Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. Fraser, and your team, for being with us today.
I'm originally from Acadia, and I of course think that the issues we have discussed are very important. We are concerned by a few matters, the Court Challenges Program, among others, which, I repeat, is very important for us.
However, you emphasized something in your report and your presentation. You started by applauding the positions' of Mr. Harper and Ms. Verner, but you said this:
While these are positive messages, they are marred by actions that significantly diminish their impact.
I count six important points that are not positive with regard to the action plan or the act. They are related to cuts in some cases, but two points are of great interest to me. Perhaps you'll have the time to give me an explanation so that I can clearly understand what is going on. They are the fifth and sixth points. You say this:
Another important change was the transfer of the Official Languages Secretariat from the Privy Council Office to the Department of Canadian Heritage.
In what way is that negative with regard to the plan and the acts? I ask myself the same question with regard to the following sentence:
Finally, the Committee of Deputy Ministers on Official Languages was disbanded.
Furthermore, we see on page 41 that, according to the performance report cards, the service to the public results are not good. I have children, and that's a concern for me. They say that's the main purpose of the acts. I wonder why management gets higher marks than those for service to the public.
Lastly, I see on page 65 that, back home in New Brunswick, more than 24% or 25% of complaints concern language of work. That's 14% more than the national average. I wonder why complaints concerning language of work are more frequent in New Brunswick and here in Ottawa than in the rest of the country.