Official Languages Committee on April 15th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Welcome everyone.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3), we are doing a study of Air Canada's compliance with the Official Languages Act.

This morning we have the pleasure to have with us the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, the Hon. John Baird.

Welcome to our committee, Minister Baird, and thank you for having accepted our invitation within a very short time.

Without further ado, Mr. Minister, I would invite you to make your opening statement. I would also like to welcome the two people with you today.

[John Baird, Conservative, Minister of Transport]

Thank you very much. It is a great pleasure to be here with you this morning.

I apologize for being a few moments late. The one member of the committee who represents a riding in the city of Ottawa will know that last night was a tough night and a stressful night, but it turned out well in the end.

[An hon. member]

It had a good outcome.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

A good outcome; that's right. That's one thing the member for Ottawa--Vanier and I can firmly agree on.

Mr. Chair, members of the committee, I would like to thank you for your invitation to discuss the Air Canada Public Participation Act. Before I begin, I would like to take a moment to congratulate you for your excellent work on the official languages file.

While I am here to talk about Air Canada, I understand that your committee also considered official language obligations at airports last fall, so I would like to take a minute to clarify the federal government's role in those.

All national airport authorities have official languages obligations by virtue of the Airport Transfer Act and the Official Languages Act. The President of the Treasury Board is responsible for the Official Languages Act, while the Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer of the Treasury Board Secretariat is responsible for defining, monitoring, and enforcing language obligations. Later this month, I understand, the Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer will be issuing clarifications with respect to the official languages obligations of airport authorities. I look forward to seeing that work.

Now let us focus on Air Canada. As you know, when Air Canada was a crown corporation it was subject to the Official Languages Act. While the Official Languages Act itself is very broad in scope, two provisions are of particular interest when speaking about official language obligations of Air Canada: one, the duty to provide service to the public in both official languages; two, the rights of employees to work in their official language of choice.

When Air Canada was privatized in 1988, official language obligations were maintained on the company through the Air Canada Public Participation Act.

To this day, it is the only carrier in Canada subject to the Official Languages Act. However, all carriers must provide safety and security information in both Official Languages. In 2000, Air Canada acquired Canadian Airlines International, which had a largely unilingual anglophone workforce. At that time the Air Canada Public Participation Act was amended to ensure that Air Canada subsidiaries providing air services to the public did so in both official languages. The effect of this amendment was to require Air Canada to ensure that its subsidiary, Jazz, met legislated requirements to serve the public in a bilingual way.

Then, in 2003, Air Canada filed for bankruptcy protection. After significant restructuring, the carrier successfully exited from bankruptcy protection on September 30, 2004, with a new corporate structure that reflected a strategy focused on maximizing the value of the individual components of the company.

Coming out of restructuring and to this day, the Air Canada Public Participation Act continues to apply to Air Canada, including full official language obligations. Similarly, any future Air Canada subsidiaries will continue to be bound by the official languages obligation under the Air Canada Public Participation Act as currently constituted. However, as a result of the organizational restructuring, official languages obligations no longer apply with respect to operations that have been moved out from under Air Canada. For example, the Air Canada Public Participation Act does not apply to ACE Aviation Holdings Inc., which had been the parent company of Air Canada since its restructuring.

On June 15, 2006, your committee tabled a report regarding the application of the Official Languages Act to Air Canada and ACE Aviation Holdings Inc. The report called upon the government to reintroduce legislation that would be similar in scope and effect to Bill C-47 which died on the order paper the year before.

Late in 2006, our government introduced amendments to the Air Canada Public Participation Act through Bill C-29. The bill was designed to maintain full official languages obligations for former internal divisions of Air Canada that had been spun off and were controlled by ACE Aviation Holdings Inc.; to extend obligations to provide bilingual services to the public, to Jazz, and any future affiliates of Air Canada that provided air services, as long as they were controlled by ACE Aviation Holdings Inc.; and to ensure that ACE Aviation Holdings Inc. provided communications to the public in both official languages.

Bill C-29 died on the order paper when Parliament was prorogued in September 2007. It was reintroduced as Bill C-36, with no further amendments. Bill C-36 died on the order paper on September 7, 2008, as a result of the 2008 election.

Although many years have passed since Air Canada was a crown corporation and much has happened in the interim, official language obligations at Air Canada are still viewed by many Canadians and by our government as important. Our government is committed to upholding the Official Languages Act and protecting and promoting both official languages.

As articulated in the Speech from the Throne, Canada's two official languages are an integral part of our history and our government will continue to strengthen Canada's francophone identity.

We also should consider that the best way to maintain and advance official language rights in aviation is to ensure a healthy and viable industry. The airline industry is and has been facing significant economic challenges, such as the long-term impacts of September 11, 2001, high fuel costs, as well as the effects of communicable diseases such as the H1N1 virus.

However, amid these practical challenges, Air Canada has clearly demonstrated significant efforts to uphold its official language obligations, as indicated by various committee testimonies. The Commissioner of Official Languages tells me that in the lead-up to the Olympic Games they did a lot. This demonstrates that when they make a concentrated effort they can do better. The number of complaints received by the commissioner also indicates that they need to do better.

At a 2009 meeting of this committee, Ms. Louise McEvoy, General Manager of Official Languages and Diversity at Air Canada, reiterated the airline's commitment to improving bilingual capacity throughout the human resources cycle, including recruitment, hiring and training.

In preparation for the Vancouver Olympic Games, Air Canada held mandatory sessions for Vancouver employees not qualified in French, and planned similar sessions for employees in other cities. The goal of these sessions was to ensure that the official languages rights of all Air Canada consumers were respected, including in instances where employees were not officially qualified to do so.

I'm told that Air Canada has mounted publicity campaigns to attract additional bilingual candidates across the country and has noted in comments to the committee that attracting some individuals in certain regions has been difficult. I understand that some of you provided suggestions to improve that recruitment strategy, and I hope the suggestions will yield improved results.

Air Canada's testimony speaks to its dedication to upholding its official languages obligations under the Official Languages Act. Furthermore, following a recent discussion with the Commissioner of Official Languages, it is important to note the efforts made by Air Canada during the Olympic Games and that the efforts and investments made by this carrier paid off.

I would also like to note that my discussions with the Commissioner of Official Languages touched on the subject of strengthening Air Canada's compliance with its linguistic obligations. I was pleased to learn that his team will conduct a detailed audit regarding Air Canada and its obligations to provide bilingual service to the public. In meetings with employees and unions, this study will carefully examine the hiring practices, the designation of bilingual positions and the linguistic training of the Air Canada personnel in order to determine the underlying reasons for the complaints pertaining to official languages. I not only commend the efforts of the commissioner but I am also eager to review the conclusions of his study.

I am mindful that continuing to trace official language obligations to parts of an organization that are increasingly independent creates practical challenges. ACE Aviation Holdings and Air Canada, as private companies, can and likely will continue to modify their organizational structures for both corporate and economic reasons.

For example, Air Canada Cargo, which was spun off after the 2003-04 restructuring, has since been repatriated within Air Canada and is once again covered by the Air Canada Public Participation Act and the Official Languages Act.

I have also discussed with Commissioner Fraser the issue of Air Canada contractors such as Jazz and have noted the concerns of the member for Acadie--Bathurst who provided a personal example from one of his trips aboard Jazz.

In this context, I would like to note that I have also asked the commissioner to obtain more information on the nature of complaints that have been received regarding Jazz. Given that Jazz is a private company contracted by Air Canada, Air Canada, therefore, under article 25 of the Official Languages Act, has an obligation to ensure the services provided to the public on its behalf are in both official languages.

Because Jazz is not a federal institution under the Official Languages Act and has not been a subsidiary of Air Canada since 2008, the official languages commissioner has informed me that he cannot intervene directly with Jazz, but can only intervene with Air Canada, who is responsible for the official languages obligations.

I have asked my officials and my office staff to obtain more information from Air Canada to know how it maintains its obligations under the Official Languages Act with contractors such as Jazz and how it will work to enhance this practice in the future.

I am proud of the accomplishments of our Conservative government in the official language file. Our concrete actions, such as our funding for official languages, clearly demonstrate our commitment to preserve bilingualism in Canada.

I admit that the Air Canada file is a complex one, however, it is nevertheless important that we stay the course and keep working with the key stakeholders, such as the Commissioner of Official Languages, the carrier, my cabinet colleagues, such as the Minister for Official Languages, and you, members of the committee, to find solutions to the challenges that I have just mentioned.

It is important that Air Canada continue to meet its obligations under the Air Canada Public Participation Act and the Official Languages Act. I welcome the advice and thoughts of this committee and welcome the opportunity to have a dialogue.

Thank you. Merci.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much, Mr. Minister.

I remind you that the minister is accompanied today by the director general of air policy, Ms. Brigita Gravitis-Beck, as well as the senior general counsel from legal services, Mr. Henry Schultz.

We will begin the first round of questions with our committee's vice-chair, Mr. Bélanger.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for being here today, Mr. Minister.

I have listened to you very carefully. You must certainly be expecting my first question. Has your government changed its mind, does it no longer have the intention of tabling a bill, or is it still of the same opinion and it does intend to table a bill?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

We intend to table a new bill.

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

What precisely?

You intend to table a bill?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Yes. We believe we need to present a new bill.

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

My second question: when?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

There's no doubt that there are things we could move on immediately. Things such as ACE Aviation being included under the Official Languages Act and the Air Canada Public Participation Act are obviously a no-brainer.

I did note the commissioner's comments and intention to conduct a detailed study with respect to Air Canada and the issue of meeting its obligations under the act.

I wanted to find out the compliance on the contractors. Air Canada has an obligation under not just the Air Canada Public Participation Act but the Official Languages Act to ensure that it meets its obligation under its contractors. Regrettably, the complaints are not divided between entities, between, for example, Jazz and Air Canada proper, so I wasn't able to get a sense of how big a problem it is. There's no doubt that it is a problem; I just don't know the extent to which it is. I suggested to the commissioner that he may want to consider, as part of his study and review, looking at specifically Air Canada's efforts with respect to its contractors.

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

Mr. Minister, I've kept my questions very short, you'll notice. I would appreciate the equivalence in answers.

This information was given to us this week by Air Canada in terms of the complaints vis-à-vis Jazz or Air Canada. Might I suggest that you have a bill--Bill C-29, Bill C-36, Bill C-47--and that you proceed, and as the information comes and as the committee deals with the bill, perhaps modifications can be introduced at such time.

There's a matter of some urgency. It has been two years and there's no bill before the House.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I share the view that a priority should be given. Obviously, we can't reintroduce the former bill because the structure of Air Canada has changed, so there would have to be modifications.

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

I'd like to make a suggestion for your consideration, Minister, and that of your cabinet colleagues. There is a provision in the House rules that allows for the government to refer legislation to committee before second reading so that the committee can get to it constructively and introduce modifications where it deems fit. The committee, since you've already complimented the committee a number of times for its work in these matters, I think is quite capable of helping the government here in crafting legislation that might be as good as we can possibly hope to achieve.

Would your government consider such a possibility--because it usually doesn't--of referring that legislation to committee before second reading?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I can't speak for the House leader, but I would certainly be prepared to consider that. Yes, definitely.

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

So my other question is this. Can we expect this legislation to be introduced in the House in the session that will end in June?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

That would be desirable.

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

Yes, it is desirable. Can we expect it?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I'd have to consult with my House leader.

Pardon?

[An hon. member]

[Inaudible--Editor]

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

He'll get to ask you questions directly soon.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

He's very shy and reserved. I'll bring him out of his shell.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will come back later.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much, Mr. Bélanger.

We will now move to Mr. Nadeau.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good morning to our guests.

I would like to come back to Mr. Bélanger's question. You say you are open to the idea of tabling a bill. Do you intend to do so over the next few weeks, given that this bill has already been tabled by the Martin government, by the current government and even during Mr. Harper's first mandate?