Honourable senators, I take note of the message from the House of Commons on the Senate amendments to Bill C-6. The bill benefitted from being debated in the Senate, and I congratulate the sponsor of the bill, Senator Omidvar, on her tireless efforts. Congratulations!

The House of Commons chose to reject Senator Griffin's proposed amendment over the age at which a person would be exempt from the requirement to demonstrate knowledge in one of Canada's two official languages. Where Bill C-6 dropped the age limit from 65 to 55, Senator Griffin's amendment proposed it be dropped to 60 years.

The humanitarian grounds behind this reduction to 55 years are understandable and can even be described as noble. I understand them and accept the will of the other place.

However, for the equally important humanitarian reasons that prompted me to support Senator Griffin's amendment at third reading, I urge the government not to underestimate the role of language in the integration of newcomers to Canada.

It is not the intent of Bill C-6 that concerns me, but the unexpected consequences that may result from it. Since the awarding of citizenship is no longer linked to language learning for thousands of newcomers, it is no surprise that we find ourselves having to work twice as hard to encourage them to learn one of our two official languages. Will current resources be enough, or will a decrease in demand result in an equivalent decrease in allocated resources?

Dear colleagues, we will have to ensure greater oversight and follow-up with the government to ensure that this loosening of the law does not prompt it to cut language training for newcomers.

Think of how hard it must be for newcomers who do not have the opportunity to learn English or French. In the larger cities mainly, many newcomers might have the benefit of having members of their cultural community around, people they can interact with in their mother tongue. Outside these urban centres, however, the risk of isolation is very real. Job hunting even for a part-time job is difficult if not impossible.

The situation is even more challenging when it comes to health care. People with health concerns are vulnerable enough without the added trouble of a language barrier.

This isolation and vulnerability have a tremendous social cost. It goes without saying that in a bilingual country like ours, where access to health care in French remains a major challenge in a number of provinces, it is hard to imagine that there are enough resources to go around to ensure widespread access to health care in other languages. We must step up our efforts by investing so that all newcomers benefit from linguistic integration as soon as they arrive to Canada.

Honourable colleagues, we will have to monitor the impact of this change on the ability of newcomers over 55 to learn one of our two official languages. If there is a significant drop as a result, then both our country's linguistic duality and the successful integration of newcomers will suffer as a result. Let us not forget that integration is about more than just getting citizenship.

I support the underlying spirit of openness and welcoming in Bill C-6 and I will vote in favour of the message received from the other chamber. However, I hope that the government is committed to going beyond symbolic gestures and will implement a real linguistic integration program for all. That would be a great way to illustrate how important it is to us as Canadians that our new fellow citizens are properly welcomed and integrated. Thank you very much.