Government Operations Committee on Feb. 6th, 2007

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

I appreciate that, because I hear the same thing. Of course, if we had honest people in every place then we wouldn't have to worry about the rules, because we would know that people were following good management. That is the challenge, isn't it, getting the right number of rules without building the bureaucracy to a level where people can't access anything, especially the groups that maybe need it more often than not. But certainly we appreciate your intervention in this matter and your work to resolve this issue.

[Vic Toews]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you.

I will now give the floor to Mrs. Thibault and Mrs. Nash and that will conclude this meeting.

[Louise Thibault, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you, madam Chair. There is going to be a vote and the meeting will have to stop anyway.

Minister, Treasury Board is the employer for the public service. Are you in any way concerned, like several of us, by the present situation relating to official languages, forty years after the Act? There are still today in the public service, especially in the ranks of higher management and the mandarinate, people who are not fully bilingual even though they may be the heads of organizations. I am not referring here to governor-in-council appointments but to the positions of assistant deputy-ministers, branch managers and so on. In other words, we still have top-level managers who are unable to work effectively in both official languages. Do you find that acceptable, forty years later? As the new minister, do you intend to do anything about that?

I hope that the president of the Public Service Human Resources Management Agency will come before our committee. That agency has a crucial role to play, especially with the Public Service modernization Act, but we have heard that it is facing difficulties in implementing its mandate because of a shortage of qualified personnel. That is an example.

A few minutes ago, you talked about prosecutors — and I have nothing against them — but are you concerned by what is happening at that level? Do you believe that there has been good enough planning over the past months and years to ensure that there will be enough qualified resources to replace those who will retire?

A while ago, my colleague talked about the need to reach the targets established many years ago. I have just talked about bilingualism but this also applies to visible minorities and disabled persons, whatever the nature of their disability.

Do you intend to change this situation in order to reach those targets established a long time ago?

Thank you.

[Vic Toews]

An aging workforce and increasing competition for the skills and knowledge of people are not something that is unique to the Government of Canada. It's affecting us right across the country. It's a challenge for all of us in terms of finding new individuals to fill the places of those who have retired. We are taking measures to deal with this particular issue.

For example, in some situations, I know that on public safety with the RCMP.... Back in 1998, when I was in the provincial government, the federal government at the time shut down Depot, the training centre for RCMP officers. It was at a time when they knew that half of the RCMP officers in Canada would be eligible for retirement within five years. They shut down Depot. That decision had a terrible impact on us, especially in western Canada, where we rely almost exclusively on the RCMP in rural areas.

Those coming into government accelerated the training of RCMP officers from approximately 800 to 1,800. It's put a tremendous strain on the individuals providing the training, and yet we have to provide quality training. Officers are receiving that training. I'm proud to say that my own nephew is going through RCMP training in Regina at this time.

It is a challenge for the public service, particularly the RCMP, in that context. We are responding. We'll continue to respond to that.

The issue of bilingualism in the public service is of course a very important one. We recognize that we are a bilingual nation. There's no question about that. We want to ensure that citizens receive services in the official language of their choice. It is a commitment this government has made.

[Louise Thibault, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Minister, our citizens are entitled to be served in the language of their choice, as long as there is a critical mass, but all your employees have the right to work in the language of their choice. Both sides have to be taken into account.

[Vic Toews]

Absolutely. That was the point I was getting to. It's not simply one principle that we apply, as important as that one constitutional principle is. We also have to see it in the context of the employees' rights as well.

I can tell you that one of the things I've been motivated by, or guided by, was a report that came out in Manitoba. Manitoba went through some very bitter struggles on the language issue--very bitter struggles. One report that I especially rely on--and I know it's not particularly relevant, because the constitutional context is a little bit different--is Judge Chartier's report from Manitoba entitled, “Above All, Common Sense”. Our government, back in 1999 or 1998, implemented that Chartier report in Manitoba in order to ensure, as much as possible, that individuals who wanted language services in a particular language received those services. We rationalized where individuals were receiving that benefit. Quite frankly, it has worked quite well.

Has everyone been happy? No, not everyone has been happy, but by and large, the francophone community in Manitoba I think has benefited from the implementation of that Chartier report. That Chartier report continues to be implemented by the succeeding government--the New Democrats--that came into power after our government.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you, Minister.

We'll go for our last question to Madam Nash.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I just wanted to pick up on our discussion concerning the cuts to the court challenges program. Of course, I won't insult you by asking about your support for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Of course, we all support that important charter.

You had said that there were concerns about the administration of the court challenges program.

[Vic Toews]

It was not the administration; it was the lack of transparency in the program.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Is there a report or a review of that program that you can offer this committee so we can see the kinds of problems you're referring to?

[Vic Toews]

There are none that I'm aware of, no.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

So you were made aware of this problem with transparency—

[Vic Toews]

When I directly contacted them.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Okay. Does it not make sense that if you perceive a problem in transparency or administration or in the application of a program, that there should be a correction to that program, as opposed to the elimination of the program? Was that not an option?

[Vic Toews]

It's not a decision that I made in my department. I looked at various other things. I assume that the appropriate principles were applied by the minister in coming to that decision.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Let me ask it another way. Surely we can all agree that not only is the Charter of Rights and Freedoms an important law in Canadian society, but that access to that law is an important principle, especially because those who seek to access it are the very people who might be disadvantaged, and therefore they need the application of the charter. Is Treasury Board, then, looking at other ways to help people access their rights and fully enforce their rights under the charter by replacing the kind of assistance they had under the court challenges program?

[Vic Toews]

Well, for example, what I've not yet been able to figure out is the role of legal aid in that respect. For example, in Manitoba, we had an excellent program--the Public Interest Law Centre--that took all those kinds of cases and did a very good job in that respect. That was run through the legal aid program. It was very transparent, all the principles were in place, it was very open, and it was a very good program. Now, I assume the program is still running in Manitoba.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

I know here in Ottawa, for example, there was an important case that went through the court challenges program around francophone rights.

[Vic Toews]

How did you find out that it went through the court challenges program?

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Through the media.

[Vic Toews]

The media told you, but you weren't able to actually access that information from the court challenges program?

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

I didn't need to. I read about it in the newspaper and found out that there was an important decision that enabled francophones, right here in the city of Ottawa, to ensure that their full rights were protected under the court challenges program, under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

[Vic Toews]

Assuming the media got it...and I don't know how they would get it when no one else has been able to get it. The only way they'd have been able to get it, probably, is through some kind of leak or by someone specifically telling them they had in fact received it. That concerns me, that information about the expenditure of public money is accessible by only some. And I would think you would agree that where there's an expenditure of public money on an important case like that, the criteria should be public and the amount of money spent should be public, rather than having to rely on discretion.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Minister, we're wrapping up this committee, but maybe I can end with a request.

It seems to me that this is an area on which more information is needed. Would it be possible for your ministry to come back to our committee and help us understand how the goal of the court challenges program, which is a goal of accessing human rights, is going to be complied with given the cancellation of the program?