Official Languages Committee on Nov. 4th, 2010

[Graham Fraser]

I can tell you that our legal experts are currently holding discussions with their counterparts at the Department of Transport.

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Is that a file that you could eventually refer to the courts?

[Graham Fraser]

I will let Ms. Tremblay answer.

[Johane Tremblay, Lead Counsel and Director, Legal Affairs Branch, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages]

The previous bills were intended to clarify the obligations...

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

They were never passed; you know that.

[Johane Tremblay]

Yes. That is because there is currently an ambiguity in the act with regard to Jazz, for example, which is not directly covered. Therefore, launching a court case would not lead to the desired results. I believe that the only existing way to remedy the shortcoming is by parliamentary intervention, not through the courts.

[Monique Guay, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

The question needed to be asked.

You talked about the long-form census questionnaire. You said that if ever it was replaced by a shorter form, that would cause huge problems in terms of providing results or producing reports on bilingualism. Could you elaborate on that?

[Graham Fraser]

I must be very careful in responding to that. I indicated a number of issues in my opening remarks, but you know that we have not yet concluded our investigation. We have received complaints, conducted an investigation, issued a preliminary report and are receiving comments from complainants and institutions. However, given the fact that the process is still ongoing, I will limit my comments to the issues that I raised in my opening remarks and say that the situation is of concern to me.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Ms. Guay.

We will now continue with Mr. Rickford.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Thank you.

Commissioner, I would like to make a small comment on your analysis before asking my questions.

On page 4 of your foreword, you state that the government's responsibility is triangular and that it is shared by the Office of the Commissioner, parliamentarians and the general public. I agree. However, with all due respect, I was surprised upon reading your report that employees themselves seemed to play a crucial role in the successful delivery of bilingual services by the federal government and its departments. Once again, with all due respect, I saw that as a model, as a way forward.

I'm struck by that because, as I said earlier, you give several examples of best practices: CIC; the Canadian Forces; the action plan of the Communications Security Establishment Canada that integrates and solicits suggestions for language training; the National Film Board, for their monitoring mechanisms, on pages 33 and 34, versions anglaise et française; and Western Economic Diversification Canada's due diligence reports, which have real analysis on their stakeholders. There were several others that, in your own words, “showed definite progress”.

I have two residual questions, then. Beyond the superordinate goals, like leadership, which I acknowledge is an important determinant, it seems to me that employees can play an important role and that we have shining examples throughout our departments of things that really work.

So how, in your view, can we gather, organize, and/or streamline these practices to showcase them for the benefit of all departments? More pointedly, what, if any, nuances and specific challenges did or could you identify that may pose barriers to templating some of these successes that can be applied across departments?

[Graham Fraser]

What really is critical is that departments create an environment and a culture that doesn't simply permit the use of both languages but encourages the use of both languages, and that makes it clear that this is a value for the department, for the government, and for the country.

One has to realize, in terms of language of work, what a radical departure from the rest of a public servant's life it is to have the right to choose language. So many other elements of the working life of a public servant are decided by somebody else, whether it's the minister, whether it's the deputy, whether it's Treasury Board guidelines, or whether it's Public Works. The number of square metres in the carrel space is defined by somebody else. There is one area in which the employee can say, this is the language I choose to work in. It can run so much against the current that an employee is hesitant to exercise that right, and a right that is not exercised is a right that shrivels up and vanishes.

And quite often I've seen and heard too many examples of senior public servants who are either bilingual francophones or bilingual anglophones who speak French better than I do who, when they are speaking to a large number of employees or to groups outside the public service, will begin by saying, « Merci beaucoup de l'invitation » and will end their remarks by saying, « Encore une fois, merci », and in between will speak for half an hour in English.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

I can appreciate that, Mr. Commissioner, but just in my last 30 or 40 seconds here....

There were essential elements and very positive results arising from a number of circumstances. Would it be possible to come up with a model, perhaps two or three guiding principles, which could be applied by each department?

[Graham Fraser]

I should point out that Deputy Minister Monique Colette undertook a study for the clerk. She travelled across Canada. She prepared a compendium of best practices to foster linguistic duality and diversity. That is a collection of all the best practices that were adopted in this area, often at the initiative of employees. One of my regrets is that those practices are not better known within government. I think that is a very important work, which I have mentioned on a number of occasions and recommend to you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Rickford.

Mr. Godin will complete our second round.

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

Thank you.

Since 2006, the Prime Minister has been carrying out an in-depth reform of the public service without taking into account the official languages. What has your contribution been to that? Have you met with the Prime Minister? Have you made your views known to him? Have you met with him?

[Graham Fraser]

Yes. I stressed the importance of that file. I have also had meetings with the clerk. I recently met with...

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

What have been the results? Same old way, same old way?

[Graham Fraser]

I am still awaiting concrete results. However, I can tell you that I also recently made a presentation before the Committee of Senior Officials, which is responsible for managing the changes and public service renewal.

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

Changes are made and are then difficult to overturn.

[Graham Fraser]

Yes.

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

This is 2010, and the renewal was launched in 2006, four years ago. Are you satisfied with the reform that is being undertaken, or are you seeing how much—excuse my French—we are again getting shafted?

[Graham Fraser]

I am indeed concerned by what Mr. Bélanger mentioned in one of his remarks regarding the changes at Treasury Board and the Official Languages Centre of Excellence. Those are concerns.

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

I am asking you the question, and this is something that you will certainly hear about later. Do you think it is appropriate for the Prime Minister's parliamentary secretary to be sending out ten percenters in his area stating that Bill C-232 on bilingual judges at the Supreme Court is not a good thing, that it would prevent anglophones from being appointed to the Supreme Court? Do you find that appropriate, coming from the Prime Minister's parliamentary secretary? Other parliamentary secretaries go so far as to say that it is the best bill to have been passed, because they will campaign against us out west by saying that we are preventing anglophones from being named to the Supreme Court.

Do you find it appropriate for a government that is supposedly responsible for insuring compliance with our two official languages to conspire against that official languages bill?

[Graham Fraser]

That is the first time I hear about that. I have no power to intervene with regard to MP's mailings or ten percenters.

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

No, you have no power in that regard.

My question is as follows: is it appropriate for a government, which claims it is respecting the Official Languages Act, to allow the Prime Minister's parliamentary secretary to send out such pamphlets? I will check to see whether others have not engaged in the same campaign as well. Is it being respectful of the Official Languages Act to put anglophones and francophones against each other on the issue of official languages, rather than promoting them?