Evidence of meeting #73 for Official Languages in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was positions.
A video is available from Parliament.
March 26th, 2013 / 3:40 p.m.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Latendresse, thank you for coming to meet with us and for going through this exercise.
Your preamble says: “Whereas the Constitution provides”. Have you drawn this from the Constitution Act, 1867?
3:40 p.m.
NDP
Alexandrine Latendresse NDP Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
I wouldn't be able to tell you exactly, but the goal was simply to bring together very clear statements as to why bilingualism is so important in Canada. We also stress that, since Parliament is a bilingual institution, it is all the more important that its officers be bilingual as well. In a sense, they are the inner workings of Parliament. The ides was also to make things a bit clearer, by explaining what we understand by an officer of Parliament.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
In fact, since you used the words “Whereas the Constitution provides“, I assume that the wording was drawn wholly, or almost wholly, from the Constitution.
My second question has to do with clause 2 and the part that says “without the aid of an interpreter”.
Suppose that an officer of Parliament has an accident and takes a few months off, but he has a hearing problem when he comes back. That can actually happen after an accident. From time to time, he might need an interpreter or a special device. In fact, even with the assistance of an interpreter, he might have trouble understanding certain sounds, which could prevent him from understanding certain words correctly in both his first and second language.
What should we do in a case like that? Should we fire him, although he has all the skills required to keep his position and he still has five years before his mandate expires?
3:40 p.m.
NDP
Alexandrine Latendresse NDP Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
I don't think that applies here. In fact, the key point is understanding the language. Let's say for example that I decided one day to learn Russian. I can now understand the language without the aid of an interpreter, but that does not mean that I wouldn't want to listen to the translation during any given activity to make sure that I fully understood.
In the present case, the fact that a person is able to understand what someone says in French without the aid of an interpreter shows that they understand the language. It is simply a way to determine whether they do.
As I said earlier, that does not mean that the person would never be allowed to use an interpreter in carrying out their duties. The idea is simply to define what “to understand” means.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
So you agree that a person could sometimes use an interpreter to make sure they understand a sentence correctly and to not hinder their judgment. Would that be acceptable?
3:45 p.m.
NDP
Alexandrine Latendresse NDP Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
Of course. I don't think that would be a problem.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
I would now like to go back to clause 4.
Let's suppose that the same individual is off for three or four months to recover after his accident and that someone else has been appointed in the interim. The position had to be filled given the importance of the duties involved. In many cases, those appointed in the interim work in the same office. They don't necessarily have the same language skills, but they are fully capable of doing the job for three or four months. If the person does not come back or dies, we would have to go through the whole process of appointing a new officer of Parliament.
For an interim appointment, can we have someone who is not as proficient in French, meaning that they meet the requirements for level 2 or 3, but not for level 1?
3:45 p.m.
NDP
Alexandrine Latendresse NDP Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
I think the same criteria should apply. I sincerely believe that there are enough bilingual and competent people in our country. We are talking about 10 positions, not thousands and thousands of positions. In a case like that, of course, there could be major complications. We are talking about 10 very important positions. The people who fill those positions in the interim, even for just three or four months, are already quite competent. When someone is able to be the interim Auditor General of Canada, they must be high up the ladder and they must know that, at some stage, being proficient in both of Canada's official languages is no longer just an asset, but something essential for successfully carrying out all their duties. In my view, that requirement should stay.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
What if it is impossible to find someone like that? Do we eliminate the position or close the office? For instance, in the case of the Office of the Auditor General of Canada where a number of people work, are we supposed to shut down the office for four months?
3:45 p.m.
NDP
Alexandrine Latendresse NDP Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
Those positions have been filled by bilingual people for years. We have had this tradition for a long time. Only recently has a unilingual person been appointed, because we have always managed to find bilingual individuals. Our country has more than 30 million people. So I find it hard to believe that it is impossible to find a bilingual person for the position.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
You must be well aware that, when we pass a bill, we have to be prepared for any eventuality. We cannot really afford to create havoc. We need to have a way out. I hope you know that.
I would like to go back to clause 3 and the Governor in Council.
Passing legislation is part of our job as legislators. As a result, we can require appointed officers of Parliament to be bilingual. However, you are basically ready to give officials the same power as that of legislators. Actually, your bill says that 10 officers of Parliament must be bilingual. It is very categorical and you are enabling the Governor in Council to appoint between 20 to 30 other officers, without asking the permission of legislators, of all the members of Parliament. Could you explain that to me? You are taking our duty of making laws away from us and giving it to other people who were not elected by Canadians.
3:45 p.m.
NDP
Alexandrine Latendresse NDP Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
The idea was to leave the list open. We wanted to make sure that new officers of Parliament could be added. As I said earlier, we are not opposed to Parliament adding them to the list instead of the Governor in Council. We simply thought this would make the process easier. I really don't think it is a bad thing to add more positions to the list. I don't think it is a problem. The list is created with a specific criterion in mind. We want to make sure that it is easy to add positions if we think other positions should be on the list as well. That does not mean that we are completely opposed to Parliament doing the job.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
So you are saying that the Governor in Council can propose to legislators new officers of Parliament who must be bilingual.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
3:45 p.m.
NDP
Alexandrine Latendresse NDP Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
Currently, all those considered to be officers of Parliament are on the list.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
Would you want to let legislators, meaning us as members of Parliament, keep the right to add them to the list? That is an important distinction.
3:50 p.m.
NDP
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would first like to congratulate Ms. Latendresse for this bill, which will certainly improve things.
I would like to go back to your last comment.
Your bill gives the Governor in Council the opportunity to add positions to the list. If I understand correctly, Mr. Gourde is suggesting that the Governor in Council should not have this power, which is in the hands of Parliament. Parliament needs to give the Governor in Council that permission. You seem to be open to that. Is that correct?
3:50 p.m.
NDP
3:50 p.m.
NDP
Alexandrine Latendresse NDP Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
We would prefer the Governor in Council to have that role.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
Neither do I, but I think it is a good idea if the Governor in Council can add positions to the list.
