Official Languages Committee on May 29th, 2008

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

When you say 5%, what place are you talking about?

[George Da Pont]

That percentage comes from the Official Languages Regulations. It stipulates that we have certain specific obligations.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

But where does that percentage apply, in the case of the Coast Guard?

[George Da Pont]

It's the Official Languages Regulations.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

I understand that it's the regulations, and I know them, but I want to know what place this applies to in the case of the Coast Guard.

[George Da Pont]

Pardon me.

This applies really in a variety of our centres where we deliver services and where there is a demand and a requirement over 5% for service in the other official language. For example, there is one centre in Newfoundland that I just mentioned, Port aux Basques, that provides bilingual services in that area. Two out of the three maritime communication and traffic service centres in the maritime region provide bilingual services. All of the four in Quebec provide bilingual services. Two in our central and Arctic region provide bilingual services, and there are--

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

We're talking about Coast Guard services, but the boats aren't on land; they're at sea. In the case of francophones, does the 5% apply to people travelling by sea, who come from the north shore to Quebec, from Newfoundland, from the Gaspé Peninsula, Chéticamp or elsewhere in Nova Scotia? Are you calculating the people from St. John's or those who work at sea? I don't see how you can calculate the 5% in the case of fishermen who are at sea.

[Michelle d'Auray]

There are two aspects to that 5%. The first concerns the delivery of services, that is to say when people call a communications centre. The other concerns activity on a ship, to conduct a search and rescue or to provide some sort of support. I'm drawing the distinction between the two because the delivery of communications services is land-based, that is to say that it is done from communications centres. That's where the 5% issue applies.

I'm going to close on this point. Staff is assigned to a Coast Guard vessel based on the vessel's mission. If a ship leaves on an exploratory mission, the crew will be constituted accordingly. Crews aren't bilingual at all times.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

We agreed to broadcast the audio tape in camera, but that's not the case with the transcript. In that transcript, the mother says: “[...] that's no longer your responsibility...”. In the audio, the quality of the French is so poor, based on my criteria, that she should have said—

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

With all due respect, Mr. Godin, we heard the audio in camera and I wouldn't like us to disclose the content of the transcript. However, I agree in condemning the fact that it was written in disgusting French.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

The point of order concerns only the audio portion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

I'm going to allow Mr. Coderre's point of order. The audio portion is indeed confidential. We can comment on the nature of the remarks, but I would ask you not to cite excerpts of the conversation. In those circumstances, I'll allow the point of order.

Thank you, Mr. Coderre.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Mr. Chairman, I'm going back to the transcript, which is not in camera, only the sound recording is, so that it is not repeated on the radio.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Mr. Godin, I have expressed my point of view. Committee members may make comments.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I request unanimous consent that the transcript should also be part of the audio.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

All right, I agree. I use it differently. I won't read the transcript.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Mr. Godin, we're going to finish with the point of order. I think we've settled the matter. I'll give you back your speaking time.

Mr. Petit, please go ahead on the point of order.

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

Mr. Coderre is right. We don't have any right to do so indirectly, even orally. We agreed that it should be heard in camera. We shouldn't exaggerate either.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Exactly.

Gentlemen, thank you for that clarification, which is entirely appropriate.

We'll now continue with a representative of the NDP.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

I'm going to ask my question differently. She began to ask one of her questions in French, then she continued in English because she felt she wasn't understood.

Do you agree with me?

[LGen Marc Dumais]

As the individual in question is a member of the Canadian Forces, I'll answer, Mr. Chairman.

Yes, she had to speak in English. I don't excuse that employee. He is an anglophone. He admitted so at the start of the conversation. He meets the language standards of the position and the duties. We're not trying to judge the quality of his French. Under the Official Languages Act, we must be able to communicate with people in the language of their choice.

The employee was dealing with an extremely delicate subject with a person who was really concerned by the tragedy. I believe he made a valiant effort to communicate the information and to explain that it was now the RCMP that was handling the matter. I admit he had some difficulty, but he ultimately managed to communicate with the woman in a relatively sympathetic manner and to give her an explanation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much, Mr. Godin.

We'll now go over to the government side and Mr. Denis Lebel.

[Denis Lebel, Conservative, Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Ms. d'Auray and Mr. Da Pont.

Mr. Dumais, it goes without saying that we will reiterate our condolences to the people who have lived through this ordeal. There is no doubt that the hearing of the recording of Ms. Aucoin's discussion shows us, in events such as this, how fragile the opportunity to speak and be understood in one's language is. We can very well understand the situation in which these people must have found themselves.

At the funeral, our government was represented by the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, Lawrence Cannon. I spoke with a number of people from the Magdalen Islands, and this event is still very present in their minds. I understand Mr. Blais very well when he tells us about the emotion he experienced, like everyone who was there. That's another reason for us to make sure that, in our country where the two official languages should be respected everywhere, they are respected at serious events such as this.

I would like to go back to the delegation to Sûreté du Québec. First, from whom did the mandate to Sûreté du Québec to make the announcement come? Did it come from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police? We know that, between police departments... Was it done in writing? Has any corrective action been taken since then? We realized that there was a problem, and I understand that that kind of mandate isn't assigned every day, but Ms. d'Auray spoke to us earlier about the observation that was made. Have corrective measures been taken?

[Lgén Marc Dumais]

As the deputy minister indicated, there's nothing unusual in that for this kind of tragedy, but normally in such cases—I'm talking about the aerial aspect and about the National Search and Rescue Secretariat—we work in close cooperation and communication with the families involved, whether it be in the case of an air crash or another problem of that kind.

In this case, I don't know exactly who decided to delegate the communication to Sûreté du Québec, but it's a more or less normal procedure since the distance was enormous. In addition, this involved a marine situation. We have to delegate the power to communicate on our behalf to a professional organization, such as the local police force.

I don't want to speak for the Coast Guard, but at one point shortly after the incident, it delegated an individual to liaise directly with the family to avoid communication problems. Each case is different, but I assure you that, in every situation, people do their best to be sensitive to an extremely emotional and difficult situation for all participants and all those who are directly affected. It's somewhat sad that the communication was not made as soon as possible, but, prior to that, we had used those people to communicate with families. There was simply an unexpected breakdown, and the people have apologized. It's unfortunate, but that is what happened.

[Michelle d'Auray]

According to the decision tree, in terms of delegation of authority, the Joint Coordination Centre calls the local police. Since the coordination centres are staffed by people from both the Coast Guard and the Canadian Forces, that depends on the person in the position at the time. However, it's really the coordination centre that decides whether or not to continue the search. As I explained earlier, we really have to consider whether there is a sufficient chance of finding a survivor at that point. We conduct all possible searches to find the person, then we move on to the—pardon the expression—recovery stage. When the decision is made, it is then communicated to the local police department. In those situations, this is done at the local level because it's easier to find the people on the ground. I don't want to go into all the details, but the delegation is made by the Rescue Coordination Centre.