I admit I haven't considered the bill's impact on my professional future. That wasn't part of the analysis that we conducted on the bill. I appreciate your sympathy, but, more seriously, it is a bill that concerns me. One of the reasons is precisely the one you mentioned. If the Charter of the French language contains such a provision—one clause states it very expressly in the bill on the Official Languages Act—there is nothing preventing another province from saying that, if the Quebec legislation takes precedence, why not its own? Why have linguistic obligations? As far as I'm concerned, I also have a responsibility in that regard, and that would have an impact on the right of citizens to receive services in English from federal institutions.
In the course of certain conversations I've had about that bill, in which we talked about the difficulty some employees of federal institutions in Quebec have in really being able to work in French, I said that they could file a complaint. If Radio-Canada employees are unable to obtain their work instruments in French, they don't need the Charter of the French Language to get those work instruments and those instructions. They can file a complaint with my office.
The third thing I would say is that the Official Languages Act was amended three years ago. Every amendment to the act requires time for behaviour to change. As Mr. Godin indicated, a lot of progress has to be made before the last amendment to the act affects the government's reflexes. We're still involved in the process. The reports we file under Part VII, which was amended, say a lot about establishing committees, and so on. I haven't yet seen a lot of concrete results. I would be very concerned if the act were amended in that way, given the implications that could have for the existing act, both in Quebec and in the rest of the country.