Official Languages Committee on March 26th, 2013

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

The reason I asked is that during my years in the military, for promotion to certain levels there was a language requirement and a requirement to keep that current. I just wonder why in a piece of federal legislation dealing with our federal Parliament we would not consider using the federal standard that assesses competency in the two languages. I am interested in your feedback.

[Marie-France Kenny]

The principle is good and I approve what Mr. Thompson says in principle, but in reality, perhaps none of us will be sitting here in 10 years. People will then be able to interpret this as they wish, by reducing the necessary language competency level. I want to ensure that there is a minimum threshold.

You are correct when you say that we should at least require that. All the better if the person's skills are above the minimum level, but we have to maintain one. I am in agreement with what Mr. Thompson said in principle, but I am afraid that there may be a tendency to do as little as possible all the time, because the governments that followed each other in the past did not demand a minimum level. Let's shoot for the moon and ask for the C skill level, at the very least, that is, the advanced level.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Okay, thank you.

Go ahead, Mr. Benskin.

[Tyrone Benskin, NDP, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

Thank you to the witnesses for being here.

There is some interesting discussion going on, but I'm going to touch first on the issue of the temporary position, when the agent leaves, resigns and so forth, and there is an interim period. I would like to share my feeling with you and invite comments. I feel that, whether it's an interim position or not—and I think you said it best, Ms. Kenny—it's the position itself that holds the proficiency and not the individual. If that individual, interim or not, cannot hold that proficiency then, for that period of time, Canadians and the people who work for that agency are getting less than they should be getting until they find someone to fill that position.

Would that be an accurate—

[Marie-France Kenny]

Currently, the Official Languages Act regulations stipulate that when a designated bilingual position is staffed on an acting basis, the person must have the language skills required by the position. I don't see why it should be any different for key positions in the government and for the agents of Parliament. I feel that the requirements should be the same, whether the person is there in an acting capacity or not.

Why should we accept less, when we do not for other positions in the government? If the Official Languages Act regulations apply to all positions within the government, they should also apply to key positions in the government.

[Tyrone Benskin, NDP, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

Because I have only five minutes, I'll jump over to what we were talking about, the proficiency levels. Any kind of grading system is a subjective thing, from elementary school right through to job applications.

My concern about adding a very specific measure in the law is that it will not account for any progress that may be made in the future in terms of language proficiency, skills, and expectations. As the country becomes more and more bilingual, one would hope and expect there would be a higher level of expectation of language proficiency—oral, written, comprehension, interpretation, and there might be something else added.

My fear in adding a limit is that the limit very quickly becomes a lower limit for what is available out there.

[Marie-France Kenny]

I'd say that after the advanced level there are the semi-professional and professional levels—at least, they were where I used to work—and those were reserved for communications people who had to be extremely...and linguists. I'm not expecting an auditor general, or someone at CBC/Radio-Canada, or a

The Chief Electoral Officer of Canada has to have a professional language level in both French and English. We want him to be comprehensible. In the wake of this bill, there will be a gradual evolution. I dare hope that if one day everyone in our society speaks the language at a professional level, we will ask the same of the agents of Parliament. When I listen to the news, I don't expect to hear extremely elevated discourse, but I do expect to understand what the person is saying. I think that the advanced level is the minimum level that should be required. If we find someone who has a professional level of competency, all the better, but if he or she has an advanced level, I will be able to understand them, as will everyone else.

[Tyrone Benskin, NDP, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

Could I get a quick response to the same question from Mr. Thompson as well?

[Stephen Thompson]

For the managerial question of what level, CCB, BCB, A, or whatever it is, the principle is for you, the parliamentarians, to have equal access to the individual in question. When you're in the cafeteria, does that person feel completely comfortable coming up and sitting at your table? At parties, can you converse with and share ideas with that person?

That's the level of bilingualism we're talking about. It's access for you, the people's representatives, to the agents or the officers listed in this bill, so that you can have equal access to them and ensure equality of status of the two languages.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you very much.

The last intervention for today, before we consider the other business that we need to deal with administratively, goes to Monsieur Gourde.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to welcome all of the witnesses.

Ms. Kenny, since you are a translator, I think that you are just the right person to answer my question. I think it is important that the people appointed to these positions be able to read, understand and speak both official languages properly. We all think that. However, in clause 2 of the bill, the following words are used: « without the aid of an interpreter ». As you said, it takes years to learn a language, and more years again to master a second language. If you do not understand a word or you understand more or less, you can ask for the help of an interpreter to make sure you understand a sentence correctly and can make the right decision afterwards.

If we leave that text intact, are we going to have to ask the agent of Parliament to resign if he or she needs an interpreter from time to time in order to understand some expression properly?

[Marie-France Kenny]

There is a difference, Mr. Gourde, between needing the services of an interpreter and needing those of a translator. If I am not sure about the meaning or the use of a word, I will turn to a colleague, naturally. There is a difference between that and being shadowed by an interpreter who translates everything, or being forced to listen to an interview in English with subtitles in French or through the voice of an interpreter who may not render certain nuances. In saying this I am absolutely not criticizing interpreters for whom I have the utmost respect, but they can't do justice to everything. You may have noticed that sometimes before this committee when I become very passionate, I answer in English, and that is why. I know that the role of the interpreter is not to translate my emotion, my passion or my anxiety.

To my way of thinking, we are not talking about the same thing at all. The words « without the aid of an interpreter » mean that the person can get along. If he says « uh » and can't find a word or uses an English word during his interview, that is acceptable. In fact, I do that myself. The words « without the aid of an interpreter » mean that there is no obligation to have an interpreter present all the time who translates everything that is being said.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

As you say, we can go from one language to the other. If you do not find the ideal word in French, you say it in English.

[Marie-France Kenny]

Yes, but that must not happen every second word; it should be occasional, as needed. It has happened to me to look for the word « essuie-glace ». I said « my wipers ». We understand each other.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

So you are indulgent in the case of the odd memory lapse.

[Marie-France Kenny]

Yes I am, because we do not expect perfection, and that it is not the objective. If that were the goal, none of us could ever occupy any of these positions. No one on earth could occupy them.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

These are high-level positions, you will agree. No one wants to have to take special university training to be able to occupy one of these ten positions. It is because of the broad experience of a lifetime, because of the skills acquired, that someone may one day, at a certain age, be appointed to one of these positions. Do you share that point of view?

[Marie-France Kenny]

Yes.

I was of course bilingual, since I was a translator. If someone wants to have a career in a government department or agency or aspires to a position in the upper echelons of the public service, like that of the Auditor General, they should be bilingual, as our young people know as of high school. If you have a certain career plan, you have to see certain things coming and act accordingly.

It's the same thing when I hear about the difficulty of recruiting bilingual people. When I was in Saskatchewan, we recruited bilingual auditors and bilingual audit directors. These people exist; you simply have to take the trouble to look for them.

Of course, if I am looking for a bilingual chartered accountant in Bellegarde, I may not find any; but if I broaden my search to all of Saskatchewan, I will find some. The point is that you have to do a serious search. You can turn to the services of headhunters, for instance. Sometimes that option seems very expensive, but it is less expensive by far than having to train someone for two years.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

If someone is named on an acting basis for two or three months, and it proves really difficult--or impossible--to find a bilingual person, would it be better to close the Office of the Auditor General for three months, or to hire a unilingual person on an acting basis while waiting for the new appointment?

[Marie-France Kenny]

You cannot close that office, but do you not think that there would be someone already in the organization who is bilingual, knows the work, and could staff the position on an acting basis?

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Would that be in another position? I was asking you whether...

[Marie-France Kenny]

We are talking about any other position.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

I think that we are all people of good will here, as you indeed said in your presentation.

[Marie-France Kenny]

Yes.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

If that were the case, would it be preferable to close an office or a department, or, if nothing else were possible, to accept a unilingual person in an acting capacity?