Official Languages Committee on April 20th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Good morning, everybody. Welcome to the 10th meeting of the Standing Committee on Official Languages.

Pursuant to Standing Order 81(4), we will be dealing with the main estimates for 2010-11, vote 20 under Privy Council, referred to the committee on Wednesday, March 3, 2010.

We have with us this morning Mr. Fraser, Commissioner of Official Languages, and his team—whom he will introduce in a few moments. I would like to inform members that, following the commissioner's appearance this morning, we will be dealing with the two motions that were handed to you and concern the adoption of the main estimates related to this morning's presentation.

Commissioner, welcome. This morning we will learn a bit more about the financial component of your mandate. I would invite you to begin your opening remarks.

[Graham Fraser, Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ladies and gentlemen, members of the Standing Committee on Official Languages, good morning.

In order to talk about finances, I am accompanied by a slightly larger team than usual. I'm accompanied by Lise Cloutier, who is the assistant commissioner of corporate services; Colette Lagacé, a chartered accountant and director of finances; Sylvain Giguère, who is the assistant commissioner of policy and communications; Johane Tremblay, general counsel; and Ghislaine Charlebois, who is the assistant commissioner of compliance assurance.

It's a great pleasure to meet with you today to discuss the main estimates for the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages and some of the activities planned for the next year. The timing is ideal, as last week marked the midpoint in my mandate.

Ensuring that Canadians' language rights are respected and protected requires appropriate resources. Members of Parliament and taxpayers need to know how these resources are being used, particularly in the current economic context.

The office of the commissioner's total budget is $20.6 million. My organization primarily relies on the expertise of its employees. The office of the commissioner has 177.5 full-time equivalents, whose salaries make up the greatest percentage of the office of the commissioner's expenses.

The office of the commissioner's program is divided into three areas of activity: protection of language rights, promotion of linguistic duality and internal services.

Although I will take the next few minutes to provide a brief overview of the main initiatives that I plan to undertake over the coming months, for further details, I invite you to consult the office of the commissioner's 2010-2011 Report on Plans and Priorities, which was submitted to the House of Commons on March 25.

Protection of language rights includes compliance assurance activities: investigations, audits, performance evaluations of federal institutions and legal interventions. The office of the commissioner also intervenes proactively to prevent situations where institutions may fail to comply with their linguistic obligations. As commissioner, I may also intervene before the courts in cases of non-compliance with the Official Languages Act. A total of $6.9 million, or 33% of the budget, is allotted to these protection activities.

As usual, compliance assurance activities carried out over the past fiscal year will be described in my annual report. This year, however, this report will be released in two volumes. While the first volume will be published in May, the second volume, which will include this information, will be released in the fall. It will also include performance report cards for 16 federal institutions.

You may be interested to know that our audit of the Canadian Forces training programs is almost complete. In June we will submit the audit report, which includes an action plan submitted by the Canadian Forces. The goal of this audit was to evaluate the extent to which the members of the forces have access to work-related training in the official language of their choice, as is their right.

In addition, we're about to begin an audit into bilingual services provided by Air Canada. As always, this audit will include recommendations and an action plan for the institution to implement in response to these recommendations. The audit report should be released in 2011.

Two other audits are planned for the next few years. One will examine service provided to the public by Service Canada. The other audit targets the development programs managed by Industry Canada.

It goes without saying that my staff will continue to respond to the 800 or so complaints that we receive each year, while also encouraging various institutions to be more proactive in order to improve their application of the Official Languages Act.

Finally, we are currently examining ways to maximize the use and extent of my powers under Part X of the act, which allow me to intervene before the courts when federal institutions fail to comply with the act. Since the beginning of my mandate, I have intervened 10 times before the courts in legal remedies involving language rights guaranteed by the Official Languages Act and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I am very pleased with the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court of Canada in the DesRochers case and with the Federal Court's more recent judgment in the VIA Rail case, in which I also intervened.

Promoting linguistic duality means building links between official language minority communities, federal institutions and the different levels of government so as to help them better understand the needs of official language communities, the importance of bilingualism and the value of respecting Canada's linguistic duality. This endeavour also involves raising awareness among the general public and federal institutions in order to improve compliance. A total of $7.4 million, or 36% of the budget, is allotted to these activities.

As part of this program activity, we are currently performing a study on leadership and language of work in order to determine how federal institutions can create work environments that are more conducive to the use of both official languages. This study will be released next fall.

Furthermore, I will continue to promote dialogue between the federal government and post-secondary educational institutions so that these institutions provide students with more opportunities to improve their second language skills. I view this as a key issue for Canadian society and for public service renewal.

In the wake of the Olympic Games, one of our priorities will be to continue to focus on the travelling public and federal institutions regarding their rights and obligations. We will also continue to stir discussion across the country on the issue of linguistic duality as a Canadian value.

Internal services are meant to support the other two program activities. They include management and monitoring activities, including financial, human resources, and information management; information technology; property and materiel management; and procurement. Overall, these services are allocated $6.4 million, or 31% of the total budget.

Over the next three years, the office of the commissioner will establish a monitoring action plan for the delegation of powers related to human resources, financial administration, and information management. We will also be reviewing delegation instruments in these areas.

Finally, we will be updating our human resources plan so that it takes into account the results of the public service employee survey, the employment equity plan, and the internal audit results.

Administrative accountability is, in my opinion, of vital importance. Managers at the office of the commissioner ensure that the funds we are allocated are used in a way that is responsible, transparent, and mindful of the public interest.

I am proud to say that the Auditor General has given us an unqualified opinion on our financial statements for the sixth year in a row.

Our budget has remained stable over the past few years. In 2007-08 we were given an additional $957,000--of which $722,000 is on an ongoing basis--so that we could cover new obligations associated with access to information and internal audits as a result of the Federal Accountability Act. Special projects such as those we undertook this past year to mark the 40th anniversary of the Official Languages Act are funded by moneys from our regular budget.

April 1 of this year marked the 40^th anniversary of the opening of the office of the commissioner and of the moment Keith Spicer and his team took office. Over the last 40 years, language rights have evolved in tandem with Canadian society. Challenges, public expectations and work tools have considerably changed. But the office of the commissioner has always learned to adapt and will continue to do so.

I have initiated an A-base review in order to ensure the optimal use of public resources that are entrusted to me. This type of examination will allow us to determine appropriate resources based on the scope and complexity of our activities, including the human resources that will allows us to reinforce our protection and promotion role. Through this exercise, we will see to it that resources are optimally allotted at the office of the commissioner.

There is an internal management issue which may, however, compromise the office of the commissioner's ability to carry out its activities. An analysis of problem areas related to information management and information technology has indicated a significant gap between our system capacity and our operational requirements.

Our current platform and hardware, as well as our current software, are out of date, and run the risk of failure. Furthermore, this technology cannot be modified to cope with new demands and requirements related to our role. We have therefore entered discussions with the Treasury Board Secretariat so that we can present a request for additional funding to the advisory panel on the funding and oversight of officers of Parliament. I hope this action will allow us to begin upgrading our information technology systems in 2010-11.

Thank you for your attention. My colleagues and I are available to answer your questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Commissioner.

We'll start with Madam Zarac.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome to you, Mr. Fraser, and to your team. Thank you for being here today to answer our questions.

Although our committee has to approve your office's expenditures, it is unfortunate that we cannot recommend a budget increase. So we can only approve what has already been allotted; however, it is important for us to know whether that adequately meets your needs. Before addressing that specific issue, I would like to talk about your presentation on the 2010-2011 main estimates.

I particularly appreciated when you said that there were two official language communities in our country and that they had an important role to play. Essentially, your role is to ensure that public policy better reflect Canada's linguistic duality. As a francophone and Quebecker, I care deeply about what you said. We know that the government is currently looking to reform the representation within the House.

I wanted to know—because that was not something you dealt with in your opening remarks—whether you had considered studying the issue this year, so that both communities would be represented within the context of that reform.

[Graham Fraser]

That is a very good question, Mr. Chair. We have already requested a study, or legal opinion, as part of the reform proposed by the Senate. But we have not yet addressed the issue of changes in representation at the House of Commons. That is an issue that is worth considering, and we will take note of your question.

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

Very well, thank you. I hope that you will reflect on that and produce a report or recommendations for us to see sometime this year.

Now, concerning your office's expenditures, you have three areas of activity, each of which account for a third of the budget. I was wondering whether such an allocation actually met your operational needs. If I understood you correctly, there is a shortfall in the services area.

[Graham Fraser]

As I indicated in my opening remarks, there is an issue related to our information technology. I do hope that our discussions with Treasury Board on upgrading our information technology systems will be fruitful. I will ask Ms. Cloutier to speak about that proposal in greater length.

[Lise Cloutier, Assistant Commissioner, Corporate Services Branch, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

There are significant gaps in our systems. Discussions are underway with the Treasury Board Secretariat, which has been very supportive of our initiative. This is an one-off request; we will not be receiving permanent funding. This is project funding that will allow us to upgrade our information technology systems.

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

Have you estimated the cost of the initiative?

[Lise Cloutier]

The estimated cost of the initiative would be between $6 million and $7 million over five years.

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

Could you repeat that?

[Lise Cloutier]

Between $6 million and $7 million.

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

Between $6 million and $7 million over five years.

[Lise Cloutier]

That is correct.

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

Very well, thank you. Is the current situation compromising your ability to carry out your work?

[Graham Fraser]

We have been able to maintain the system up until now; it has not yet failed but is hindering our ability to ensure that all directorates are working together. It is difficult to extract all the data. Our complaints data base is at risk. From one year to the next, we use our reprofiled funds to address the gaps and vulnerabilities, but our aging system is posing a problem.

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

How many complaints do you receive per year?

[Graham Fraser]

Last year, there were approximately 1,400. That represented a year-over-year increase, which was attributable in part to two specific events: the closure of a radio station in Windsor, which generated many complaints, and the Olympic Games.

Year in, year out, we receive about 800 complaints.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Ms. Zarac.

We will move on to Mr. Nadeau.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to welcome everyone from the Office of the Commissioner.

At the risk of repeating what I have said at some of your previous presentations, Commissioner, I think that there is something that is not being addressed by the Office of the Commissioner. I am talking about studies on assimilation. I wanted to point that out because I think that it is worth repeating.

Since the first reports by the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages, we have never—or only rarely—had a precise account of the decline in the use of French, whether in Quebec or in the rest of Canada. Such a study would have shown that assimilation is still rampant and that there is still a lot of work to do to ensure an actual recognition of the French fact, as well as the English fact, over our entire land.

I see that you have budgets for such studies. There is the "study" component. I would greatly appreciate—this is a request that covers the overall project—if we could receive clear data on the political profile of that situation. That would be very helpful.

Canadian Heritage has long referred to the francophone retention rate. In Saskatchewan, I recall that it was 15% among young Franco-Saskatchewanians. Consequently, there was an 85% assimilation rate. What does that mean in the general scheme of things, in terms of ethnolinguistics and community life?

I am raising the issue because you have funds allotted to conduct studies. If there were more in-depth studies on that issue, they would have to be published and mentioned in the commissioner's report. I believe that would be an extremely significant contribution.

In light of what Ms. Zarac said earlier, we all know that the government is trying to reduce the presence of francophones and Quebec in the political arena—with the critical mass living in Quebec—as part of its bill on democratic representation. The bill is intended to reduce our political weight in the Canadian federation. It is therefore extremely important to have the right data with respect to that issue.

I am amazed to hear you say that you want to intervene with senior federal officials in order to promote language of work rights. They, above all, should be aware of those rights and ensure that government workers can work in the language of their choice. We know that that is not the case.

What do you intend to do so that government decision-makers ensure compliance with the French fact, that people feel comfortable working in their own language? I am talking about the French fact because it is French that is most often scorned within government.

[Graham Fraser]

First, I would like to respond to the first issue raised by the member. If you look at the studies on the vitality of communities, you notice that the issue can be addressed in a different way. I have just come back from Vancouver where a study is being conducted on the vitality of francophone communities in British Columbia. Vitality studies have also been conducted in western provinces. I believe that the studies address the issues raised by the member.

With regard to the right to use French and English within the public service, that is indeed an issue of concern to me. That is why we are conducting a study on leadership and linguistic duality within the workplace; a study that will be completed next fall.

Despite the legislative amendment of 1988, which clearly establishes the right for public servants to use French or English in designated bilingual regions, we have noted that there is no model, no best practices. We can raise the issue and give examples of best practices to encourage the use of French in the workplace. However, we decided to conduct the study in order to identify the nature of the problem and the importance of leadership.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Nadeau.

We will continue with Mr. Godin.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Fraser, and thank you to the members of your team.

In speaking about your new vision concerning official languages, you say that—and correct me if I am wrong—you want to engage in promotion and assistance work, rather than entering into conflict. I think you understand what I am saying. There is a new vision at the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages. Rather than finding the guilty party, you want to work together to resolve problems.

On the one hand, in your annual report, it is stated: "Two Official Languages, One Common Space." On the other, this morning, in the National Post, you could read the following:

Should Mr. Godin's bill pass the Senate, the Supreme Court would become so unreflective of this country’s people it would rapidly lose credibility as a national institution.

I would like to conclude with the following point. The senator in the Upper Chamber, Mr. Mockler, who claims to be a defender of francophones and bilingualism, is telling members, or senators, that the people they represent will never have the chance to be appointed to the Supreme Court if they vote for the bill.

[Graham Fraser]

Mr. Chair, at the risk of repeating what I have said before this committee and the Standing Committee on Justice, I think that it is essential for the Supreme Court justices to be able to understand both official languages. Our laws are not translated; they are written in both official languages. In 1935, the Supreme Court clearly established that the French version had equal force of law. Moreover, it is often up to the Supreme Court to clarify the meanings of laws, given the nuances that might arise between the English and French versions.

Individuals also have the right to be represented by counsel who can put their cases before the Supreme Court in the language they are most familiar with.

With all due respect to the interpreters, I think that nuances are often lost. Furthermore, with unilingual justices on the Supreme Court, all in camera discussions among the justices must be held in a single language, even if all the points of argument, submissions and documentation are in French.

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

Mr. Fraser, I know what your position is on this, you have made it public. I thank you for that.

However, do you have enough money in your budget to start a campaign, given that that is your new philosophy? We know that the Conservative government is telling its non-elected senators to vote against a bill that has just been passed by the House of Commons. Is there a way to run a campaign that would help people understand that this is not the end of the world nor is it the end of the Supreme Court? Out of 33 million people there may be 9 who are qualified people.

I think that what the government is doing is an insult to anglophones. It is as if one were saying that there are no anglophones in Canada who are sufficiently bilingual to sit as judges on the Supreme Court. That is an insult to anglophones.