Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I'd like to welcome you. I apologize for arriving late. I was at the doctor's office. As you can see, I have the flu.
I had a point of order, and I agree that it wasn't really one. The five minutes are ours and we ask the questions we want to ask.
That's an example of the way the government operates. A Supreme Court judge could be appointed without being bilingual. The act is drafted in English and in French. It is not translated, but written in French. And yet, after all that, we ask the translators, with all due respect to them, to translate that act for the judge—even if we don't allow it to be translated—so that he can make a final decision, because there is no further recourse after the Supreme Court.
We're talking about deputy ministers who aren't bilingual. The government's message is that bilingualism isn't very important in the country, even if Canada is a bilingual country. The government is a major employer. I worked in the mines. I remember giving the following example. When the company wanted to hire people to operate heavy equipment, it said what it needed. It did the same if it needed an electrician. When the public service needs staff, what is the government's position? It operates as though bilingualism were not necessary, despite the fact that Canada is a bilingual country by law. And yet they are the ones who will have to train those people. Wouldn't it be preferable for it to be done by the institutions?
Why don't you make that request? Will you have the means to do it with qualified people by working jointly with the employer? In fact, you represent employers, since you provide training to the people they'll be hiring later. Isn't it possible to solve this problem once and for all?