Official Languages Committee on May 8th, 2014

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Welcome to the 23rd meeting of the Standing Committee on Official Languages. Today is Thursday, May 8, 2014.

Pursuant to Standing Order 81, we are here to study the Main Estimates 2014-2015.

Today, we are hearing from Mr. Fraser, Commissioner of Official Languages, as well as Ms. Saikaley and Ms. Lagacé.

Welcome, everyone.

Mr. Fraser, you may begin.

[Graham Fraser, Commissioner of Official Languages, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Chair, honourable committee members, good morning.

It is a pleasure to appear before you today to present the main estimates of the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages.

The Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages has a budget of $20.8 million to carry out its mandate during the 2014-2015 fiscal year. This amount includes $13 million in salaries, or 62.8% of the main estimates. Our workforce consists of 170 full-time equivalents.

Our operations are divided into three program activities: protection of Canadians language rights, promotion of linguistic duality and internal services.

Before we examine these activities in detail, a word about our recent move is in order.

On March 17 we relocated all of our employees in the national capital region to new offices, at 30 Victoria Street, in Gatineau.

The decision to move from our downtown Ottawa location was made about a year ago, for the following reasons: first, to foster cooperation and share common services with other agents of Parliament already located at 30 Victoria Street, notably the Chief Electoral Officer, Privacy Commissioner, and Information Commissioner; to embrace the new work environment, known in the public service as workplace 2.0, which is more conducive to collaboration between employees; and to take advantage of lower rental costs resulting from a smaller office footprint, which in total represents about $800,000 in annual savings for my office for the taxpayer. An advance against future appropriations was provided to fund the costs associated with the Office of the Commissioner's move in 2013-14.

To protect the language rights of Canadians, the Office of the Commissioner investigates and resolves complaints, conducts audits, evaluates the performance of federal institutions and intervenes before the courts, when appropriate. The expenditures planned for this activity in 2014-2015 are $6.8 million, which amounts to 32.8% of the total budget.

Over the current fiscal year, my office will carry out audits of the Canada Border Services Agency, the Canadian Air Transport Authority, Elections Canada and the Treasury Board Secretariat. In addition, we will begin an audit of the Canada School of Public Service, we will publish follow-ups to our audits of Air Canada and Industry Canada, and we will begin a follow-up to our audit of Parks Canada.

I will continue to intervene before the courts on behalf of Canadians. For example, we are currently awaiting a Supreme Court ruling in the Thibodeau v. Air Canada case, and the case against CBC/Radio-Canada is still active.

In total, more than 400 admissible complaints are filed with my office every year. We will continue our ongoing efforts to reduce the length of our investigations. Recent efforts to improve our investigation process have included the launch of a web complaint form and a client satisfaction survey.

Expenditures linked to the promotion of linguistic duality account for $6.5 million—a sum that represents 31.5% of the total budget. To promote Canadian linguistic duality, the Office of the Commissioner communicates regularly with parliamentarians, official language minority communities, federal institutions and the Canadian public.

Our research, our studies, our distribution of information products, and our exchanges with many key stakeholders and community representatives contribute to the promotion of linguistic duality among Canadians. That is an integral part of my mandate.

As part of our many planning activities, we will continue to work with federal institutions and organizing committees to help them integrate linguistic duality into the various activities leading up to the celebration of the 150th anniversary of Confederation in 2017. Canada's official languages are an important part of the country's history and a key component of its future.

We want to take a closer look at immigration in official language minority communities, as well as early childhood issues. In both cases, we will collaborate with governmental and community organizations already at work in these domains.

We will intervene with federal institutions to follow up on the recommendation of our August 2013 study concerning the bilingual capacity of the superior court judiciary. On a related note, we are organizing a conference on access to justice with the Bar of Montreal.

Our third program activity, internal services, allows the office of the commissioner to assemble resources that support the organization as a whole, including asset management, finance, and human resources management. This activity has been allocated a budget of $7.4 million, which constitutes 35.7% of our total budget. These services, essential to any organization, ensure that taxpayers' dollars are used efficiently and transparently.

In addition to completing the logistical and administrative arrangements associated with the recent move to Gatineau, we will explore opportunities for further collaboration with other agents of Parliament on the delivery of the Office of the Commissioner's internal services, while upholding our mandate and maintaining our independence.

We will also migrate to the Government of Canada's PeopleSoft human resources information system, harmonize our employee performance management program with the Treasury Board Secretariat's new directives on performance management, and implement the shared case management solution for small departments and agencies. Lastly, we will develop additional technological tools to improve efficiency and employee workflow.

Mr. Chair and honourable committee members, thank you for your attention. I'd be pleased to discuss any aspect of our operations in more detail.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Fraser.

Mr. Godin, go ahead.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Fraser, Ms. Lagacé and Ms. Saikaley, welcome to the Standing Committee on Official Languages.

Commissioner, did you consistently support Bill C-208, which concerns the appointment of bilingual judges to the Supreme Court? I introduced the bill in the House of Commons three times. Were you disappointed with yesterday evening's results?

[Graham Fraser]

I am always disappointed when a bill I supported is defeated. But I try to consider the issues objectively, without letting my emotions get in the way. I know it was defeated, but I still believe in and support the fundamental principle that Supreme Court justices should be bilingual.

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

Commissioner, I encourage you to have a look at what transpired in the House yesterday evening on CPAC. I asked Minister Raitt questions about VIA Rail. I had to repeat my first question three times because she couldn't understand the translation. So I said “welcome to the Supreme Court of Canada”. I urge every Canadian to have a look at that. It gives you an idea of what the French-speaking community has to put up with.

We are talking about the highest court in the land, and yet our Prime Minister refuses to appoint judges who are bilingual. There's all this talk about language equality, but exactly where does that equality stop? The Official Languages Act has been around for 45 years. Those appearing before the Federal Court or the Federal Court of Appeal can be heard and understood in their first language, but not those going before the Supreme Court.

I am disappointed, and the tremendous value I place on both of our official languages is probably why I get so upset. Anglophones would never be in this boat, in other words, they would never have to appear before a Supreme Court judge who didn't understand them. But francophones do.

My next question is an important one. It concerns something that really bothered me at the time and still does, even though I will try not to let my emotions get the better of me.

You mentioned your office move, Mr. Fraser. You now share office space with those who work for the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and the people at Elections Canada, among others. That leads me to wonder about partisanship. I'm not sure whether I'm explaining myself clearly, but I wonder whether there's a risk to agents of Parliament sharing office space. I imagine you would say no, since you agreed to the move. Nevertheless, the fact that all of you are working together does worry me somewhat, in that you might have to investigate the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner one day, or vice versa.

Sharing office space may very well save you $800,000, but does it not jeopardize the non-partisanship of agents of Parliament?

[Graham Fraser]

I don't believe so. Had I felt there was a risk, I would not have agreed to the move.

As agents of Parliament, we always discuss certain matters. We stand united on certain issues. For instance, a few years back, the President of the Treasury Board gathered us all to discuss something. We got together and signed a joint letter regarding Bill C-520.

There are certain issues that affect all of us, as agents of Parliament, but that in no way prevents one of us from investigating a fellow agent of Parliament. The Auditor General does yearly audits on each of our offices. The Auditor General doesn't spend any less time or effort or exert any less rigour in auditing our books just because we are agents of Parliament. And the exact same principle applies when we are called upon to investigate a matter involving another agent of Parliament.

All agents of Parliament are now required by law to be bilingual at the time of their appointment. And I find that reassuring when it comes to the leadership of our organizations. This ensures that, right from the moment they are appointed, agents of Parliament have a clear understanding of what linguistic duality entails.

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

It's a shame it doesn't work that way at the Supreme Court, but it will come. I have no doubt that it will happen eventually.

You brought up Bill C-520, and I'm sure some of my colleagues are going to ask you about it. It's a very important bill dealing with the non-partisanship of agents of Parliament.

As for me, I'd like to come back to the cuts at CBC/Radio-Canada. Last week, Hubert Lacroix appeared before the committee. We are struggling to understand how the federal government could have cut the broadcaster's budget by $115 million. The minister in charge told us that the government wasn't to blame this time. But the elimination of wage indexing and spending cuts at CBC/Radio-Canada represent millions of dollars.

Isn't CBC/Radio-Canada, the nation's public broadcaster, at risk of not adequately fulfilling its mandate in official language minority communities? In Moncton, for instance, cutting one of the two journalist positions at RDI would mean half the budget gone. How can that not affect the broadcaster's obligations towards official language minority communities?

I'd like to hear your views on that, commissioner.

[Graham Fraser]

I am indeed concerned about the impact the cuts could have on CBC/Radio-Canada's ability to continue serving official language minority communities.

It is often hard for parliamentarians, Canadians, and listeners and viewers in majority language communities to understand just how vital CBC/Radio-Canada is to those who live in official language minority communities. Whether you are talking about anglophones in Sept-Îles or francophones in Saskatoon or Moncton, CBC/Radio-Canada is often their only source for TV and radio news. It's always challenging for families wanting their children to grow up in a French environment outside Quebec or in an English environment far away from Montreal. That's the challenge I faced as a father living in Quebec City. I can tell you that the role CBC/Radio-Canada plays in official language minority communities is vital.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you.

Mr. Gourde, go ahead please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Fraser, Ms. Saikaley and Ms. Lagacé.

Mr. Fraser, you've always been a proponent of people from different communities in the country taking part in exchanges, in other words, leaving their region to have a different language experience in another region.

Right now, the temporary foreign worker program is causing some problems. It is a fact that some regions of the country are experiencing a labour shortage, which is leading Canadian companies to spend considerable time and energy recruiting workers from other countries to fill those temporary jobs. That's a frequent occurrence in the summer. Wouldn't it be more beneficial to channel that same energy into hiring young Canadians, 18 to 25 year olds from out east, to fill those temporary jobs for 3 or 4 months and provide them with accommodations? At the same time, they could live that very language experience you are supportive of.

I am convinced that, across Quebec and the Maritimes, we could find 100,000 young people who were ready and willing to work. With the same supervision provided to foreign workers who come here, young Canadians might be inclined to have that experience, which could last three months, once or twice in their lives. It would benefit bilingualism in Canada.

[Graham Fraser]

That's a wonderful idea. I learned French while working summer jobs. It wasn't through an exchange program, but they were still three- or four-month stints I spent immersed in French in Quebec. Similarly, some of my francophone colleagues learned English while working summers jobs in Toronto and going to university.

I discovered that, under the current exchange system, it's easier for a teacher from Ontario to take part in an exchange with a teacher from Australia than with a teacher from Quebec. Under that program, the teachers switch jobs and homes for a year. Likewise, it's much easier for a teacher from Quebec to go on the same kind of exchange with a teacher from France than one from Ontario. I think it would be worthwhile to explore those opportunities. A lot of things would be possible if we changed our approach.

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

Today, we are really seeing young Canadians making a genuine effort to learn both official languages. The francophones want to learn English just as much as the anglophones want to learn French. And the statistics back that up.

But they encounter a big problem when they enter the workforce. After spending a year, or two or three in the same unilingual workplace, they gradually lose their ability to speak the other language.

Would that same kind of exchange be possible? Canadians today are working in large companies with employees in a number of provinces. Wouldn't it be possible to give young people in different language communities access to work exchange opportunities for a few months a year so they could have that exposure and keep up their language skills?

[Graham Fraser]

That could work not just in the private sector, but also in the public sector.

I read a Department of Canadian Heritage report on the efforts being made to promote the use of both official languages. According to the report, the department had set up an employee exchange program, so an employee working in an English-speaking region could go on an exchange and switch jobs with an employee at the same level working in a French-speaking region. I found that wonderful. When I read the next page, I learned that the department had sent two employees on an exchange. It's a shame that the scale of the program is so small. People don't realize what an impact a wider-reaching program could have.

Indeed, I believe young public servants should have the opportunity to incorporate these kinds of experiences when carving out their careers.

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

I believe Farm Credit Canada has a province-to-province exchange program for workers, as part of its mandate. It does a lot of exchanges. It would probably be worth exploring to find out how it works. I think it's done systematically. It would likely be a good lead to follow.

I saw young people from other provinces who worked in Quebec, as well as Quebeckers who spent two or three years working in a different office emerge from the experience with a broader and stronger vision of the country. They become excellent ambassadors. If it is doable, that is something I propose to you.

[Graham Fraser]

I have, in fact, met many adventurous public servants who had applied for jobs in different parts of the country and who came out with an appreciation for Canada's diversity. As far as I know, it's always been on the person's own initiative. I'm not sure whether any programs exist to encourage that sort of thing. If so, they aren't very well-known.

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

If you happen to learn of any, perhaps you could promote that kind of leadership. It would no doubt be an excellent example to set. It might inspire other departments or businesses across the country to follow suit.

I have no further questions.

Thank you, Mr. Fraser.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you.

Ms. St-Denis, go ahead.

[Lise St-Denis, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Good morning. Thank you for being here.

Coming back to the estimates, I see that amounts allocated to official languages are going to the departments. Wouldn't it be more effective if that money were going to your office? We've heard that sometimes the money isn't used. In fact, the money isn't subject to any kind of oversight.

[Graham Fraser]

That would require transforming the office into a kind of central oversight body for official languages within the government and transferring certain powers currently held by Treasury Board back to Canadian Heritage, the Canada School of Public Service and other departments. It would mean a fundamental change in our role as an ombudsman and agent of Parliament. The office would have to become a central agency of sorts.

[Lise St-Denis, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

That would be a more effective way to protect the rights of anglophones and francophones in minority language communities.

[Graham Fraser]

It would be an entirely different, albeit interesting, approach. I'm reluctant to speak off-the-cuff about what would be more effective, but it would certainly make it easier to track spending in some areas. As things stand, it's pretty difficult to determine what language training costs are, now that managers within each department are responsible for incorporating language training in the learning plans of federal employees. Spread out over 260 federal institutions, it's harder for us and even the Auditor General to figure out.

If Parliament decided to turn the commissioner's office into a central government agency, we would go from being an agent of Parliament, an ombudsman and a complaints investigator to being an official languages administrator.

[Lise St-Denis, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

During your presentation, you said that the protection of Canadians' language rights was one of your program activities. It entails a number of things: conducting investigations, resolving complaints, performing audits and, where appropriate, intervening before the courts. This program activity accounts for 36% of your budget.

How much of that 36% do you spend on court-related activities?

[Graham Fraser]

I am going to ask Ms. Lagacé to answer that.

[Colette Lagacé, Director, Finance and Procurement, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages]

Hello.

We have to be careful when figuring out that amount, because every investigation is separate. The commissioner's office has its own legal services. The legal affairs unit accounts for 8% to 10% of the office's total budget, so between $800,000 and $1,000,000. It has eight lawyers.