Bill C-13

An Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada's Official Languages

An Act to amend the Official Languages Act, to enact the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act and to make related amendments to other Acts

Part 1 amends the Official Languages Act to, among other things,
(a) specify that all legal obligations related to the official languages apply at all times, including during emergencies;
(b) codify certain interpretative principles regarding language rights;
(c) provide that section 16 of that Act applies to the Supreme Court of Canada;
(d) provide that a final decision, order or judgment of a federal court that has precedential value is to be made available simultaneously in both official languages;
(e) provide for Government of Canada commitments to
(i) protect and promote French,
(ii) estimate the number of children whose parents are rights holders under section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ,
(iii) advance formal, non-formal and informal opportunities for members of English and French linguistic minority communities to pursue quality learning in their own language throughout their lives, including from early childhood to post-secondary education, and
(iv) advance the use of English and French in the conduct of Canada’s external affairs;
(f) clarify the nature of the duty of federal institutions to take positive measures to implement certain Government of Canada commitments and the manner in which the duty is to be carried out;
(g) provide for certain positive measures that federal institutions may take to implement certain Government of Canada commitments, including measures to
(i) promote and support the learning of English and French in Canada, and
(ii) support sectors that are essential to enhancing the vitality of English and French linguistic minority communities and protect and promote the presence of strong institutions serving those communities;
(h) provide for certain measures that the Minister of Canadian Heritage may take to advance the equality of status and use of English and French in Canadian society;
(i) provide that the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration is required to adopt a policy on francophone immigration and that the policy is to include, among other things, objectives, targets and indicators;
(j) provide that the Government of Canada recognizes the importance of cooperating with provincial and territorial governments;
(k) provide that the Treasury Board is required to establish policies to give effect to certain parts of that Act, monitor and audit federal institutions for their compliance with policies, directives and regulations relating to the official languages, evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of policies and programs of federal institutions relating to the official languages and provide certain information to the public and to employees of federal institutions;
(l) enable the Commissioner of Official Languages to enter into compliance agreements and, in certain cases, to make orders; and
(m) enable the Commissioner of Official Languages to impose administrative monetary penalties on certain entities for non-compliance with certain provisions of Part IV of that Act.
It also makes a related amendment to the Department of Canadian Heritage Act .
Part 2 enacts the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act , which, among other things, provides for rights and duties respecting the use of French as a language of service and a language of work in relation to federally regulated private businesses in Quebec and then, at a later date, in regions with a strong francophone presence. That Act also allows employees of federally regulated private businesses to make a complaint to the Commissioner of Official Languages with respect to rights and duties in relation to language of work and allows the Commissioner to refer the complaint to the Canada Industrial Relations Board in certain circumstances. It also provides that the Minister of Canadian Heritage is responsible for promoting those rights. Finally, Part 2 makes related amendments to the Canada Labour Code .

[Guillaume Rousseau]

First, the whole question of the policy on francophone immigration is very important, both in Quebec and in the other provinces. Ideally, the Government of Quebec should have more power when it comes to immigration in order to have a coherent policy on immigration and integration. In addition, there should also be a federal policy on francophone immigration for the other provinces.

Second, in Quebec, Bill 101, or the Charter of the French Language, has to apply to private enterprises, given the expertise and experience of the Office québécois de la langue française. Private enterprises under federal jurisdiction in the francophone regions need to be brought under legislation on the use of French. That legislation has to be an expanded version of Bill C‑13 that is modeled more on the Charter of the French Language.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

As you say, it's very far-reaching.

Can you name three tools that could be put in place, as priorities, to stop the decline of French, the day after Bill C‑13 is put in place?

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

I am going to ask you a very simple question and I would appreciate a brief answer.

What are the necessary tools that you believe we should incorporate into Bill C‑13 in order to stop the decline of French in Canada starting the day after the new act comes into force?

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for participating in this exercise, Mr. Rousseau.

I also want to thank our two students, Arielle Warten and Houston Rifai. It is nice to see young people getting involved to defend their convictions. I can tell you that this is very much appreciated. These young people will always be welcome in the political arena.

In your presentation, Mr. Rousseau, you made a comment concerning the overfunding of anglophone postsecondary institutions in Quebec in connection with Bill C‑13. Could you explain what overfunding means, in concrete terms?

[Guillaume Rousseau, Full Professor, Faculty of Law, Université de Sherbrooke, As an Individual]

Good afternoon, and thank you for this invitation to come and speak to you about Bill C‑13.

I would particularly like to thank and say hello to Mr. Beaulieu, whom I have been fortunate to meet. I would also like to say hello to my member of Parliament, the MP for Sherbrooke, Élisabeth Brière.

I will start with a review of a fundamental principle in law and in language policy. There are two major models: the model based on territoriality, where there is one language within a territory, and the model based on personality, where there are multiple official languages and each person chooses the language in which they want to receive services from the state.

I have found in my work that the studies are extremely clear, not to say unanimous: only the territorial approach, based on the idea of one official language per territory, can save a vulnerable language. It is therefore extremely important that there be one official language in Quebec, as set out in the Charter of the French Language. The federal government must align its policy with that Quebec policy based on territoriality insofar as possible.

I will illustrate this with a very concrete example. In Switzerland, where the territoriality-based model was adopted, the percentage of francophones rose from 18.4 to 22.9 per cent between 1970 and 2017: the francophone population of Switzerland increased by 4.5 per cent. In Canada, on the other hand, the francophone population fell from 25 to 20 per cent in the same years, a decline of 5 per cent. Obviously, other factors are in play, but it appears plain that the language policy model is the determining factor.

These are the considerations in light of which I study Bill C‑13. In my opinion, the bill must do more to reflect territoriality, in order to provide more protection for French in Quebec, which does not prevent application of the model based on personality in the other provinces. The model based on territoriality is essential for a vulnerable language, and more must absolutely be done for French in Quebec.

However, when the majority language is not vulnerable, like English in the other provinces, and to a lesser extent in Quebec, the personality-based approach, such as when services in French are offered in the other provinces, is not a problem, because English does not need the territorial approach.

The other major principle we must understand is asymmetry. We have to stop putting the situation of francophones in the other provinces on equal footing with the situation of anglophones in Quebec. After the last census, we saw the point to which French had declined everywhere in Canada, including in Quebec, with no equivalent decline in English. We must therefore consider asymmetry. The bill contains passages that support asymmetry and other passages that support symmetry. Bill C‑13 therefore needs to be much better realigned toward asymmetry. An asymmetric approach is needed in order to do more for French in Quebec, but also in the other provinces.

For example, in the new section 41(6)(c) proposed by Bill C‑13, it talks about the importance to linguistic minorities of having strong postsecondary institutions. That provision puts the situation of English Canadians and French Canadians on equal footing, when the reality is quite different.

Anglophone postsecondary institutions and research in English in Quebec are overfunded, while research in French is accordingly underfunded, and this affects me considerably as an academic. When I read that in the bill, I said to myself that the federal government is going to continue overfunding research in English and underfunding research in French. That is something that Bill C‑14 should correct. Asymmetry and the territorial model really need to be given precedence.

It is worth noting that Bill C‑13 enacts the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act. That is a step toward territoriality, because the intention is to protect the right to work in French and obtain services in French in Quebec and in majority francophone regions, which are essentially located in the areas surrounding Quebec. That is a very attractive territorial approach that holds up, scientifically, and could even make it possible to save French.

However, what is less desirable in this bill is that the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act proposes weaker protection of French than is offered by the Charter of the French Language. If the idea is to substitute that federal law for Bill 101, it is a step backward for French in Quebec. However, if that federal law is applied outside Quebec, it is more attractive.

We must also not forget that in Quebec, expertise in respect of support for private enterprises in language matters is the responsibility of the Office québécois de la langue française. We should therefore allow the Office to continue to play its role in Quebec. In the other regions, it could allow federal agencies to take its place.

[Houston Rifai, Public Policy and Public Administration Student, Youth Advisory Committee, Bishop's Forum, As an Individual]

I thank my colleague.

My name is Houston Rifai. I am active both in social movements and as a student and worker in Quebec. I'm here to share my concerns and the concerns of many young English-speaking Quebeckers about Bill C-13. I do so while fully supporting the elements of the legislation aimed at bolstering minority language communities across Canada but seemingly not here in Quebec.

Everyone here agrees that there is a need to protect and promote the French language in Canada as a whole, particularly where it is in decline. However, French can be promoted and protected in a positive way, without having to suppress the use of other minority languages to achieve this objective.

Quebec’s English-speaking community is not a threat to French in Quebec. More people speak French inside Quebec than ever before, and more young anglophones are bilingual than any community other than francophones outside of Quebec. As English-speaking Quebeckers, we have put in the work to live and learn in French, and our language communities therefore constitute a population that is distinct from the rest of Canada, just as francophones do in Ontario and New Brunswick.

The notion that French is threatened in Quebec often relies on mother tongue indicators and the languages that people speak in the privacy of their own homes and with their families. This exclusionary framing is part of a wider fear-based narrative, which has been reflected in the legislation and in rhetoric from our political leadership.

In just these past few weeks, we've heard from members of our government in Quebec words of contempt towards minority communities and fearmongering against minorities as if they are a threat to the majority. The sentiments of exclusion were echoed by a member of the House of Commons, who stated that the idea of protecting English in Quebec obviously makes absolutely no sense, which the current version of Bill C-13 appears to take to heart.

We propose that protecting the rights of minority languages and minority communities is always good sense, and we ask that you consider protecting the rights of English-speaking Quebeckers as a minority within their own context, just as we ask that the rights of Franco-Ontarians and Acadians be respected and upheld in this legislation. We ask that our government take an active stance against the reduction of rights as seen in anti-charter legislation such as Bill 96 and Bill 21. We implore that you do not make reference to the Charter of the French Language in the Official Languages Act, as we feel that this will allow for more exclusionary and pernicious elements within our political culture to hold sway over federal language policy.

Thank you. We look forward to your questions.

[Arielle Warten, Sociology Student, Youth Advisory Committee, Bishop's Forum, As an Individual]

Good morning, Monsieur Arseneault and members of the committee.

I am Arielle Warten, an English-speaking Quebecker currently attending Concordia University in my third year of sociology. Attending with me today is fellow English-speaking Quebecker Houston Rifai, who will introduce himself shortly.

We represent a group of young English-speaking leaders who attended the Bishop's Forum. The Bishop's Forum is an initiative supported by the Government of Quebec's Secrétariat aux relations avec les Québécois d'expression anglaise.

We are here today to share our perspectives on Bill C‑13, which will have profound effects on young English speakers living in Quebec. We are people who have grown up as members of a linguistic minority, and who plan on continuing to build our lives in Quebec. We are bilingual and bicultural, and want an opportunity to contribute to Canadian and Quebec society.

Our group would like to make a few points regarding Bill C-13.

Over the past five years, public discourse surrounding our official languages has gone from a collaborative, positive discussion to a divisive exercise pitting English and French against each other. Official language rights are now being played in a zero-sum environment, which is ignoring the very real changes faced by English-speaking Quebeckers.

Bill C-13 proposes to include specific mention of the Charter of the French Language within Canada's Official Languages Act. We remind you that as amended by Bill-96, the Charter of the French Language operates notwithstanding the fundamental rights and freedoms of Quebeckers.

Bill C-13 proposes to create new language rights for francophones only with respect to their communications with federally regulated businesses, effectively creating special rights for a majority population instead of a minority population. As young English-speaking Quebeckers, we feel abandoned by the federal government in this proposal.

We are concerned that Bill C-13's emphasis on the protection and promotion of French threatens the duty of federal institutions to take positive measures to enhance the vitality of the English-speaking community of Quebec.

Thank you. We will now hear from Houston Rifai.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

I was just getting to the offer of services in French by the machinery of government.

Twenty, 30 or 40 years ago, a majority of francophones in Ottawa lived in the eastern part of the city. Today, they are everywhere in the city. We know the situation is a lot easier in Ottawa. However, in regions where the number of francophones warrants the offer of services in French, but the population is scattered, how is it possible to meet those needs?

We often hear someone ask why services are offered in French when there are only 100 francophones in a small region. In the context of Bill C‑13, how do you think we can continue combining these elements and making sure that these services continue to be offered, knowing that this presents geographic challenges?

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lévis—Lotbinière, QC]

Mr. Théberge, if we considered amending Bill C‑13 so that the list of bilingual regions was updated cyclically, would you be in favour of the amendment?

[Raymond Théberge]

My worst nightmare would be that the bill was not passed and we were left with what we have now. I think a bill that is a success is a bill that contains the key elements.

First, there must be governance to ensure horizontal coordination across the federal government to implement the act.

Second, there has to be a Part VII that is well written and codified, because that is the part that affects the communities the most.

I would also like to see whether it is possible to examine the question of language of work in a work world that is changing rapidly.

I think those are all important elements.

A bill that did not even come up to the level of Bill C‑13 would not be satisfactory.

In my opinion, there are improvements to be made, particularly in terms of governance and Part VII, but I think the elements are in place for achieving a good bill.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would first like to make a comment.

I find it quite bizarre, and we have now heard this several times from the Liberals, that even if we consider the decline in French to be a serious problem and it is our role, as committee members, to examine a bill, we have to disregard the recommendations made by key witnesses and keep moving on.

Personally, I think we have a responsibility to do our work as MPs efficiently, as we are doing, but also to show respect to the many witnesses who are telling us clearly that the bill has to be improved.

Commissioner, given the situation we are in, and knowing that French is in decline and that the figures we observe from one end of the country to the other are quite shocking, do you think C‑13 needs to be improved?

Do you think we will do a better job of slowing the decline of French with enforceable language clauses, for example, or with more focused objectives regarding immigration in the act?

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Regarding Bill C‑13, it is not that it isn't perfect, it is that it doesn't contain the bare minimum to help improve the status of French in Quebec.

First, Quebec being in charge of its language planning should be there, but it is not. Nothing requested by the Government of Quebec is in the bill.

I know what your answer to this is, so I will not make you repeat it.

A study conducted by Radio-Canada showed that 68% of federal public service positions in Quebec required knowledge of English, while barely 13% of the positions outside Quebec called for knowledge of French.

Do you think that is right?

[Raymond Théberge]

At present, the only real power the Commissioner has is to make recommendations. Bill C‑13 proposes that the Commissioner be given a graduated scale of powers. For example, he will be able to make orders, impose very limited monetary penalties, sign enforceable agreements, and offer mediation. The tools proposed in the bill will make it possible to resolve certain problems quickly, instead of it always being necessary to conduct an investigation and wait for recommendations, provide for monitoring, and so on.

At present, the Commissioner has a toolbox, but there is not very much in it. Regarding AMPs, in particular, I think it is important to see how we could apply them more broadly. That does not mean using them all the time, but they are part of the toolbox.

For example, take a measure as simple as raising awareness on the part of federal organizations through enforceable agreements, orders, imposing AMPs, and so on.

In fact, what is proposed in Bill C‑13 gives the Commissioner a well equipped toolbox for the coming years.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

That may also be true if we don't do it, but if we go ahead, we will be able to make changes as we proceed. I like what you said about Bill C‑13 providing for itself to be reviewed every ten years. That is a big change in the act.

You also spoke just now about expanding the power to impose sanctions so that it applies to federal institutions.

What could we add to the measures already in place?

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Thank you for coming and giving very forceful testimony on behalf of Bill C‑13, and more specifically on the need for us to make rapid progress.

My question will deal with some comments that were made to the effect that we should wait. I understand that the exercise we are currently engaged in consists of holding consultations and determining how the bill introduced by the government could be improved to address the needs of francophones across Canada.

What's your view on the possibility of doing both of these things at the same time? We can do something about stopping the decline that has been observed in francophone communities in Canada, while continuing to improve the act and making sure that the amendments resulting from the work of all participants, including people like you, will enable us to move ahead.

Earlier, you said that the work had to proceed quickly. I would therefore like to hear what you think about this, particularly given its importance for francophone minority communities.