Official Languages Committee on March 30th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Good morning and welcome to this sixth meeting of the Standing Committee on Official Languages.

I would like to welcome our parliamentary secretary, whose presence allows us to have a full quorum, even though we may hear witnesses with six members present.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(f), we are beginning our study of the broadcasting and services in French of the Vancouver 2010 Olympic Games.

As well, pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(f), we are studying Air Canada's compliance with the Official Languages Act. To do so, we have the pleasure and privilege to have with us the Commissioner of Official Languages. He's accompanied this morning by the assistant commissioner from the compliance assurance branch, Ms. Ghislaine Charlebois.

Welcome to the committee.

The commissioner is also accompanied by Mr. Sylvain Giguère, who is assistant commissioner, policy and communications branch. From the more judicial side we have lead counsel and director of legal affairs, Madam Johane Tremblay, who is well accustomed to our committee.

Mr. Commissioner, I would like to welcome you once again to the Standing Committee on Official Languages. I would invite you to report on your experience of the Olympic Games and also to speak to the transport issue, that is to say regarding our national airline, Air Canada.

[Graham Fraser, Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Excuse me, Mr. Fraser.

Mr. Bélanger, you have a point of order?

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

I would like some clarification, please. The agenda we received stipulates that there are two meetings. If I understand correctly, Mr. Chair, we have combined them.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

We are combining everything, Mr. Bélanger. Mr. Fraser's presentation will deal with both subjects. At the end, when we will have finished our meeting with the commissioner, we will be able to present the members with the report of the first meeting of the steering committee concerning our schedule.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

I just wanted it to be clear, thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Mr. Fraser, you have the floor.

[Graham Fraser]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Honourable members, members of the Standing Committee on Official Languages, Mr. Chairman, good day. I am pleased to meet with you today to discuss the linguistic aspects of the Vancouver 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games, and also Air Canada. I do not have a separate statement regarding Air Canada. I will include some comments at the end of my presentation on the games.

Over the past three years, I have given considerable attention to the Vancouver 2010 Olympic Games. My staff has maintained regular contact with the Vancouver Organizing Committee for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games, VANOC, as well as with the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games Federal Secretariat, which is part of Canadian Heritage.

I first raised my concerns the first time I appeared before you as commissioner, in November 2006. I published a report on the games in December 2008 and a follow-up report in September 2009. In addition to visitor and athlete services, the issue of French television broadcasting of the games received my full attention until the final hour.

The games are now over. It's time to take stock and draw lessons for the future.

In the coming weeks my staff will be completing an analysis of the complaints lodged by some 40 citizens, almost all in relation to the opening ceremony. As usual, we are contacting these individuals and the institutions concerned, in this case mainly Canadian Heritage. Everyone will be informed as the process unfolds and when a final determination is made.

At the same time, the various federal institutions that provided services at the games will be sending me a report on their activities between now and July 1. Based on these reports and on our own analysis we will produce an overall performance assessment of VANOC and the institutions. This document will also include my proposals on how best to reflect linguistic duality in the organization of other large-scale events in Canada, as well as international events that project the image of the country.

I had the opportunity to spend almost a week at the games in order to observe the work that had been done on site. This allowed me to meet with other concerned observers, including the Grand témoin of the Organisation internationale de la Francophonie, Pascal Couchepin.

Also present at the games were two employees from my office, who were able to observe first-hand how VANOC and federal institutions complied with their language obligations.

My testimony today is based on what I have seen while in Vancouver. Admittedly, they are first impressions of the most visible aspects of bilingualism at the games, pending a more in-depth analysis.

I would first like to share an observation that could be made by all Canadians who watched the games on television. I was deeply impressed by the number of our young athletes who could comfortably express themselves in both official languages. Alexandre Bilodeau, Maëlle Ricker, Joannie Rochette, Jennifer Heil, Roberto Luongo, Jonathan Toews, Charles Hamelin, Kristina Groves, Clara Hughes, Jasey Jay Anderson, Sydney Crosby and countless others charmed their audiences with their desire to excel, their personalities and their bilingualism.

The fact that their number is growing from one Olympic Games to another is a powerful message on young people's commitment to their country and on their openness to the world. I would also like to emphasize just how much the activities organized for the public by francophone communities contributed to the festive atmosphere that prevailed at the games. In Vancouver, as in Maillardville, thousands of people were able to discover the country's francophone culture.

In fact, the Place de la francophonie received enthusiastic praise from the Vancouver Sun, which awarded it a gold medal for its dynamic programming. French was visible—and audible—in various ways at Olympic venues and in the streets. VANOC's bilingual signage was, on the whole, consistent. The athletes' biographies were available in both languages, as planned.

To continue with a personal perspective, let me say that I was able to register in French. When I arrived at the Thunderbird Arena I was greeted with an active offer in both languages at security. When I asked at the door to the arena where I should go with the pass I had, I was greeted with “I don't speak French—Jenny, you speak French”. The volunteer turned to a colleague who sorted out my problem and escorted me to the correct section. It was a model of how people should be served in both languages.

In several of the areas that we identified as problematic in our reports--translation, signage, directions, availability of athlete statements, and translation of documents--it can be said that the Vancouver games were a success.

I appreciate all the work that your committee,

the Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures, the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne of Canada,

Minister James Moore, and government officials did in this regard.

You may recall that when I first appeared before you in November 2006 I raised the concern that the games might not be available for French-speaking Canadians outside Quebec. You picked up on this concern. Thanks to the intervention of Konrad von Finckenstein and the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, the efforts of the consortium, and public-spirited action by the cable companies, the Olympic Games were not only well covered in both languages but were also available in French on CPAC across the country. I congratulate all those involved in ensuring that Canadians from coast to coast had access to the games in both languages.

Unfortunately, many Canadians felt that the opening ceremony did not reflect the country's linguistic duality. As we are now investigating these complaints, I will not comment on the opening ceremony today. However, I think it is unfortunate that a shadow has been cast on the significant achievements we've seen.

I hope that we will be able to contribute to a reflection on how Canada presents itself to the world in terms of its linguistic duality.

However, my employees on site noticed that the French version of the official souvenir program for the games was virtually nowhere to be found, except on the Web site. This was a missed opportunity not only for VANOC, but for Canada as well, since the program was a promotional tool that could have reached a worldwide audience.

As for service, we often came across VANOC volunteers who were able to provide information in both languages, even though they were sometimes hard to find and their dispersion across the various sites seemed random, at times. Instead of trying to locate a bilingual individual, unilingual volunteers had a tendency to sometimes resort to enthusiastic hand gestures. This was cute, but not always effective.

A number of federal institutions, such as Canada Post, put their on-site infrastructure to good use by setting up oversized displays in both languages. Some sponsors such as Coca-Cola and The Bay provided signage and service in both languages.

Needless to say, Olympic protocol was properly applied: it seems announcers at the venues used French and English systematically, both during competitions and at medal ceremonies.

Before the games, I expressed some concerns about the services provided by the various federal institutions in Vancouver during the games. The personal observations I was able to make in this regard are relatively limited. I would therefore like to reserve my comments for the final report, at which time I will have more information in hand. Nevertheless, I can say that considerable efforts were made to increase the number of bilingual employees and volunteers, particularly for services provided at the Vancouver International Airport.

Assuming that federal institutions provided bilingual service of greater quality than usual, it is worth reiterating that the language obligations in effect during the Olympic Games are in fact the same as those that apply the rest of the time.

What must be avoided is what some consider a return to business as usual, which, in the case of western Canada, is approximate bilingualism and an almost total lack of active offer. Guaranteeing Canadian taxpayers bilingual services that comply with the Official Languages Act in that part of the country requires leadership from the heads of a broad range of institutions, an increased commitment by the Treasury Board, and of course the watchfulness of parliamentarians.

I will therefore continue to closely monitor the status of federal services in the Vancouver region, and by extension western Canada.

In the coming year I also intend to focus on the rights of the travelling public. It is important that the obligations of airport authorities be clarified. It is also important that the minister adopt a bill to clarify the language obligations of the new entities, such as Jazz, created by Air Canada as part of the new corporate structure. Such a bill should not only protect the language rights of the travelling public, but also ensure that Air Canada employees maintain their right to work in the official language of their choice within the new entities in the Air Canada family.

Thank you for your time. My colleagues and I will be happy to answer any questions you might have.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much, Mr. Commissioner.

I see you have mentioned that the Vancouver Games were a tremendous success. In that regard, I would like to thank you for your positive comments about the committee and its members. That reflects on all of its members, regardless of their political stripe. Thank you for those kind words. We appreciate it.

Mr. D'Amours, you have the floor.

[Jean-Claude D'Amours, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Commissioner and thank you to your staff members who have come with you this morning. My comments will deal with two issues: that of Air Canada in the second part, but first the Olympic Games.

Towards the end of your presentation, on the subject of Vancouver Airport, you used the expression “business as usual”, on the subject of a possible return to old habits. And yet, Mr. Commissioner, you gave compelling examples of other people who understood, including when you spoke about our athletes. Our athletes are more and more bilingual. In fact, our young people across the country are more and more bilingual. Private companies, including The Bay and Coca-Cola, understood the message concerning bilingualism. On the other hand, I understand that you did not want to make comments on the Olympic Games' opening ceremony, but let us remember that our athletes, our youth, are more and more bilingual and that private companies understood the need to offer bilingual services even though they are under no obligation to do so. They are private companies. They are under no obligation, but they understood. There must be a reason for that. However, as far as the opening ceremonies were concerned, you have had concerns since 2006. For our part, at the committee, it is true that we had to act as a watchdog, at one point, in order to ensure that adequate services would be offered to people. The Olympic Games were not only for the citizens of the world, but also the Canadian Olympic Games, for Canadians, paid for in part with Canadian taxpayers' dollars. Those who were not able to participate directly in Vancouver also had the right to participate in their own way, at home, in front of their televisions.

How many times did we have the people from VANOC here, how many times did we tell them—I will always remember what I said—that we would find ourselves obliged to make comments that were not always glowing after the Olympic Games. It is clear that generally speaking, perhaps on the ground there, things were fine, but we nevertheless had given them a warning from the first countdown. One year before the launch of the Olympic Games, when there was the countdown, we gave a warning to VANOC and we could only expect that they got the message. I am aware of the fact that you may not want to discuss this, but one year later, at the opening ceremonies, we witnessed a situation that was perhaps not identical but that was somewhat similar, and that is shameful. It was in response to these criticisms, including criticism of the Department of Heritage itself, that at the end of the Olympic Games there were efforts made to compensate for that, which is laudable. People made efforts and I would never criticize anyone who tries, even if things are imperfect. Not everyone has the ability to speak both official languages perfectly, of course.

Needless to say I am anxious to see your final report because the committee has devoted four years to this issue. This took a lot of time and we asked VANOC to take the situation seriously. Once again, I repeat, taxpayers' money paid for part of the Olympic Games. It was not only for the rest of the world, but also for Canadians.

I would now like to discuss Air Canada. Mr. Commissioner, I agree with you that we need legislation. We remember, a few years ago, probably around 2006, that Minister Cannon announced with great pride to the Standing Committee on Official Languages that he would be enacting legislation on Air Canada. That was in 2006. We have had many elections and prorogations since without result. It is not even in the government's pipeline—if you'll pardon my expression—at this time. I still remember Air Canada's comments and I would like you to clarify the situation. Air Canada was saying they did not want to have any obligations, and that if they did, they would need help. Mr. Commissioner, is Air Canada subject to any obligations, yes or no? When they signed the agreement to buy Canadian International, was the obligation to provide services in both official languages included?

[Graham Fraser]

I completely agree. That was part of their obligations. The argument was the following: Canadian taxpayers had invested in the creation and maintenance of the infrastructure and the image of that airline over a long period of time. With its purchase, the people had bought a Canadian creation that bore Canada's name. Through the purchase of not only the infrastructure, the physical assets, but also the image and history associated with it, there were very clear obligations. I'm not a lawyer but I believe that when a contract is signed, it cannot be amended without the consent of both signatories. In my opinion, there are very clear obligations.

The problem is that, in the current context, several bills have already been tabled. Every time a bill is tabled, all of a sudden the structure is changed. We see that certain services are transferred from one component of what I call the Air Canada family to another. There are therefore not the same obligations for certain subsidiaries as there are for Air Canada. We are consequently proposing that the obligations be clearly defined for all the entities that are part of the Air Canada family.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you. Mr. Nadeau, you have the floor.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Commissioner, I would like to welcome you and your colleagues to our committee. I am very pleased to welcome you here, particularly on the issues affecting the Olympic Games.

Personally, there is something that really bothered me at the Olympic Games. I learned about it after the fact. In the text of the contribution agreement between Canadian Heritage and VANOC, the fact that the Canadian government required equal usage of French and English in the activities that would be taking place in order to reflect the Québécois and Canadian nations before this world audience was not included. I would like to hear your comments on the fact that this was not included in this very important text. The contribution agreement stated that the money would follow according to the criteria set out.

[Graham Fraser]

During our research for the studies and the follow-up, we only saw part of the contribution agreement, but we never saw the complete document. I can therefore not comment on the details of this agreement because we were not able to do a detailed analysis of it.

However, there was clearly a lack of understanding. All of the members of Parliament very clearly expressed to the VANOC representatives who came and appeared before the committee the importance of the cultural component involved in the ceremonies. During our investigation, following the complaints that we received, we will continue our more detailed study in order to get a better picture of what happened.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

I would like to address another important aspect.

We had six or seven years to prepare for the games. It took some time before we knew that they would take place in Vancouver. Other cities were in the competition as well. Vancouver won, and good for them. Seven years later, there were the opening ceremonies. I know you will not speak to this today, but for the entire world, it was a reflection of the country where the games were being held. You yourself said that French was as hard to find as snow in Vancouver. Minister Moore, who is indeed the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages, said that he was disappointed and found the lack of understanding of VANOC to be regrettable.

I remember that during the committee's deliberations, when the people from VANOC appeared, we were very disappointed by the countdown as far as the show was concerned. There was no French at all. That was one year before the games. At one point, we told the VANOC people what we felt. At that point, I had even asked if it was possible to withdraw VANOC's funding in order to give it to another organization so that they could do the job. For me, this is the same old story with the Canada I know. No one cares about the French fact, but when there is a crisis, adjustments are made. Once again, we have seen the evidence of this. I find this extremely unfortunate.

You attended the games, unlike myself. However, we read the media reports. It was said that approximately 15% of the 25,000 volunteers were bilingual. Were you able to draw any conclusions on this issue? Was it really terrible or were the French services on the ground more or less adequate?

[Graham Fraser]

From what I understand, VANOC decided to assign bilingual volunteers to areas where the probability was higher that there would be francophones, for example in registration areas, in the media room and at other critical areas. This strategic distribution of bilingual volunteers meant that in the street, for example, the probability of someone wearing a blue vest being bilingual was less likely. For those who wanted to somewhat test the volunteers' bilingualism in the street and who pointed certain people out, it was sometimes difficult to find them. The fact remains that in specific areas where francophones needed services, the probability of meeting bilingual staff was higher.

One result of this strategic decision struck me. For example, athletes' families from Quebec were welcomed and accompanied in the bus by volunteers who spoke French. There were also the events. A strategic effort was made to offer good accompaniment to identifiable francophones, if you will.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Commissioner.

Thank you, Mr. Nadeau.

We will now go to Mr. Godin.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would also like to welcome you to the official languages committee, Mr. Commissioner, as well as your team.

Before the Olympic Games, there was some discussion about a report that you had requested from the RCMP, but that you had not received. I would like to hear your comments on that subject.

[Graham Fraser]

We finally received the report. All I can tell you about the RCMP and security in general is that, to my knowledge, we did not receive any complaints.

Ghislaine, am I mistaken?

[Ghislaine Charlebois, Assistant Commissioner, Compliance Assurance Branch, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages]

No.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

We are discussing complaints. There are rumours that you received between 40 and 100. How many did you receive?

[Graham Fraser]

I believe the final total was 38.

[Ghislaine Charlebois]

During the Olympic Games, we received approximately 40 complaints. In the beginning, we heard from several people, but after having analyzed this information, we realized that several people in the end had just written letters of opinion. They sent in their comments. After having checked with them, we realized that they did not officially wish to complain.

Therefore, after analysis, we can state that we received some 40 complaints concerning the Olympic Games.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

They did not wish to file complaints.

What did the complaints deal with?

[Ghislaine Charlebois]

The vast majority of the complaints concerned the opening ceremonies.