Official Languages Committee on March 22nd, 2011

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

You have an action plan for the coming years?

[Morris Rosenberg]

Yes. We will give it to you in May.

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

Are you also going to tell us what the consequences were of transferring the responsibility of providing bilingual services from Passport Canada to Canada Post?

[Morris Rosenberg]

I don't have that information here, but we will try to find it for you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much, Mr. Godin.

I made a mistake. I gave the floor to our vice-chair, Mr. Godin, before giving it to our parliamentary secretary.

So, Mr. Gourde, you have the opportunity to have the final word.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank the witnesses for being here, and I congratulate them on the work they are doing. We know that the Department of Foreign Affairs works 24 hours a day, seven days a week. We would like to thank you. Keep up the good work.

In your presentation, Mr. Rosenberg, you spoke about accountability to Parliament. You're aware that you have had a negative official languages evaluation.

So, when it comes to your department's obligation to be accountable to Parliament, with regard to complying with the Official Languages Act, do you feel that there is some pressure that will lead you to submit a strategic plan?

It's not simply about submitting it. The evaluation you received indicates that you need to work with it and not just shove it in a drawer. All the departments in our government must improve their ratings. What are you going to do?

[Morris Rosenberg]

I agree with you. It's not enough to say we have a plan. End of story. There are a few important issues. You need a plan because, without a plan, you don't know where you're headed. So that's important.

There's also the implementation of the plan. I've already spoken about balanced mechanisms, such as leadership at all levels, and quantifiable mechanisms that allow us to measure progress. They let us see where things stand and let us intervene, if necessary, in order to improve performance and accountability, and to report to Parliament or to the committee from time to time. They are responsible for making sure the government is accountable for our actions.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Thank you for your answer. I think we need to understand that, before our government came in, there was a moral obligation to do this work, but now I think that there is a real obligation to obtain results. We really want to see this difference. Certainly, we are going to invite you to come back next year so we can see the difference.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. That's all I have to say.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much, Mr. Gourde.

That ends the first part of our meeting. I would like to thank Mr. Rosenberg and his team for testifying before our committee this morning. We do know that you have very busy days. So thank you very much. We look forward to seeing you again.

We will be suspending the meeting for a few minutes so we can go in camera to work on ongoing business.

I give the floor to Mr. Bélanger.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Could we have a notice of motion that I tabled a few days ago?

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Yes, we can do that. I am going to validate that.

Mr. Bélanger, you have a motion…

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Yes, Mr. Chair. Please allow me to present a motion that asks the committee to reinvite Ms. Liseanne Forand, senior associate deputy minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and chief operating officer for Service Canada, and champion of official languages, to follow up on the meeting of March 8, 2011. We all remember the meeting of March 8, 2011 and the repercussions of that meeting. It's important to make some things clear. That's why I am proposing that we invite them to reappear before the committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Do you have any comments on the motion, Mr. Bélanger?

The floor is yours, Mr. Godin.

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

Mr. Chair, I do have an amendment to this motion. I propose that they appear on Thursday of this week.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

I remind you that an hour to meet with Industry Canada representatives has already been set aside. The hour may change depending on the wishes of the members and the availability of the witnesses. That will be on Thursday.

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

I think it is important for them to come back to discuss this motion. I have nothing against them personally, but I feel some contradiction in the air.

For example, from Ms. Forand's testimony, it was very clear that the administrative structure of the Atlantic region was unilingual. You will recall that I asked her whether it was unilingual French. When she said that it was unilingual English, she was smiling.

Now one of the directors of Service Canada in the Atlantic region has sent a message saying that that was a mistake and the services are bilingual. That is according to Michael Alexander.

Let's not mix up services and administrative structure. We were not talking about the services, we were talking about the administration. There was an administration in New Brunswick, one in Nova Scotia, one in Newfoundland and one in Prince Edward Island. Those four administrations were centralized but the players changed. I realized that the administration was anglophone when I contacted it. The director of the Newfoundland office went so far as to call me to say that she would prefer me not to call their offices any more, but to go directly to the minister. Anglophones can deal with the administration but francophones have to deal with the minister. It makes no sense.

But Ms. Forand seems to say that she made a mistake, meaning that it is apparently bilingual. I would like her to say that publicly. She said publicly that it is unilingual English. So let's have her come and tell us publicly that the administration in the Atlantic region, with its 500,000 francophones, is bilingual. I see it as very important for her to come and tell us that as quickly as possible in order to clarify the matter. Otherwise, it will keep going in the papers and on television and people will be talking about two different things.

I think that francophones in the Atlantic region need to be reassured regarding services and regarding the administration. We need to know and Canadians need to know. Otherwise, people are going to get up in arms about something that the government has already decided, that it is bilingual. So let it say so; it is as simple as that. They always talk about the services, but they have said nothing about the administration. The question asked here was very clear. It was about the administrative structure, the directors of the employment insurance offices, the directors of Service Canada and the directors of the Canada Summer Jobs program. All the people we dealt with before are now anglophone. She also said that it took two years to learn another language. But these are new positions. So why have unilingual people been put into positions that should be bilingual?

I think it is very important for her to come and explain the differences between the two public statements.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Godin.

We will do that on Thursday, then.

Mr. Nadeau, the floor is yours.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

If Thursday works for the person who moved the motion, it is no problem for me. We are all friends here.

Mr. Chair, the Bloc Québécois will certainly support the motion. I talked about it with Mr. Bélanger at the Festival du film de l'Outaouais recently, when he made the suggestion.

There is one thing. I remember Ms. Forand's presentation when she as much as said “the Maritimes are now anglophone only”. Frankly, I behaved myself and said that there were ways in which things could be done, like conference calls, for example, so that service in French can be provided if no one in the office is able to speak the language of Molière.

I mentioned my experience in an Elections Canada office a long time ago. Today, I can tell you that, if I found myself in an office in Acadie being told “we don't serve in French”, whether by a Mme Gaudreault or by a Ms. MacMillan, it would probably take the RCMP or a tow truck to get me out of that office. I would not be a happy camper and I would make sure that I got service in French. The first language in Acadie, after all, is French. That is why.

If Ms. Forand really did make a mistake, we should know about it. As Mr. Godin said, we have seen the opposite message in the few days after the stir in the media that the presentation by Ms. Forand and the Service Canada people caused.

So I feel that Mr. Bélanger's suggestion is perfectly appropriate. I would like it to become a proposal from the Standing Committee on Official Languages. I hope it will set the record straight. I hope that, in the Maritimes, Acadians will have as much right to services in their language as the descendants of the Loyalists have in theirs.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Nadeau.

Mr. Murphy, you wanted to add a comment.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

I want to echo what the two previous speakers have said, but it's even a little more serious than.... I think Yvon said he didn't want to be mean or anything; I might want to be mean, because I think the split message is deliberate. I'll go so far as to say that Service Canada, in their releases printed in Atlantic Canadian newspapers--and I'll remind Mr. Nadeau that it's not just the Maritimes, but the region of the Atlantic provinces, which are four; I know that the Bloc would be sensitive to geography, as we are--Service Canada said that nothing has changed, yet they admit that there is a designation for administrative purposes in one region, which is, in fact, a change. They also say that the place of work and the services offered are both unaffected; that is not what we heard from the witness, so either it's the “right hand, left hand” situation, meaning that either the person we heard hadn't relayed the message to the people in the press office or that there's some sort of deliberate confusion being attempted here between what we all understand as services delivered in both languages and what I call the “back office” place of work where parts IV and V of the act have to be complied with.

I think the agency should be called here, but I also think it should be stated in the strongest words from you, Mr. Chair, or from those inviting the witness, that they be prepared to answer what I would say is a deliberate contradiction among the public.

If it's easily solved, great; somebody, however, has to be rebuked, because there is a contradiction now among the public, let alone in the evidence, so I fully support the motion, obviously.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much, Mr. Murphy. I have taken careful note of your comment. In fact, we generally do tell witnesses about the topics that might potentially come up when they appear.

Our parliamentary secretary now has the floor. Mr. Gourde.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

We on our side are also going to support your motion, Mr. Bélanger, as well as the NDP motion asking that Service Canada representatives appear again on Thursday of this week.

We do not understand whether Ms. Forand made a mistake. There is a contradiction. We on our side were here during her presentation too, and we were very surprised to hear the comments she made.

I think we must hear from Ms. Forand again in order to clear the situation up.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much, Mr. Gourde.

Are you ready for the question?

Yes, Mr. Godin?

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

I think that Mr. Bélanger wants to wrap up the discussion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

It would normally be Mr. Bélanger's turn, but…