Thank you, Mr. Chair.
First, I want to thank the commissioner for coming.
The first time you appeared, I was not here, but I am pleased to meet you today, you and the members of your team. You are servants of Parliament and the guardians of the Official Languages Act.
I liked the way you talked about the official languages. I think that you take this seriously. In your book Sorry, I Don't Speak French, you wrote about this. It is very telling. The words “I don't speak French” make me think of the Canadian Forces.
You said that you found the universal approach to be interesting. It is somewhat like a vision. Based on that vision, we are losing ground. At least, that is how I see it. The functional approach is about respecting the act. If people aren't satisfied, they change the act. It is as simple as that.
I am not an expert, but I think I know that the highest-ranking officers at National Defence have to be bilingual whereas the lower ranks don't have to be. It's almost like telling young people that they don't need to worry, that they can go to school, that they won't have to learn both official languages. The implication is that bilingualism is not important, that now that they have enrolled in the Canadian Forces, that no one has the time to do anything for them anymore so they'll find them a little spot here or there.
Mr. Commissioner, it's unfortunate that the former Liberal government closed the Saint-Jean military base. We must not forget this. Sometimes, people don't speak bluntly. We use words like “formerly” for example. The fact remains that the Liberals didn't help us.
Now that I have stated where things stand, how they stood in the past and the fact that we haven't made any progress, I want to talk about the 12 recommendations made by the Office of the Commissioner, which I have here. This week, the minister testified before the committee and she said, if I understand correctly, that 10 recommendations had been followed. So which two were not? Were they the most important ones?