Evidence of meeting #22 for Official Languages in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was air.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney
Good morning to everyone. Welcome to the 22nd meeting of the Standing Committee on Official Languages.
On the orders of the day this morning, we have some committee business, and then we continue with the consideration of the draft report on the study of immigration as a development tool in official language minority communities.
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney
We are checking with our interpreters to see if the simultaneous interpretation system is functioning.
Liberal
Brian Murphy Liberal Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB
Bilingualism is the raison d'être of the committee. If this were a true official languages committee, we would not need any interpretation, no?
Conservative
Conservative
Liberal
Brian Murphy Liberal Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB
It might be necessary for the gentleman from Quebec, but he might not need it.
Conservative
Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB
Mr. Chair, thank you, because you know that I have a hearing problem.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney
All right.
I was saying that we had planned a meeting in two parts this morning. First, there will be committee business and then, we will deal with the report.
Our first bit of business is to deal with Mr. D'Amours' motion, which will be followed by that of Ms. Glover. Thereafter, the meeting will be held in camera. You will recall that Mr. Généreux has a motion on... In fact, we will talk about that in camera.
Without further ado, I would invite Mr. D'Amours to break the ice.
Liberal
Jean-Claude D'Amours Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
You have all received the notice of motion in the past few days. I would still like to read it so that all committee members and the people listening to us can know exactly what we are discussing:
That the Standing Committee on Official Languages invite Air Canada to once again place a prescribed complaint form for services in both official languages in the front seat pocket of all its aircraft, with prepaid postage and addressed to the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages.
Before explaining why I am presenting this motion, I would like to indicate that I am doing so in collaboration with my colleagues, Ms. Zarac and Mr. Bélanger. In the current context, we firmly believe that people do not know where to turn in order to file an official languages complaint. You will understand what I am getting at.
First of all, there used to be a reply card—a copy of which I have here—placed in all front seat pockets. It was clearly labelled as a complaint form and available to all passengers in their front seat pockets. Today, the form can only be found in the enRoute magazine. enRoute is a magazine that is distributed by Air Canada, among others, and can be found in the seat pockets in front of passengers.
As I previously indicated, the forms used to be entitled "Formulaire de plainte—Complaint Form." That was crystal clear. It was very simple to fill out and was sent to the Commissioner of Official Languages. That way, people could take the small card with them and then file their complaints.
What is a bit surprising today is that, when you go on to the Air Canada website, you can find certain pieces of information, including an invitation to transmit your questions or observations. Mr. Chair and committee members, you will agree with me that there is a big difference between "questions and observations" and "complaints." That is a clear attempt to diminish the importance of respecting the Official Languages Act.
Now let us delve a bit further and consult the enRoute magazine. In the June 2010 issue, the piece of information we are looking for can be found on page 110 of a 123-page magazine. Once again, it does not seem to be a priority for Air Canada to ensure that people will see that information. First of all, before making it to page 110, people will have to flip through the section on Air Canada's various world destinations, found on pages 108 and 109. I wonder whether they are not trying to prevent people from looking any further.
I would be remiss if I did not point out another thing. On page 110 of the current issue, you can read the following:
If Air Canada staff has allowed you to have an exceptional in-flight experience, please go to aircanada.com/customersolutions or fill out a comment card that flight attendants will provide you with upon request.
You can no longer ensure the respect of the Official Languages Act by way of a reply card. However, Air Canada will hand out cards in order to gather favourable comments. It is all very well to tell employees that they are doing a good job. However, if Air Canada is no longer able to give out reply cards concerning the respect for official languages, I wonder whether Air Canada actually wants to inform people of their rights and ability to file complaints.
And there is still more. Air Canada now directs you to an Internet site or e-mail address. There is no doubt that people do use those telecommunications or computer tools to communicate. In fact, those are also telecommunications tools because people can access their messages at all times on their BlackBerrys, for instance.
However, one major issue remains. Take the March 2008 issue of the enRoute magazine, and compare it with the June 2010 edition, a bit over two years later. At the bottom of the cover page of the March 2008 issue, it says "Yours to keep / Ce magazine est à vous." A passenger who starts reading the magazine aboard an Air Canada flight can keep it, because that's what is written, i.e., that the company is pleased to offer passengers a copy. Once back home, the passenger can gather the exact information in order to file a complaint.
However, the note at the bottom of the cover page can no longer be seen on the June 2010 issue. People now wonder whether they can keep the magazine or not. They wonder if they will get a slap on the wrist for doing so, because they do not know. If ever Air Canada states that I cannot keep a copy, then the company would probably send me a bill, which I would pay.
In fact, Mr. Chair, when flipping through the first pages of the enRoute magazine and looking through the fine print, you can read that an issue of the magazine costs $5. You can even subscribe on a yearly basis. In the past, Air Canada clearly stated that passengers could keep the magazine, but that is no longer the case today. Moreover, if you read the fine print in the first few pages, you read that you can get a copy of the magazine for $5. In 2008, it said that magazine was "Yours to keep," but that is no longer the case today.
When you consider all of those elements, Mr. Chair—and I omitted some because I do not want to take up too much of our time—it clearly appears that Air Canada is really trying to free itself of its obligations by placing the information on page 110 of a 123-page magazine. Moreover, customers are obliged to visit a website or use an e-mail address, i.e., [email protected]. In the past, complaints were sent to the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages. The address that is now provided on Air Canada's website is as follows: [email protected]. In the past, the complaint form, which had been prepared and championed by our late colleague Mr. Sauvageau, was sent to the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages. I do not think that created any confusion.
Air Canada says that the number of complaints received has decreased, but we know the reason for that. I do not need to repeat my anecdote about the toilets or Mr. Godin's remarks about the 7Up can in order to understand that Air Canada is limiting the options for passengers who feel they have been wronged and would like to file a complaint. In the "Canada's Official Languages" section, on page 110 of the June issue, it is written:
If one of our employees has demonstrated our commitment to serving you in the official language of your choice, we invite you to share your experience and nominate the employee for a Dialogue language award.
That brings up a serious problem: I searched their entire website and was not able to find anything. I do hope that Air Canada officials are listening to us today and can point out to me where I can find the information on the Dialogue language award. I searched through the website using the search tool, but I really did not find anything.
It is one thing to want to congratulate employees who respect the official languages and provide customers with good service, but what we want to ensure is that people can file complaints. Moreover, if people wanted to nominate someone for a Dialogue language award, they would first have to find the link somewhere. It is unfortunate, but I was not able to find it despite my best attempts. I hope that people at Air Canada will be able to show me that I did not search hard enough. The website's search tool did not yield any results. I did not search in English, I only did so in French, but nowhere did I find that award. I hope someone can help us with that.
The motion is clear: it invites Air Canada to once again place a complaint form in front seat pockets, where you used to be able to find them. That would clear up any ambiguity and clearly state that, if people wanted to file complaints, they would know that the forms would be for that purpose, and not simply to write comments. If people file complaints on a questions or comments Web page, Air Canada might state that those people were simply submitting comments when in fact they would have been complaints.
In the past, there was no ambiguity. The purpose of the reply cards was clearly to gather complaints. It was very easy to understand. People knew what that entailed. They could at least indicate that they had had problems and could ask that the Official Languages Act be respected.
The motion is quite simple. I have spoken to it for the past two or three minutes. In my view, the facts that I have set out this morning clearly show that there is an intent to create constant ambiguity. I hope that all political parties will support the motion so that we can adopt it. If ever Air Canada decides not to comply with it, then we shall see what measures could be taken. I think that this is a start and that it will yield results.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney
Thank you, Mr. D'Amours.
Before opening the floor up to committee members, I would like to clarify two points.
First, do you have copies of the magazine and form?
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney
I would suggest that you pass them around. I myself have not had an opportunity to see the form in question.
Liberal
Jean-Claude D'Amours Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
If I may, Mr. Chair. The section of the Air Canada Web site refers to a form intended to gather questions or observations, not comments. I did not print out the English version. However, the form of our late colleague Mr. Sauvageau is in both official languages.
Liberal
Jean-Claude D'Amours Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
The following is stated on page 110 of the magazine:
Write to us at [email protected] or visit aircanada.com and click on Contact us and then Linguistic Affairs.
There is nothing there about being able to submit questions or observations. There is really very little information.
I can hand you page 110, if you accept the fact that it is only in French. That is up to you to decide.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney
You can hand around the documents that are in both official languages.
Needless to say, committee members are masters of the proceedings. All the same, we could ask Air Canada to provide us with information on the Dialogue language award that you referred to earlier. That is something that I can do as the chair. I would ask you to share your views on that.
We will now move to Ms. Glover for her comments.
