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 .

[Michel Doucet, Emeritus Professor, Faculty of Law, Université de Moncton, As an Individual]

Good afternoon.

Before giving my address, I'd like to point out that I am not representing the Université de Moncton's Faculty of Law. I have in fact been in retirement for some time and am self-employed. I would also like to tell the members of the committee that I'm not speaking on behalf of an educational institution, the Faculty of Law or any other group. I am speaking as an individual.

I'd like to thank the members of the committee for having invited me to give a presentation this afternoon on a matter that I care deeply about and on which I have spent much of my adult and professional life. Those who know me are familiar with my interest in protecting language rights in Canada generally, and in New Brunswick in particular.

Canada's Official Languages Act, and New Brunswick's, play an important role in the development and vitality of linguistic minority communities, including French-language minority communities not only in their respective provinces, with the exception of Quebec of course, but also across the country and the continent. These communities need the federal and provincial governments to recognize their vulnerability and the active support they need if they are to survive.

Of course, recognizing that a linguistic minority community has rights entails a fundamental obligation, which is to promote the achievement of substantive equality. That community must be able, under certain circumstances, to demand to be treated differently from the majority so that their specific needs can be addressed. The concept of substantive equality is often misunderstood. Language rights tend to be thought of as representing a response to a straightforward request for accommodation. Under an interpretation like that, these rights would be eliminated would be limited to the right to communicate with public authorities and to receive services in the official language of your choice. This approach would instrumentalize language rights and ignore the group's need for linguistic security, which is one of the fundamental reasons for acknowledging these rights.

The main objective of language rights is to foster the vitality and development not only of people speaking in isolation, but also of the entire group of these speakers. If this were not the case, we could rightly question the imperative need of recognizing these rights. In fact, since members of a minority community, taken individually, can generally express themselves in the language of the majority, what purpose would be served by language rights, if not as mayor tools of accommodation for the isolated instances in which a person is unable to speak the language of the majority? Consequently, language rights must necessarily serve to promote both the primary goal of achieving substantive equality for official language minority communities, and their continued growth and vitality in political and social harmony.

I know that such an acknowledgement is not enough to change people's mindset. The wording of the act itself cannot alone guarantee the survival of a linguistic community. The determining factor lies rather with the members of that community. It's up to them to shoulder this responsibility. They are the ones who need to ensure that these rights are respected.

In any event, I will have the opportunity later to answer any questions the members of the committee may have about Bill C‑13. First of all, I would say that I consider the bill to be a step in the right direction. It's true that it might go into certain issues more thoroughly, but as Charles de Montesquieu put it so well, “The better is the mortal enemy of the good.”

I'll go over all the positive aspects of the act with you, namely the recognition of the diversity of provincial and territorial language regimes that contribute to progress toward equal status in the use of French and English in Canadian society, and a specific acknowledgement of New Brunswick from the linguistic standpoint. I know that it is in the preamble to the act, but it needs to do a better job of defining the measures that the federal government will take. Later on, I will no doubt have an opportunity to discuss matters such as the appointment of a bilingual Lieutenant Governor in New Brunswick.

The intent of the new bill is also to set out legal obligations with respect to official languages and to ensure that they apply in emergencies. It's a step in the right direction.

It's important for section 16 of the act to apply to the Supreme Court of Canada. I should, however, point out that this straightforward amendment will not be enough to ensure that Supreme Court judges will always be able to understand what lawyers are saying in both official languages.

I'd now like to point out that the federal government will make commitments to protect and promote French. We can only hope that these commitments will be acted upon.

Francophone communities need to do something about a number of negative demographic trends, and concrete and effective measures are needed before it's too late. The federal government and the provincial governments must take action to support francophone communities across Canada.

[Joan Fraser, Director, Board of Directors, Quebec Community Groups Network]

Up until now, the purpose of the Official Languages Act has been to make Canada officially bilingual, to bring constitutional language rights to life and to enshrine federal obligations with respect to Canada's official languages.

The act focused first on the official language of government and, from 1988, on advancing the equality of status or use of English and French in Canadian society. Bill C-13 radically changes that approach. It has as its central purpose the protection and promotion of only one official language: French. C-13 embraces asymmetry in the relationship between Canada's two official languages. The approach was expressly rejected by the B and B commission. It is offensive to the constitution and antithetical to the principle of linguistic duality in law.

Asymmetry is appropriate in the practical application of—

[Marlene Jennings, President, Quebec Community Groups Network]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I am Marlene Jennings, president of the Quebec Community Groups Network. I am joined today by QCGN board member and former senator the Honourable Joan Fraser and our legal counsel Maître Marion Sandilands.

Thank you for the invitation to appear in your committee's study of this seminal legislation. Committee members have received the QCGN’s brief, so we will focus our opening comments on the essentials.

The QCGN is proud to support the protection and promotion of the French language in Canada. No other English-speaking community in Canada can claim to have our level of bilingualism and proficiency in French, nor the personal commitment required.

The QCGN acknowledges the demographic decline of francophone minorities outside Quebec. Our organization also actively supports the protection and advancement of language rights through a long tradition of court interventions on behalf of francophone minority communities.

Before addressing Bill C‑13, I feel obliged to mention a related bill that was recently adopted in Quebec, Bill 96. The Act Respecting French, the Official and Common Language of Quebec, weighs heavily on the English-speaking community of Quebec because it transforms the Charter of the French Language and protects it under the notwithstanding clause. It also claims to be amending the Constitution Act, 1867.

It makes obvious incursions into two areas of federal jurisdiction, and on the language rights set out in the Constitution. Its application will also have serious impacts on the English-speaking community of Quebec in terms of public services, education and access to justice.

We believe that it is impossible for this committee to study Bill C‑13 without a thorough knowledge and understanding of Bill 96.

The QCGN has studied Bill C-13. In our brief, we set out four strategic concerns. First is the revolutionary change in the purpose of the Official Languages Act and the effects this may have on the interpretation of this quasi-constitutional law. Second is the references to the Charter of the French Language, which, as amended by Bill 96, operates notwithstanding the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Third is the failure of Bill C-13 to address the well-known accountability challenges surrounding part VII of the OLA. Finally, fourth is the historic proposition of creating new language rights in federal legislation for only one official language, initially in only one province.

I would like to express our community’s profound disappointment that the federal government would recognize Quebec’s Charter of the French Language, as amended by Bill 96, within the Official Languages Act. Bill C-13 proposes to include two references to the Charter of the French Language in the Official Languages Act and proposes to allow federally regulated private businesses to choose to be subject to the Charter of the French Language.

It is the only provincial language regime to be so honoured, but I repeat that it operates notwithstanding the fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It beggars belief that the Government of Canada would contemplate recognizing such legislation. The QCGN strongly recommends that all references to legislation that operates notwithstanding the Canadian Charter of Rights be removed from Bill C-13.

I turn it over to my colleague Joan.

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

Mr. Chair, I'd just like to introduce a motion concerning Bill C‑13.

That, in relation to the consideration of Bill C‑13, the committee instruct the clerk and the analyst to draft a letter intended for the Premiers of the provinces and territories, in order to invite them to testify and submit any brief providing information for this study.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

That raises a question, Ms. Ashton.

Mr. Drouin said that, if we had unanimous consent, he would withdraw his motion so we could hear the witnesses' presentations and proceed with our study of Bill C‑13.

You introduced an amendment, and Mr. Beaulieu moved a subamendment to your amendment. I must therefore request the committee's unanimous consent to withdraw all that, that is to say, so we can withdraw Mr. Beaulieu's subamendment, your amendment and Mr. Drouin's motion. So we would be starting all over again.

That's what I suggest, with the committee's unanimous consent, of course.

Is anyone opposed to that?

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I know it requires unanimous consent, but I'd like to withdraw my entire motion because there doesn't appear to be any agreement. We can debate the motion and proceed with all the votes, but it won't matter because we don't agree on the duration of the work. We have to work on Bill C‑13. I need unanimous consent to withdraw my motion. If we have to vote, let's vote.

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

Mr. Chair, thank you for following the procedure.

I'd like to move the following subamendment: “That, in relation to the consideration of Bill C‑13, the committee instruct the clerk and the—

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

Mr. Chair, I ask that we adjourn debate so we can hear witness testimony.

We've summoned witnesses, and we want to work on Bill C‑13.

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

I just want to remind members of the committee that, through Mr. Serré, we asked to do a pre-study in April and you rejected the idea. I introduced a similar motion. You rejected it, and debate stopped. After that, I was accused of wanting to speed up testimony and bulldoze the process.

I would remind you that 15 hours represent one month or even five weeks of committee meetings, and that's not including clause‑by‑clause consideration. We'd be holding meetings that are usually spread over six or seven weeks in the space of two weeks. That's significant. There are never any guarantees for a minority government. The official language minority communities want us to pass the bill as soon as possible.

Yes, there will be amendments, but if we don't set a limit, we'll still be here in December hearing the same things from all the witnesses. We're refusing to allow Bill C‑13 to be passed in the House of Commons, and, unfortunately, my community will once again pay the price.

I've been an MP long enough to understand the tactics used in Parliament. I find this appalling. Fifteen hours of meetings to hear testimony represent five weeks, and that doesn't even include clause‑by‑clause consideration. That takes us up to six or seven weeks.

No one should think we don't want to hear testimony; that's not at all what we're saying. We wouldn't be having this discussion if we had simply adopted Mr. Serré's motion in early April. We would have started the work already.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

I call this meeting to order.

Good afternoon, everyone.

Welcome to meeting number 25 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Official Languages.

Today's meeting is in a hybrid format. Members will attend in person or with the Zoom application.

In light of the recommendations from health authorities regarding the pandemic, all those attending the meeting in person should follow the directives of the Board of Internal Economy.

I thank the members in advance for their cooperation.

Should any technical challenges arise, please advise me immediately. We may need to suspend for a few minutes as we need to ensure all members are able to participate fully.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Monday, May 30, 2022, the committee is undertaking its study of Bill C‑13, 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.

Before welcoming the witnesses, I want to give the floor to Mr. Drouin, who wishes to speak.

Go ahead, Mr. Drouin.

Official Languages

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Minister of Official Languages and Minister responsible for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency]

Mr. Speaker, once again, I would like to thank my colleague for his question.

As I said, Bill C-13 is now before the House of Commons and committee. Committees have important work to do.

Before the bill receives royal assent, we need to do all the work to ensure that it receives royal assent. Afterwards, we can implement the bill, absolutely.

[Dominique Vien, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Parliamentary Budget Officer tabled a study on the estimated cost of implementing Bill C‑13 on official languages.

Treasury Board, Canadian Heritage and IRCC refused to provide the PBO with their planned expenditures for implementing this bill.

This is public money. It is money given to us by our citizens. This is a question of transparency and integrity.

What are they trying to hide?

[Tracy Robinson]

It's my intent, as I arrive in this company, to ensure that we completely fulfill our responsibilities in supporting and promoting the French language, and that we, and I, take a leadership role in this. It's my personal priority and it's a personal commitment that I've made.

As I come into the role, I'm working to determine where we are in the process. I see a strong commitment and strong use of French as I come in here. However, as I mentioned, I have asked Mr. Finn to conduct an internal assessment and to have an external third party legal review of our processes, our policies and the approach, so that I fully understand both where we are performing well and where the opportunities are to improve.

I know there are considerations before this committee as you consider Bill C-13. We will endeavour, as you do that, to ensure that we fully understand the parameters of what you bring forward, as well as all other legislation that applies to us. With the help of the reviews I've outlined, we'll be diligent in developing our plan to build the competencies we need and the processes we need to ensure that we continue to completely fulfill our responsibilities.

It's something that is very important to us and is a commitment we've made.

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

Mr. Chair, as we all remember, in a recent discussion, all the members of this committee were willing to add hours to their schedule. We did so again today by adding half an hour, but we're planning to add more time in order to consider Bill C‑13.

Consequently, I don't understand my colleague's remarks.

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

[The Deputy Speaker, Chris d'Entremont]

Pursuant to order made on Thursday, November 25, 2021, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the amendment to the amendment to the motion at second reading stage of Bill C-13.

The question is on the amendment to the amendment. May I dispense?