Official Languages Committee on March 19th, 2013

[Graham Fraser]

I met with him on February 22, when he asked me to agree to an extension of my term. I also met with him in late September, during my round of meetings with ministers and deputy ministers regarding my annual report recommendations.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Fraser and Mr. Godin.

[Graham Fraser]

Allow me to clarify something. If any annual report recommendations have to do with a minister or the Prime Minister, we request a meeting to let them know. Three recommendations have been directly related to the Prime Minister, and on all three occasions, he agreed to meet with me so that I could advise him in advance of the recommendation that would appear in the annual report.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Okay, thank you.

Mr. Dion, you have the floor.

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Fraser, I would like to come back to the issue of budgets. Ms. Bateman was very optimistic and thought that communities would make it through without a problem. I don’t share her optimism. Could you tell me if you are prepared to follow up on the issue and point out the problems that may ensue?

There are many things that worry me. First, in the last four years, the government has not increased its budgets, on the contrary. For Canadian Heritage, the budget for community life was $62 million four years ago, and now it is $55 million—in current dollars, without inflation being factored in. Then an amount of $176 million was earmarked for education in the minority language and now it is down to $166 million. For linguistic duality, the amount was $4.4 million, and now it is $4.3 million. For second language learning, the amount was $115 million and it dropped to $112 million. That does not include the $106 million in cuts that Canadian Heritage has to absorb in the next three years, or the bad news we might get with the budget.

What I am saying is that we are faced with a tremendous challenge. When I raised this issue with the minister, he told me that I was not taking into account the Roadmap money. So even the minister confirmed that the Roadmap was used to fill up the coffers after the cuts, which was not supposed to happen. Funds were supposed to be added. We don’t know what amount the government will put into the Roadmap. I hope that it will be a large amount.

There is another problem. When we talk to the minister about what is happening in other departments, he tells us to go talk to the people involved. Yet he is the minister responsible for official languages. But he is not a full interlocutor like he should be.

So here are my questions. First, are you able to monitor those cuts closely, given that we know that the government is cultivating a lack of fiscal transparency? Second, are you going to be aware enough to go beyond the numbers?

Let me give you an example where I think you might have missed the boat. I am talking about the closure of the search and rescue centre in Quebec City. Your report pointed to the deficiencies in bilingualism in Trenton and Halifax. It must be said that Quebec will be divided into two; one part will be sent to Trenton and another to Halifax to oversee what is happening on the St. Lawrence River and in the gulf. However, I didn’t think there was enough emphasis on how high the level of bilingualism had to be. When your clients are in shock and their lives might be in danger, they need to be able to speak their language with their accent and to receive an answer right away.

That is an example to show you that, beyond numbers, you have to be really aware. I would also like to come back to the issue of accuracy and rigour. That will allow us, our committee and Canadians in general, to be better equipped to monitor the impact of the upcoming budget cuts, in addition to those that have already been made.

[Graham Fraser]

That is a very good question.

Actually, our director of finance will be in the budget lock-up going through all the figures. I have a lot of confidence in our analysts. They will be able to decipher and analyze all the data. We will see if that is enough.

I am concerned about the trends you have identified. I can also tell you that we have heard a lot of concerns about the federal-provincial agreements that have an impact on institutions in minority communities. We are currently conducting an investigation on the transfer of responsibilities in relation to the training of Service Canada employees in British Columbia where some institutions in the communities were abandoned after that transfer.

Some concerns have been expressed by anglophone communities in Quebec, because they are afraid that the Quebec-Canada agreement will have an impact on the health network, for instance, or on the community learning centres, which play a very important role in 14 minority communities scattered throughout Quebec.

If, as a result of those agreements, the responsibility of awarding money is directly transferred to the provinces, the concerns of communities will be heightened.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you.

Mr. Lapointe, you have the floor.

[François Lapointe, NDP, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I am going to summarize a situation, but I am not asking you to comment since you have agreed to examine it. I just want to introduce it to explain how concerned I am about an issue that you and I have previously mentioned, Mr. Fraser.

In my riding, someone urgently needed a drug. He contacted the Department of Health, but none of the people he talked to were able to speak French during the three-week or four-week process. They justified the long delay in responding to my questions by the fact that they had to translate my emails. We were asking Health Canada for an emergency drug and I was constantly following up with the minister, but when I talked to her about it, this is what she said:

“Don't make that an issue.”

In terms of decentralizing the oversight of French-language services in departments and your study of those troubling cases, could you tell me how this study will be sure to accurately measure the impact of the decentralization? What do you plan to do to reassure us? You are saying that it is not necessarily a bad thing. I wish I could believe you but, for the moment, my experience on the ground as a member of Parliament is rather troubling.

[Graham Fraser]

I share your concern. I am aware of the incident that you mentioned. I think it is a dreadful experience. I will keep your concern in mind when we do our study.

Thank you for sharing your concern with us.

[François Lapointe, NDP, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

In terms of the study that you mentioned, who is going to tackle the decentralization and assess the impact?

[Graham Fraser]

It is a study on language training, currently...

[François Lapointe, NDP, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

In the public service?

[Graham Fraser]

That is correct.

[François Lapointe, NDP, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Mr. Lapointe, you can continue.

[François Lapointe, NDP, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

I would like to talk about the Marine Rescue Centre. We had a consultation where my colleague Mr. Godin was present. A former official, who specialized in improving river safety, shared his knowledge with us. He said that he was following the file everywhere. He was present at the public consultations in Trenton and he followed the issue at every stage, from A to Z.

That is when he told us a very troubling story. He said that, in Trenton, the candidates were required to have two skill sets. Let's not forget that the person who takes the full-time position will have to replace the five or six people who were working in Quebec, which is a great loss of services. That is already quite troubling. He was there when the decisions were made at the public consultations in Trenton. He told me that they were not able to find a candidate who was sufficiently familiar with the river and who had a very high level of French. It seems that the next candidate who is going to be hired will not have sufficient knowledge of the river or the appropriate French skills.

I for one see a great loss of services for the linguistic minority. The francophones, who need the river for marine transportation, deserve to get the services of someone who has both skills, knowledge of the river and the ability to provide an answer in French to someone who is panicking. We are not about to get anything like that. We will get someone who can get by in French and whose knowledge of the river will be mediocre. Thanks a lot.

[Graham Fraser]

You are raising an area of great concern with respect to that change. When I was asked what my priorities were for the next three years, I said that one of the top priorities was the impact of government changes on services in both official languages. It might be the regionalization of services in the Atlantic provinces or this type of institutional reorganization, which would make it increasingly difficult to maintain the same level of services.

[François Lapointe, NDP, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

That is the difference. There is an impact on language skills, but that is not the only thing we have to consider if we want to provide a good service to minorities. You understand what I mean. By decentralizing, we may find someone who speaks English or French perfectly, but we are reducing the number of employees where we need them. If we find someone who has the necessary language skills, but not the other required skills, we still have a problem of language services being poorly delivered. Does that make sense?

[Graham Fraser]

Yes, I fully understand what you are getting at. I will take note of that and we will give it some thought.

[François Lapointe, NDP, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

I call on your bulldog abilities.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Lapointe.

Mr. Galipeau, you have the floor.

[Royal Galipeau, Conservative, Ottawa—Orléans, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for your testimony today, Mr. Fraser.

After hearing questions from both sides of this table, I assume that our comments will remain anonymous, despite some small details that I have heard this afternoon.

I would like to give the floor to the vice-chair of the committee, Mr. Godin. I presume that he will introduce an appropriate motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Galipeau.

Mr. Godin, you have the floor.

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

Mr. Fraser, you have conducted an investigation on the Marine Rescue Centre. For me, it is important because it is the only bilingual institution like that in Canada and we are sending it to Trenton and Halifax. The government is telling us that one person per shift will be bilingual and that, in addition, the people will have to write their reports in English because the supervisors will not be bilingual. That is not consistent with Part V of the Official Languages Act.

Are you going to follow up on that before the move happens so that, if the services ever move—which would be the worst thing the government could do—the people will then be protected. There is a fundamental responsibility related to the safety of people out at sea and vacationers. The government was not able to show us that this will work. We even wanted to conduct a study in committee, but we were not able to do so. That is why we did our own study and we will submit the report. You have a responsibility. You did a study and there has to be a follow-up. Will the government show you an action plan that you will be happy with?

[Graham Fraser]

I agree that it is very important, in those types of cases, to follow up on the recommendations to be able to know what the outcome is.