Official Languages Committee on Nov. 3rd, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much, Ms. Glover.

Now we'll begin the second round.

Mr. D'Amours, I believe you're going to share your time with Ms. Zarac.

[Jean-Claude D'Amours, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I'm going to do things extremely quickly.

Colonel Meloche, you mentioned earlier that you had gone as far as you could with regard to the translation component, and that things had become difficult. Before you leave us in a while, if you could give me your card, I could send you the contact information of an organization in my riding, CIDIF, that offers translation assistance and resources. It might possibly be able to contribute to economic development in my riding and, at the same time, provide you with the necessary resources to do the translation you need at National Defence.

[Col J.P.L. Meloche]

Thank you very much for that information. I'll take note of it. However, all our translation goes through the Translation Bureau, which has connections.

I meet with the file manager at Public Works and Government Services Canada who is responsible for translation, and I make sure that that officer is able to communicate with the various branches and prioritize the translation.

We also make sure we maximize translations, that is to say that, in many cases, similar information can be sent for courses at various levels. For example, there is a certain similarity between the NCO tank commander course and the officers' tank commander course. In addition, rather than send the content of both courses for translation, the common portion of the courses will be sent only once. The Translation Bureau helps us a great deal: it has software enabling it to ensure that the same document is not translated twice.

[Jean-Claude D'Amours, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Thank you.

Now I'll hand over to my colleague Ms. Zarac.

[Lise Zarac, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

Thank you.

Good morning and thank you very much for being here today. I really like what I've heard so far, and I congratulate you because you're right: when you set a model that is to be followed, and example, that's the best way. It takes role models to set an example.

I also like hearing that you're sharing your responsibilities because it can be dangerous to have an official languages coordinator who has sole responsibility. What I'm hearing today is that you've transferred that to various departments. So it involves everyone.

I also congratulate you for taking action. You're not just developing a plan; you're taking concrete action when you say that officers who are not bilingual by December 31, 2011 will be forced to retire.

Have you studied the impact of that action?

[MGen W. Semianiw]

Thank you for the question, Mr. Chairman.

At the end of the day, there is no impact. The impact is that they will not be in the Canadian Forces and someone else will be promoted who has CBC.

It's very simple. On the other hand, if there are any questions as to whether there are officers

who this will be a challenge for perhaps, but I'll wait until December 31

when I get the results. Then, it's very clear for the Chief of the Canadian Forces.

People will be taking their releases.

I come back and say

politics, in a way, is a process,

but it's not a process; it's about leadership. I keep coming back to this. It's about leaders being able to function effectively in both official languages, French and English, and lead the institution.

That's the challenge, but also the expectation.

That's where we want to go.

[Lise Zarac, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

It's a challenge for you, but ultimately it's a fundamental right because what you're saying today is that Canadian Forces personnel are a great representation of Canadians. I think that, to be fair toward all Canadians, this is a right that belongs to them.

Your plan is a five-year plan that will end in 2012. You still have a lot of work to do on the translation side. Are there any budget constraints in your plan? You've developed a plan, but is there a budget for it or do you have any constraints?

[MGen W. Semianiw]

The answer is frankly

yes, it is, for two reasons. First, do I have the money I need? Yes. Second, for me it's a high priority.

So the direction I gave to General Gosselin, who works for me, was that this is a priority for me, therefore it's now a priority for him. I know it's a priority for him and his team to ensure that money is put there. But as you heard, the challenge is not money. We understand what we have to do.

We see the needs.

But the challenge now is ensuring that we get everything translated as quickly as we can in the priority we need. If you had another 100,000 people doing translation, it would probably all be done next week.

But that's not the way it is.

So with the folks we have who do the translation, as Colonel Meloche said, we prioritize what we need to get done. We have completed a lot and we know where we want to go.

In my mind, that's the way things are.

Do you have a plan for where you want to go?

I hope this committee will call us back next year to ask how we've done with that plan, given the passion here.

But clearly we've done much, we have a long way to go, and money is not the challenge.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much, Ms. Zarac.

We'll continue with Mr. Nadeau.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Gentlemen, I want to talk to you about a letter from a constituent that concerns the navy. In the work you're currently doing, or since the start of the plan, the land forces have been the first work place affected, and I assume the air force and navy will follow.

The person who wrote that letter told me this:

I belong to the Canadian navy and I must deplore an unacceptable situation that has been going on for too long and in which I do not see any will within the organization to solve the problem. On the military ships of the Government of Canada and on Canada's two naval bases, Esquimalt and Halifax, the only authorized language of work is English. Furthermore, the use of French among francophones is not tolerated, and speaking French therefore results in an administrative reprimand. The only example that has been successful in this kind of situation to date has been that of the army, which, to solve the problem, has formed an exclusively francophone contingent in which the recognized language of work is French and in which everything is done in French, from training to operations.

This is a recent letter, dated October 23 last. It contains a kind of complaint. This person was told to complain to the authorities. It's good that we have the letter as such. I wanted to tell you about it.

In what direction is action being taken in the case of the navy, for example, which I assume is starting to work on the plan that the army has already introduced?

[MGen W. Semianiw]

Thank you for the question.

It's an unacceptable situation. I'm answering this, not him, because I'm the leader. At the end of the day, that is unacceptable to hear. That's not what I believe or stand for, or what the program stands for.

It's true that we started with the land forces.

We started with the army and had great improvements. We know we need to work more with the navy.

That's true, Mr. Nadeau.

I know this is a challenge, but I would love to get a copy of the letter so I can take immediate action with the commander of the navy. That's his issue to deal with, not the coordinators or the individual who runs the base or wing, but the navy. I would be very pleased to take the letter. I will speak to him, if he's available, right after this meeting.

That's unacceptable.

It is unacceptable to hear that in a letter.

[Col J.P.L. Meloche]

Perhaps I could add one point. We're talking about making a change in organizational culture. In the navy, in combat units, on the frigates, there was a French-language unit: in Quebec City. With the review of the linguistic designations of units, the navy will be adding two ships that will be bilingual in the next few years, with a view subsequently to making them francophone ships. So we're going to provide equal opportunities for both francophones and anglophones to serve in the navy in the language of their choice. The unit designation project is one of the basic aspects of that.

So in the navy, there won't be just Quebec City that's francophone; within the next few years, two other places will be added: one on the west coast, at Esquimalt, and the other on the east coast, in Halifax.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

What will be added then?

[Col J.P.L. Meloche]

Two ships that are currently English-language units are being converted to bilingual units, and those ships will become French-language units within four years. It takes a certain amount of time to make the transition, build a team and ensure that people are reassigned.

So, in the Canadian navy, instead of having just one francophone unit, there will eventually be three so that people can have equal chances to serve.

[MGen W. Semianiw]

In conclusion, it's unacceptable--I say this again--to hear what I heard in the letter. It'll address one issue. But to hear that somehow actions would be taken for people speaking French is totally unacceptable.

I'd love to get a copy of the letter and speak to the commander of the navy before 12 o'clock to ensure that something is done. But it's a leadership issue here that needs to be addressed.

[Col J.P.L. Meloche]

We have an internal complaints system protecting the individual's identity.

[An hon. member]

That's important.

[Col. J.P.L. Meloche]

It's very important and that's why—

[MGen W. Semianiw]

On what we're hoping for, we can talk about processes and leadership. You can have all the processes or mechanisms of voice that you want where people complain to. The leadership needs to take action, Monsieur Nadeau. C'est vrai?

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you.

You're up, Mr. Nadeau.

Now we'll go on with Ms. O'Neill-Gordon.

[Tilly O'Neill-Gordon, Conservative, Miramichi, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

A sincere welcome to all of you for joining us here this morning. It is great to have you with us.

First, I want to say how happy I am to hear you say that money was no challenge in the translation, because I know how hard you work to provide this opportunity and have things translated. We wouldn't want a shortage just because of money.

It is obvious your intent is to make sure that bilingualism is apparent in all aspects. However, how do you explain the fact that this commitment by senior leadership does not seem to be able to bring about greater tangible results for service personnel?

[MGen W. Semianiw]

Could I ask you to clarify the question? How has it not created greater tangible results?

[Tilly O'Neill-Gordon, Conservative, Miramichi, NB]

It has then, you're saying?

[MGen W. Semianiw]

It has been to start with, since they have leaders who can speak in both languages. More importantly, if a question is posed, as I do, when I travel...and it's not, to be fair, about 25%-75%, it's about being able to speak as a leader in the language of choice of an individual who is talking to you. So it already has had tangible results.

[Tilly O'Neill-Gordon, Conservative, Miramichi, NB]

That's fine. Thank you. I'm glad to hear that.

On another matter, the investigation made by the ombudsman has stated that bilingual instructors have a much heavier workload than the unilingual instructors.

Do you feel enough has been done to hire more instructors who can train recruits in the official language of their choice?