Official Languages Committee on Feb. 7th, 2008

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much, Mr. Vaillancourt.

We'll go over to the opposition. For the Bloc québécois, it will be Mr. Nadeau.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

We've just heard a discussion and some very interesting remarks. I'm of Franco-Ontarian origin, and I remember a sentence by Jeannine Séguin, who is no longer with us today, but who was President of the Association canadienne-française de l'Ontario. I worked closely with her at the time when she was President of the Fédération des francophone hors Québec. She said that we Francophones learn French, but we catch English.

In a society that wants to be bilingual, at least in accordance with the Constitution of Canada, we're still living that reality. When my children were at the Coopérative d'habitation Villa Bonheur in Saskatoon, they caught English very quickly. They were five and eight years old when they started there, and they learned it. That's a reality because English is the majority language there. I'm blaming no one; that's a reality. The Anglophone children didn't catch or learn French. There are those circumstances.

Perhaps we caught English, but we had to develop and improve our French as best we could. It's frustrating to see federal government colleagues who don't master both languages at all, whereas they should since they occupy so-called bilingual positions. I use the word “colleagues” as though I were a public servant.

There's also the letter that Ms. Kenny sent us yesterday or Tuesday. She is a woman who works with minority Francophones and who told an important story. The supervisor doesn't speak French, or doesn't understand it very well. Francophones may be numerous or less numerous; they will always speak English regardless, because, if you speak to the supervisor in French, the message won't be transmitted or won't be clear. You risk being misunderstood and you also don't want to undermine the job that has to be done.

In the public service, the further you get from the communities where there is a majority of Francophones, the more Francophones themselves work in the other language.

The public service is experiencing a problem in this regard. I know that it isn't the public servants' fault. It's a matter of will on the government's part. Will it step forward or not? Will it provide the tools or not?

The Action Plan for Official Languages has to be given an orientation. Let's see what Francophones... French is the language that is being lost and that is in difficulty across Canada, even in certain regions of Quebec. Let's make sure that the work can be done, that is to say that comprehension and learning can be done.

I would ask Mr. Cashman and Ms. Demers to answer that question. Are there things that the federal government has done well in the past, that have been cancelled and that should be reinstated?

The Action Plan for Official Languages is a good opportunity, even if it means establishing partnerships or restoring elements that were cancelled and that shouldn't have been, because they provided solutions.

I'm thinking of certain examples. Last year, the government cancelled the Canada Summer Jobs Program for youths and reinstated it this year, because it had completely missed the boat. We have a difficult situation here. I'd like to have your viewpoint on this aspect because you're inside the public service.

[Michèle Demers]

One thing has been removed, and I never thought I would hear myself say that the matter should be reconsidered. However, I see that, under the system put in place in the public service in 2003, a good balance should be struck between unilingual and bilingual positions in order to give people the time to acquire the second language. To achieve that, the level of imperative bilingual positions staffed in the public service should be reviewed.

Mr. Chong, you mentioned that candidates should, in principle, be bilingual in order to enter the EX category, and that that made sense. I don't disagree with you, but the fact remains that bilingualism is required at much lower levels. From the moment there is direct interaction with the public in designated bilingual regions, candidates must meet the linguistic requirements in both languages. Couldn't we strike a better balance between bilingual and unilingual positions in order to enable people to acquire the second official language?

Coming from us, who represent the employees of the federal public service, this initiative would be interpreted as a good will gesture. That would open a door. However, it should be accompanied by a training program and funding. I repeat what I said earlier: responsibility is shared between employee and government, but it is there for both.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Ms. Demers.

We'll now go to Mr. Brent St. Denis.

[Brent St. Denis, Liberal, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I very much appreciate what's been said, first by Luc, then by Mauril. I'm a good example of what's at the bottom of this issue. I have a French name, but I'm Anglophone. When I was young, we had no opportunity to learn Canada's other official language through immersion.

The boundary of my riding was changed four years ago. The riding was slightly expanded to include the Highway 11 corridor in northern Ontario, that is Smooth Rock Falls, Moonbeam, Kapuskasing, Hearst, Val Rita, Mattice, and so on. That's a very Francophone region, but also a very bilingual one. Someone explained to me one day that a person who could switch from one language to the other without an accent, as many members do here, was a gem in Canada, a very special phenomenon. It's a challenge for me to become that. I think it's impossible.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

It's coming; it's coming.

[Brent St. Denis, Liberal, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

Does everybody understand what I'm saying? Yes?

Let's go back to the subject of the debate. The objective of the Government of Canada is to make the public service very bilingual, but we have to accept the fact that, for the future of Canada, the government now needs a new generation of public servants. Is an effort being made to find candidates from that next generation of public servants in highly bilingual places like the Highway 11 corridor, in Ontario, Mattawa, the birthplace of my friend Mauril, or New Brunswick? There are a lot of bilingual young people in these big and small areas.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Perhaps Mr. Cashman can answer.

[Ed Cashman]

I'd like to answer that in English.

I have a problem with deciding that for entry into the public service we're going to limit the candidates to those who are bilingual. By doing so you will exclude large chunks of this country, and that's not fair.

We should be aiming for the best and the brightest to enter the public service over the next couple of years. By simply saying that these regions are bilingual and we're only going to take candidates from those regions is not building the country we are intending to build.

[Brent St. Denis, Liberal, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

I agree, but are we trying to establish a balance by trying to find both young people from bilingual regions and youths who want to learn the other language, regardless of whether they come from Quebec or outside that province?

[Ed Cashman]

I think there is also a balance between the carrot and the stick. Right now, if the government were to say...and Madame Adam, the Commissioner of Official Languages, did say it. She felt there were enough bilingual people in the public service now that we didn't need to put as much money into language training.

That's dangerous, because we haven't achieved that critical mass within the public service and, truthfully, among young Canadians who want jobs in the public service.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Mr. Peralta.

[Gonzola Peralta]

We have participated in many consultations across the country, and many of the questions and issues raised here today have been voiced right across this country.

In some ways, some of us are saying the same thing. I appreciate very much député Bélanger's suggestion to actually sit down together and propose something. It's evident to us from an industry perspective that no one group has the complete answer. That's very evident.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

You have very little time left, Mr. Peralta.

[Gonzola Peralta]

I'd also like to point out that when I went to university here, I had to pass a bilingualism test to get my diploma. Not a single university in Canada demands that any more. Shame on us.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Peralta. I think you have raised an interesting issue here about our educational system and language learning and requirements.

We'll now move on to Mr. Nadeau.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Vaillancourt, Mr. Peralta and you have spoken about the language industry and its development. From the documents I read before the meeting, the language industry is growing at a rate of approximately 18%. So that means that, at that rate, if my calculations are correct, that industry will double in size within approximately six or seven years. The program is for a term of five years; at least that was the case of the one that has just terminated. However, I would like you to talk to me about your organizations' needs for assistance from the federal government, which is responsible for the program. Mr. Vaillancourt and Mr. Peralta, I'd like to hear your comments on that subject.

[Jean Vaillancourt]

Indeed, this $3 billion market for Canada alone is doubling every five to seven years. The global market is even bigger. So we're talking about extremely significant potential economic development for Canada in order to position itself.

Currently, Canada clearly has a serious shortage of translators and terminologists to meet its needs. We know that Ireland and Australia have seized a significant share of the Canadian translation market. The primary interest should potentially be to train more translators in Canada. It is very important to support the development of training activities in both the private sector and the universities. It is extremely important to train more people so that, collectively, Canadians can benefit from the extraordinary growth in this market.

Second, it is essential to train translators so that they can work efficiently and produce more. The only way to increase translators' productivity is to put tools at their disposal, whether it be software, software packages or simply physical instruments that facilitate and accelerate translation. These products can only be developed in Canada if we invest in research and development.

The Language Technology Research Centre is the first and currently the only research centre specialized in language technologies in Canada. Earlier I mentioned that, for us to be competitive, we would need $6 million a year more than the current funding shared by LTRC's partners. Beyond that, it would be extremely important to arm the Canadian industry so that it can put these inventions on the market so that it can benefit fully from them, whether it be the business marketing market or the translation market itself.

[Alain Chamsi]

Remember that the industry is here to meet the country's needs, whether it be government imperatives or the needs of a bilingual country. When we say translation, we're talking about terminologists and language training. That's why we're here, but we're also here to help extend Canada's international reach. Other countries often ask us to share our linguistic experience with them. Countries like Chile, Serbia and other countries that have the same kind of people come to see us to ask us what we do, because Canada is viewed as a beacon in this regard. So we are a significant presence in the world and we must continue to be that.

However, as you said, we need people. We don't have the necessary personnel or resources. They must be trained. One way to overcome this kind of problem is to develop technologies. We are a world leader. I've previously been asked why the Canadian language technology sector is so well developed. There are a lot of businesses, even in the Ottawa-Gatineau region, working in the language technology sector. We need that. That's one way to facilitate the development of translation, terminology and language training at lower cost, because we don't have the essential financial or human resources to meet the needs in this country, without even looking to the outside.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you.

[Gonzalo Peralta]

May I share some figures?

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Yes.

[Gonzola Peralta]

You may draw your own conclusions. The annual growth rate is 18% per year for everyone. It takes four to seven years for the industry to double. The maximum Canadian growth rate in the number of translation graduates is 6% per year. Soon our translations may be done in Morocco.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Peralta.

By the way, people say very good things about the simultaneous interpretation done on the Hill.

I will now turn the floor over to Mr. Petit.

[Daniel Petit, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, that was very interesting and very instructive. I'm a new Conservative member, having been in office for two years. Indeed, things were done before I arrived here, and I'm learning because a new program has to be prepared. As Mr. Godin said, we have English and French. Personally, I'm an immigrant and I have another language that no one here could speak, and that's Walloon. So I represent a problem for you because my mother tongue is Walloon.

When I arrived in Quebec City—I'm originally from Quebec City and I live in the lower town, like all immigrants—I learned joual. That was special. Having studied classics, I had learned good French with the Eudist Fathers. I learned Latin, which formed the basis of French. I also learned Greek.

When I arrived here, I was faced with only two languages, and people were trying to stake out their territory. I can't get over it, but people really are territorial here on the Hill. Everyone wants his own little kingdom.

I'm trying to find out one single thing. This issue must move forward, and my question is very basic. I heard Ms. Demers say earlier—but I don't want to put words in her mouth—that she was part of the private system. But in fact, the Government of Canada subcontracts to the Université du Québec. Mr. Vaillancourt, the rector, seemed to be speaking on behalf of a Quebec entity.

So there's apparently a school at your university, Mr. Vaillancourt, but I don't know how that works.