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 .

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Oh, I have one more minute? That's wonderful.

You're responsible for implementing Bill C-13, which deals with official languages. I have a lot of questions about that. Whatever the case may be, the parliamentary secretary imposed on you was the only one who voted against that bill.

Are you comfortable with the government's decision? How does it affect the application of the Official Languages Act and your commitment in that regard? Do you have free rein?

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

Thank you, Ms. Carr. By the way, you speak excellent French.

The situation is a little discouraging. On the one hand, the government talks about strengthening the French language, introduces bills and has good intentions. In reality, however, it's still too expensive to translate documents into French and to provide effective French training. I think we really need to take action. We'll see what kind of report the committee produces, but I think we're going to have to shake the tree a bit.

Yvon Barrière, from the Public Service Alliance of Canada, actually said the same thing, that we need to stop outsourcing language training.

Also, as part of the study of Bill C‑13, the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada published a brief that made some pretty hard-hitting observations. For example, you were concerned that the federal government was failing to foster respect for language rights by not adequately funding resources.

Do you get the impression that there's a will to improve things since the adoption of Bill C‑13, or that nothing is happening?

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

So you would favour a model where the Canada School of Public Service would once again have this responsibility within the government.

Also, you mentioned Treasury Board, which now has, in principle, responsibility for implementing the policy, but is not necessarily responsible for day-to-day training. How do you see the role given to Treasury Board by Bill C‑13?

We are talking about senior executives, but training is also relevant for people who might move into these positions later.

So, how do you see the new legislative provisions that have come into force and the role granted to Treasury Board in this new legislative framework?

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank the witnesses who are before us today.

Ms. Carr, I think I've already had a chance to meet you before you became president of the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada. You were then the person responsible for the National Capital Region, as I recall. It's been a long time since I've seen you. Welcome to the committee.

In principle, we're doing this study because the Commissioner of Official Languages has asked us to assess the effects of the adoption of Bill C‑13, particularly on senior public servants.

My first question is for Ms. Bullion-Winters.

You said that the Canada School of Public Service provides training for senior public servants to maintain their language skills and level in line with the requirements of their position within the public service. Is that right?

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

I understand, Mr. Chair. Time is a very scarce commodity.

As I understand it, Ms. Carr, despite the passage of Bill C‑13, the model is not currently effective. Apart from the Official Languages Act, which doesn't solve the problem, what should we, as legislators, be doing to improve things? Is there anything else we can do? Do you have any suggestions? Are there any regulations to put in place, decisions to make, or new bills to propose to ensure that the model is effective and that Canadians have access to services and can be served in both official languages? That is the goal, after all.

[Jennifer Carr]

It's a preoccupation of mine.

I've come to many committees where I've talked about the decentralization of services, and we did hear from the Canada School of Public Service about decentralization and leaving those responsibilities for the department. That has created an inequity within the department such that things have fallen through the cracks.

It depends on where you work. If you work for a small agency or department that can put resources towards something, you get them, but other agencies or departments may not put the emphasis necessary to achieve what is asked for under Bill C-13.

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

Ms. Carr, as you know, when our committee studied Bill C‑13, which included amendments to the Official Languages Act, we moved an amendment to make Treasury Board fully responsible for applying the act to all affected organizations, rather than dividing those responsibilities.

You just told us about a fruitless dialogue. I understand that this is the result of the old bill, now law, which divided powers. Once again, it falls between the cracks.

Is this something you’ve observed? Are you happy with the situation?

[Jennifer Carr, President, The Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My name is Jennifer Carr, and I am the proud president of the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada.

Our union believes in a country where people can successfully pursue their career and obtain the services they need in both official languages. That is our belief for our organization and for Canada's public service.

It's not only a fundamental right set out in Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It's also an important Canadian value.

That's why we stand behind the protection of both official languages and the protection of the many indigenous languages spoken across our country. Protecting one's language and preserving one's culture go hand in hand.

The institute believes the federal government must set the example for all other employers and be held to the highest standard, but our employer is failing to uphold bilingualism in our public service. Our members have raised concerns about inadequate investments in language training. They have told us there's a lack of a coordinated language strategy, and it's hurting their career development opportunities. They've spoken about their frustrations when tools they must use for everyday activities aren't available in both official languages. With remote work and cross-country virtual teams, this is more important than ever.

We're also concerned about how the use of private contractors is making things even worse. Contracting out is being done outside of the normal rules the government has set for itself, ignoring the language and diversity requirements that our government says are its priorities. This means that on top of runaway costs and the damaging loss of institutional knowledge, contracting out is hurting the government's ability to offer quality services in both official languages.

I was also concerned to hear the language commissioner's testimony about the lack of a centralized approach. Decentralized systems, where individual managers carry out too much of the load, lead to an uneven response to common problems. As the commissioner recommended, a central body at Treasury Board, with responsibilities for implementing and governance, could help.

We also urge the committee to consider how the government can support diversity within the public service. People from indigenous communities, who may not know both official languages, can bring valuable knowledge of indigenous languages and cultures, enrich our government and help us deliver better services to their communities.

A thoughtful implementation of Bill C-13 presents a unique opportunity for the Canadian government to promote and protect bilingualism and linguistic diversity. To achieve this, we have three recommendations for this committee.

First, the government must engage in continuous dialogue with its stakeholders. This means establishing ongoing discussions with unions like mine, employee groups and linguistic minority communities. It is critical to ensure that the processes and policies implemented are practical and fair and consider the diverse needs of our members.

Second, the government must provide comprehensive, accessible and flexible language training opportunities for all employees. This must be backed with adequate investments and proper resourcing. It is crucial that these training programs accommodate various learning styles and different schedules and ensure equitable access for all.

Third, the government must establish mechanisms for the ongoing monitoring and evaluation of the implementation process. This must include seeking regular feedback from employees and their representatives to identify challenges and areas for improvement. The government should commit to clear implementation goals and a timeline that it must report on regularly so that adjustments can be made if and when necessary.

Treasury Board is in a unique position to show leadership and establish a coordinated language strategy, one backed by properly funded language training.

We hope that the committee, in preparing its final report, will take our members' concerns and recommendations into consideration.

Our goal is to ensure that the results of your work will benefit all employees and support the development of a public service that truly reflects Canada's linguistic diversity.

Thank you.

I'd be pleased to answer questions from committee members.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Commissioner, thank you very much for being here with us today with your team. As you know, your role is very important, not only to the machinery of government, but also to the committee. That's why we always appreciate your opinions and advice.

I'll start with a sentence from your letter: “Leaders must lead by example”. I think this sentence is very important because it contextualizes the situation in which we find ourselves. When I read that bit, I immediately thought of Mr. Rousseau and Air Canada, and it really pained me, because he was not someone who led wisely, in my opinion. That was very obvious. I'm very proud of our government for being able to react quickly, not stand for that and say that changes had to be made.

Back to my questions. There are three things I'm very interested in: deputy ministers and associate deputy ministers who have already been appointed, new ones, and those awaiting appointment. I'm going to ask you a number of questions, and you can address them in any order you wish.

What do we do about deputy ministers and associate deputy ministers who are already on the job but don't meet the bilingualism requirements? Should they be assigned to departments that are less involved in the application of the Official Languages Act? Under Bill C‑13, the new Official Languages Act, I find it unacceptable that these people can continue to hold such positions. What is your opinion on that?

[Raymond Théberge]

The bill that has been passed, Bill C‑13, does indeed give new obligations to Treasury Board. In particular, it is responsible for the governance of the act, i.e., its implementation. In my opinion, this implies that Treasury Board must provide direction to the federal government on the implementation of the act. Canadian Heritage also has a role to play, especially with regard to part VII. However, in terms of governance, it is extremely important, in my opinion, that there be a single conductor, not several. Nor should we forget the Action Plan for Official Languages 2023-2028: protection-promotion-collaboration. We need to ensure good governance of the action plan.

So, what are needed are clear, even prescriptive, directives from Treasury Board for the implementation of the act. In addition, it's important to remember that, in promoting compliance, we mustn't overlook the fact that for 50 years we've had a law that was difficult to enforce due to lack of understanding. Now we have a new one, with new obligations. It's extremely important that this law be well understood by the federal apparatus and Treasury Board has an important role to play in this regard.

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

Earlier, you said you didn't want to comment on whether the government respects the spirit of the new Official Languages Act resulting from Bill C‑13.

Recently, we've seen that the percentage of francophones appointed to key positions, that is to say federal political appointments, has dropped to an unprecedented level, from 24% to 21%. This aspect touches tangentially on what you're saying about bilingual positions. It seems to me that we don't see any political will to improve the situation since the situation started deteriorating.

[Raymond Théberge]

As I said, it is important for all senior federal leaders to be able to communicate in Canada's two official languages and for Canadians to be heard in both official languages.

The new Official Languages Act based on Bill C‑13 does not address the examples you mentioned. Two other bills, Bill S‑220 and Bill S‑229 do currently address those possibilities—

[Raymond Théberge]

Since Bill C‑13 was just passed last June, I could not say whether the most recent appointments are in compliance with the act. They should be in compliance. I am not aware of recent appointments though, so I cannot say whether they uphold the act or not.

Some aspects of the act will come into force in June 2025, including the requirement that all public servants have the right to be supervised and to work in their preferred official language in any region designated bilingual for language of work.

[Raymond Théberge, Commissioner of Official Languages, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning, honourable members of the committee.

I'd like to acknowledge that the lands on which we are gathered are part of the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people, an indigenous people of the Ottawa Valley.

As you may know, in 2021-2022, following a record number of complaints filed with the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages, I recommended that a study be conducted on language obligations related to the staffing of senior management positions in the federal public service and Governor-in-Council appointments. The idea behind this recommendation was to determine whether knowledge of both official languages should be a requirement when hiring for these types of positions. The study you are undertaking is in response to this recommendation, and I'd like to thank you for it.

I've said it many times in the past, that being able to speak both official languages is, in my view, an essential skill for any leader, especially those in federal institutions subject to the Official Languages Act.

The bilingual nature of an organization depends, in large part, on the bilingualism of those occupying positions at the highest levels. They need to lead by example and must be able to represent all their employees and Canadians in both official languages.

I therefore believe that proficiency in both official languages must become a hiring criterion for senior management positions in the public service and for Governor in Council appointments.

I am pleased with the amendments made by your committee last spring to Bill C-13, particularly with regard to the language training required to ensure the bilingual capacity of deputy ministers and associate deputy ministers who are newly appointed to the federal public service, if they are not bilingual at the time of their appointment.

It will be interesting to see the impact of this change on the public service over the next few years. That said, the job is only half done. In the absence of clear policies and guidelines, how can we ensure that this change will be implemented, measured and adjusted as necessary? What measures will be put in place to support incumbents when they return from language training to enable them to carry out their responsibilities effectively in both official languages? What will happen in cases where senior civil servants are still unable to master their second official language?

I also question the absence of bilingualism in the list of essential criteria for Governor-in-Council appointments. As you may know, in recent years, a number of appointments have raised eyebrows among Canadians because no bilingualism criteria were required as part of the nomination process. This has led to a significant number of complaints to my office.

We should be looking at all senior management positions and institutions subject to the Official Languages Act to ensure that a command of both official languages is part of the requirements of these positions.

Moreover, the act did not address current senior public servants at the time of royal assent. However, the legislators' intention behind the addition for newly appointed deputy ministers should shine through to all senior management.

In my opinion, any leader in the federal public service must be able to express himself or herself in both official languages and understand anyone who speaks English or French, in order to promote the use of both official languages and encourage linguistic security in the workplace in the federal public service. This also gives a voice to the issues on the table.

Senior management must lead by example and send a clear signal that both English and French have a prominent and equal place in the federal public service, so that public servants can flourish in both official languages. It is high time that we acted.

I'm confident that your study will shed light on the hiring criteria for senior public service positions and that it will help government decision-makers take a closer look.

Thank you for your attention. I'm happy to answer your questions in the official language of your choice.

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

I'll jump in really quickly. There is one measure that could help you. It was in Bill C‑13, which created a new act to provide the right to access services in French in federally regulated businesses. Have you heard of that? Do you think that's a good thing?