It is important to recall that the Charter does not apply solely to the federal government. It is possible that it is highly respectful of the Charter and of language rights, but that the provincial governments make decisions that are inconsistent with the Charter.
Let's take the example of the case funded by the Court Challenges Program involving parents who had taken immersion courses outside Quebec. After moving to Quebec, they wanted their children to be enrolled in an immersion program. Quebec's Department of Education maintained the following position. In its view, it was understood that immersion in the case of Manitoba meant education in French, but that it meant education in English in Quebec. According to that reasoning, parents who had taken courses in the immersion program in Manitoba were not entitled to enrol their children in an immersion program in Quebec. That seemed somewhat paradoxical.
The Supreme Court decided the matter by ordering that parents who had taken an immersion program outside Quebec could send their children to Quebec schools offering an immersion program. Without the Court Challenges Program, that result would not have been achieved. That had nothing to do with the federal government's respect for the Charter.
There are a lot of other cases. The Mahé decision, for example, enabled Francophones to obtain school boards controlled by Francophone communities across the country. Once again, that had nothing to with the federal government's respect for the Charter. The idea was more to ensure that other governments complied with the Charter. I am not casting the slightest doubt on the respect the Prime Minister and his government have for citizens' Charter rights.