As I said at the outset, training is important.
If you give me a program like Excel and expect me to be able to use its 300 functions but you don't train me, I'll make very basic use of it or avoid using it whenever I can.
The same goes for a weapon and an official language. You have to give people the opportunity to become proficient and the confidence to use those skills. Confidence matters.
If all we do is say that things have to change and impose quotas without giving people training, there's no point.
I want to comment on something Ms. Le Scelleur explained. It's hard to complain in the armed forces. It's hard to question things. Something funny I used to say was that trying to understand was like being disobedient. When that's the mentality, imagine what it's like if you ask for things. When you're in training, whatever it may be, but especially basic training, the last thing you want is to stand out. You have to stay anonymous. You have to keep your head down. You don't want people to know your name. Because of that mentality, people don't tend to complain.
However, to really understand where things are and determine whether something is making a difference, you need what I call a 360° review. In other words, you can't just ask those in leadership where things stand. You also have to ask those at the lowest level.
The organizational climate is a command responsibility. You have to be able to tell the commander that even if they think their unit is bilingual, the results on the ground show otherwise.
Checking boxes and filling in forms is well and good, but if members were actually interviewed and asked whether they felt comfortable speaking in their second language, they would probably say no. Those same members, however, might say yes on a paper form, precisely because they could be perceived as challenging the system. It's not easy in the forces to question the system.