la Prairie claims it's the largest. MR. CHAIRMAN: lt isn't, Springfield is . MR. H. GRAHAM: In land only. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr.

Graham. MR. H. GRAHAM: Mr. Loew en, when you'r e representing a population that large, I imagine that you and your council deliberated very long and very carefully to accurately reflect the collective opinions of your people before you prepared this brief; would that be a fair assumption? MR. J. LOEWEN: Yes, that is a fair assumption. As a matter of fact, I admonished my council to very carefully consider what action would be taken. I assume they did, and this is what they come up with. Mr. Chairman, if I might, going back to his prc.: c..1� question on the lighter side, we have that many people in Han over.

We also have more pigs and more cattle and mo re chickens in Ha no ver than any other municipalities. MR. H. GRAHAM: Is there a relationship? MR. CHAIRMAN: Further questions, Mr. Graham? MR. H. GRAHAM: No, that's fine. na MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Lecuyer. MR. G. LECUYER: One question, Mr. Chairman, Mr.

Loewen, would you perhaps feel if an amendment, such as has been proposed on September 6th or has been suggested or recommended - I don't know which word is the proper one - which would guarantee and protect the rights already acq uired or enj oyed by the other ethnic minorities, in Manitoba, and that were put into this amendment, would you perhaps feel that would remove the fear expressed in your brief? MR. J. LOEWEN: I would have to give my own feeling on that, Mr. Chairman. My inclination has always been that, if something doesn't have to be legislated, it shouldn't.

When you start legislating all the rights of every specific ethnic minority in Manitoba, it seems to me, and that's my own personal opinion, it could get very extensive and far-rea ching. So I couldn't foresee that, quite frankly. MR. G. LECUYER: I wasn't suggesting, Mr. Loewen, that there be similar detailed amendments regarding each of the lingu istic minorities, but perhaps you're not aware - and I don't kn ow tha t I can supply th e information which is the

Section 23 . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: Question, Mr. Lecuyer. I've never ruled out of order reading from either the resolution or the amendme nts, because that information should be available to anyone presenting a brief. MR. G. LECUVER: Perhaps you've seen the suggested addition to the amendments, which would be

Section 23.9 which states as follows: "Nothing in

Section 23 and

Section 23.7 abrogates or derogates from any legal or customary right or privilege acquired or enjoyed, either before or after the coming into force of this amendment, with respect to any language that is not English or French." That is the amendment I was referring to, and asking you, Mr. Loewen, whether you felt that perhaps that would not go a long way into alleviating the fears expressed in the sentence in the bottom paragraph which Mrs.

Smith read awhile ago, which states, "We fear, if the rights and privileges of this group of Canadians are extended, spelled out and set forth, this will take away from the inclin ation and urgency of the government to provide assistance to other ethnic groups of Manitoba." MR. J. LOEWEN: I really can't answer that, I'm afraid. I haven't dwelt on it enough, I haven't considered it enough, or council hasn't looked at it so I can't really answer that. MR.

CHAIRMAN: Reeve Loewen, for your information, copies of both the original amend ment and the prop osals for sugge sted further amendment are available on the table at the rear if you wish to take some for your council. MR. J. LOEWEN: lt's not that we don't have them, Mr. Chairman, it's just that ... MR. CHAIRMAN: No, I meant the second sheet, the su pplemen tary amen dme nts that were tabled on

Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 September 6th. Some people don't have those because they were only tabled in the committee, and have been available during our hearings if anyone does not have them. Further questions for Reeve Loewen? Mr. Scott. MR. D. SCOTT: Oka y. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Through you to Mr. Loewen, I'll try it again. In your brief on Page 2, at the bottom of, I guess, it's the first paragraph, you say, "We are opposed to either increasing or decreasing the rights of Canadians, of French or English origin." That is what I was attempting to paraphrase.

Are you or is your council against the restoration of services that are within those rights to Canadians of English or French origin? MR. J. LOEWEN: I think, we have no choice, that is the law of the land. The statutes of 18 70 say what shall be done, and that is the law. The courts have declared that is a valid statute, and we support that. MR. D.

SCOTT: The other point that I don't thin k you asked earlier, and you can choose not to answer, of course, if you wish, and that is on your next paragraph, was, " ... if passed, will have a dividing effect on the people of Manitoba and seriously hurt the unity of the country." I had asked before and didn't quite get an answer, I don't believe, on when is a good time to restore th ose rights and to recognize for people who have a right and have been deprived of a right; when is an opportune time for them to go and seek redress, or for a government to act without having to go through the courts or redress being sought through the courts to recognize those rights?

MR. J. LOEWEN: I think our brief says, and we believe that the striking down of that law of 1890, which declared Manitoba to be an English-only province, has restored those rights and should be enough, we feel, for Canadians of French origin to enjoy the kind of culture which they wish to maintain. MR. D. SCOTT: I take it from that, that you will accept the

interpretations of that, I guess, if they're court ordered , moreso than provincially, of what extent on the services that are included under those rights as recognized in 1870? MR. J. LOEWEN: I go back, again, and say the act, as it stands. I consider ourselves to be law- abiding people and we're satisfied. MR. D. SCOTT: Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: Further questions for Reeve Loewen from members of the committee? Mr. Banman. MR. R. BANMAN: Mr. Chairman, through you to Reeve Loewen.

You mentioned, Reeve Loewen, that you were somewhat and your area was somewhat familiar with the question of language rights as it goes back to the school qu estion in 19 60. Wha t ha ppened to the population of the municipality shortly after the Manitoba Government's move on the language education issue in 1916 ? 777 MR. J. LOEWEN: Mr. Chairman, I'll have to do a little bit of mind-joggling to come up with some answers, but I do know that there was quite a bit of division amongst the people of the community and it had a divisive effect, but I wouldn't want to go beyond that. MR. R. BANMAN: That's fine. MR.

CHAIRMAN: Further questions? Seeing none, Reeve Loewen, thank you very much for appearing here today and thank you for representing your council here at this committee meeting. Lawrence Berard; Mayor Fontaine, Omer Fontaine; Aime Gauthier; Councillor Ed Falk, Ed Falk; Mayor Gil Wiebe, Mayor Gil Wiebe. For the information of committee members, Reeve Clarence Baker, R.M. of Brokenhead , has asked to be removed from the list because he was unable to return later on this afternoon and missed his call this morning. Mr. Graham has asked if Mr. Baker filed a brief with the comm ittee; no brief has been filed.

Leo Robert, Leo Robert; Tony Shewchuk, Ukrainian Museum and Village Society, Gardenton, Mr. Shewchuk, please; Richard Loeb; Frank Baker; Rino Ouellet , Rino Ouellet. Dr. Archambault. DR. G. ARCHAMBAULT: Monsieur le president . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: Would you please just wait a moment until all the members have copies and, more importantly, the interpreter. Please proceed. DR. G. ARCHAMBAUL T: Monsieur le pre sident, membre du comite.

Je trouve deplorable que les franco-mantobains doivent encore une fois deployer beaucoup d'effort et d'energie pour venir vous presenter des memoires qui revendiquent ce qui devrait legalement etre accorde d' apres les ententes conc lue s en 1870 entre le gouv ernement canadien et Louis Aiel, chef du gouvernement provisoire de La Riviere Rouge. Ce processus epuisant ne peut que decourager les plus ardents et donn er raison aux petit s esprits qui pretendent que le nom bre ne justifie pas les changements pro poses; cha ngements di s-je qui rectifieraient les iniqu ites du passe.

A chaque fois que les franco-manitobains ont obtenu des ecoles, des services et des structures adminis tratives necessaires a leur epanouissement, ce fut messieurs de la comission, a coup de memoires, de pression politique et de manifestation. Quand messieurs du gouvernemet et de I' opposition finira cette lutte interminable, ce cauchemar inla ssable, cette injustice malicieuse et flagrante.

Je deplore le fait que des hommes politiques, ou devrais-je dire des petits politiciens jouent a des fins politiques le sort des francophones, un des peuples fondateurs du Canada, de l'ouest canadien et de la province du Manitoba. Cette attitude abusive est bouleversante pour ne pas dire genante pour I' ensemble du pays qui se fait champion, outre frontriere, de la justice et de la liberte. Les droits negocies des franco-manitobains lors de I' entree du Manitoba dans la Confederation canadienne,

Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 etaient a mon sens une condition sans equivoque de participation, comme d'ailleurs, les ententes entre le Haut et le Bas Canada en 1867. A I' entree du Manitoba dans la Confederation canadienne, Louis Riel chef du gouvernement provisoire a la Riviere Rouge exigea des garanties pour la langue franc;:aise sur le nouv eau territoire manitobain. L' Acte du Manitoba rendait le franc;:ais et l'anglais langues officielles de la nouvelle province dans des domaines definis et offrait deux systemes d'education a fondement confessionnel.

Ces ententes aux deux niveaux sont un temoignage de respect et ce respect mutuel entre anglophones et francophones, formait a l'epoque, la pierre angulaire, a

partie de laquelle, on voulait batir un pays tenant compte des deux realites, des deux peuples fondateurs. Lorq u'o n se penchait sur toute la qu estion du bilinguisme a Ottawa en 1969, tous les partis, liberal, conservateur, neo democrate et creditiste, votaient en faveur de la proposi tion, mettant de cote toute partisannerie politique pour acceder a une decision juste, equitable et digne de louanges. Pourquoi ne serait-il pas de meme au Manitoba avec cette question d'amendement. Pourquoi cette opposition farouche, orchestree par les membres du parti conservateur et un dissident neo democrate.

La resistance manifestee aux amendements proposes, est le fruit de vos efforts et non comme vous le pretendez, un mouvement spontane de la population. Si vous vous etiez ralies aux amendements proposes la reaction aurait ete minime. Vous etes responsables de cette reaction. Vous, messieur s de !' opp osi tion, avez evei lle dans la population ce qui a de plus vil et de plus meprisant. Vous avez instaure dans I' esprit des gens des craintes sans fondements.

Vous avez deploue tous les efforts pour monter une opposion, voire meme un sentiment anti -franc;:ais plutot que depasse vos prejuges personne ls et vote avec le go uvernement. C'e st deplorable et je regrette ce comportement de votre part. Et vous, messieurs du gouvernement, vous avez flechi sous la pres sion politique.

Vos propositions de changement du mois de septembre altere tellement le texte de !' entente du 17 mai que nos conseill ers juridiques nous disent que les petits changements, et j'ajoute entre parentheses, comme vous le pretendez, diluent beaucoup ce qui avait ete negocie par la S.F.M. et endossee ' par les franc o-manitobains et le gouvernement federal. Pourquoi ces changements proposes, pourquoi ce volte-face, pourquoi ce recul avant meme enendre les gens se prononcer sur la question.

Ces changements proposes apportent rien de nouveau au debat parce qu'ils sont trop techniques mais modifient beaucoup ce que le gouvernement est pret a enchasser. Ceux qui sont opposes aux amendements sont aussi opposes maintenant qu'avant les changements pro poses en septembre. Alors, a mon sens, vous n'avez rien gagne. Vous avez joure a la politique avec une question tres sensible et vous avez perdu. Vous avez perdu du terrain politique, de la credibilite et meme des votes. Pourtant votre parti a toujours defendu les droits des plus petits, des demunis, et des minoritaires.

Bien que je ne suis pas de votre alliance politique je reconnais cependant que la protection des droits des minorites est un de vos points forts. Alors je comprend mal comment vous avez succombe aux pressions de !'o pposition en ns apportant ces changements au mois de septembre. Je vous encourage fortement de faire demi tour arriere et poursuivre avec !'entente du 17 mai dernier. C'est la seule solution acceptable au dilemne. La SFM a negocie de bonne foi et vous a fait confiance.

Laissez nous croire qu'elle ne s'est pas trompee, qu'elle a eu raison, que vous etes dignes de confiance, et que vous ferez, comme gouvernement, ce qui doit etre fait pour corriger !'injustice commise en 1890. Merci. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Dr. Archambault. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please, order please. Some of you may not have been here earlier when I advised the gal lery that displays are not permitted from the gallery in any form. Questions for Dr. Archambault from members of the committee? Mr. Desjardins. HON. L. DESJARDINS: Monsieur le president, Dr.

Archambault, vous dites que le gouvernemet a flechi, a capitula. Est-ce que c'est vraiment juste lorsqu'on vous affirme et je vais, le texte est en anglais done je vais parler en anglais ici. You see the text of these draft amendments are subject to further amendments, which may flow from briefs presented to the Stand ing Comm ittee on Privileges and Elections and from technical advice received from Council, including the Legislative Council.

Lorsqu'on vous affirme que certainement il n'y a rien de decide, il n'y a pas d'amendements de proposes dans le moment, est-ce qu'il est juste de dire que le gouv ernement a deja flechi, a deja recule en arriere. DR. G. ARCHAMBAULT: Je suis d'accord peut-etre que ce n'est pas juste que le gouvernement a deja flechi mais il donne des impressions qu'il va peut-etre flechir. HON. L. DESJARDINS: Peut-etre. DR. G. ARCHAMBAULT: C'est pour c;:a qu'on est ici, Monsieur Desjardins, c'est pour presenter justement, on veut que le gouvernement suive I' entente du 17 mai derni er. HON. L.

DESJARDINS: Oui, je suis d'accord avec votre suggestion et meme je l'accepte de tout coeur. Mais dire que nous avons deja flechi, c'est aller un peu loin, je pense. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Penner. HON. R. PENNER: Yes, just to clarify that particular point about adhering to the agreement Dr. Archambault, and thank you very much tor a very forceful and very well-expressed brief. Is it your position that you are calling upon us to adhere to the spirit of May 17th, and principles, or are you saying that nothing can be changed, not a semi-colon, not a period, nothing can be clarified? Is that your position? DR. G.

ARCHAMBAULT: Well I would think, yes. HON. R. PENNER: That nothing can be clarified?

Tuesday, 27 September, 1983 DR. G. ARCHAMBAULT: Well I'm sure what you're proposing as a clarification. I'm not adept in law, so I wouldn't answer anything which would compromise this particular aspect, okay? HON. R. PENNER: No, I didn't think you would. DR. G. ARCHAMBAULT: What I'm saying is that attended the meeting in May and I was happy what the President of the SFM recommended to the people present and I accepted what was given as explanation, an authorative explanation by the lawyers that were present, and to me, that is what I want. I think that's pretty clear. HON. R.

PENNER: So that if words can be found that express that intention more clearly, you would not oppose those? DR. G. ARCHAMBAULT: Well again, I'm not sure that I'm answering what you want me to answer, but what I'm saying is let's stick with what we negotiated in May last. HON. R. PENNER: I wouldn't try to force the issue with you any further. MR. CHAIRMAN: Further questions from members of the committee? Mr. Gr aham. MR. H. GRAHAM: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, through you to Dr. Archambault, and again I want to cong ratu late him on a very forceful brie f. Dr.

Archambault, you made mention of the official language in 1969 that was passed in the House of Commons, I believe, in your brief. When that was passed, was that enshrined in the Constitution at that time? DR. G. ARCHAMBAULT: No, I don't think so. MR. H. GRAHAM: Would you know when it was enshrined in the Constitution? DR. G. ARCHAMBA ULT: No, I don't really. MR. H. GRAHAM: Would it be 12 or 13 years later? DR. G. ARCHAMBAULT: Possibly. MR. H. GRAHAM: You also said that you were at the meeting in May of the Societe franco-manitoban when this proposal was put forward and you were in full agreement. Is that right?

DR. G. ARCHAMBAULT: That's right

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	32-2-pe40
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	32nd 2nd hansardpdf pe40.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	6932a7f18cf3ccc1c39ebe70c496bd8e52b45290

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).