Evidence of meeting #116 for Official Languages in the 42nd Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was justice.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Legal Counsel, As an Individual
Yes, and I believe that is Treasury Board's responsibility now. Indeed, when particular obligations are created, it must ensure that the various departments and organizations obey the law.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Denis Paradis
Thank you, Mr. Choquette.
I would ask you to divide your speaking time, Ms. Fortier and Ms. Lambropoulos.
Ms. Lambropoulos, you have the floor.
Emmanuella Lambropoulos Saint-Laurent, Lib.
Thank you for being with us today.
Obviously the English minority in Quebec hasn't been mentioned once, so I'm going to be asking questions about that. In Quebec there's one official language and that's what they consider the norm, and this is what the provincial government is very adamant about.
On section 45, you mentioned that people should have access to federal, provincial, municipal and educational services in both languages. Obviously we have less authority over those other areas, but what are some ways that our government can negotiate with other governments to try to push for these rights to be given to anglophone Quebeckers?
Legal Counsel, As an Individual
There are two ways. The first would be a negotiation with the provincial government to create areas where you get both federal and provincial services at the same place. It would be easier this way to give access in English to some of the provincial programs.
The other thing is that, in dealing with the minority, it should have to do with access to federal services in their language, rather than trying to involve the federal government in things that are really a provincial jurisdiction. This prolongs the conflicts all the time.
It really depends on the political will of both governments to act together, in a sense. It seems to me that the provincial government in Quebec is willing to coordinate some services when they really benefit the population. When I met with people from Quebec just last year, they were mostly insisting on access to health services and services for elderly people. They were losing ground in this area, but they were presenting this before federal people who said, “Well, our hands are tied. This is not our area of jurisdiction.”
Saint-Laurent, Lib.
I have spoken to federal agencies when making calls for constituents. Very often, it's the exact same problem you mentioned for Air Canada. Different federal agencies in Quebec have francophones and they speak a very broken English, if any at all. They say, “I'm sorry, do you speak French?”, and I say, “I do, but some others don't and they don't have access to this.”
Definitely, there are some ways to improve on our end, for sure. The commissaire has a lot to do with that as well. When we mentioned it last week, I don't know how....
Legal Counsel, As an Individual
It is very difficult for him to deal with the quality of service in English in provincial jurisdiction areas. Even under the provincial legislation, when there's a right to a service, it means the right to a service of equal quality.
I don't know if you're aware of this, but the bar association of Quebec started a lawsuit against the Government of Quebec with regard to the quality of the Code of Civil Procedure. I gave the bar association the legal opinion. You don't have to do it, but if you do it, you have to do it with equal quality, because you're not providing access.
In the case of the code of procedure, it has to be done under section 133 of the Constitution. Even if it's not there, if legislation is created giving the anglophones any type of right, then automatically, that right has to be of equal value. It has to be good enough that you don't need to refer to the French version to understand what you have the right to.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Denis Paradis
Thank you, Ms. Lambropoulos.
I now give the floor to Ms. Fortier for two minutes.
Mona Fortier Ottawa—Vanier, Lib.
I will be brief.
Mr. Bastarache, thank you very much for being here today. This is our first meeting with you and we are pleased to be able to call on your expertise.
Over the past 50 years, a lot of work has been done, and a number of things were accomplished. Today, we are modernizing the act, and for my part, I am turned toward the future. The government will be providing digital services. When I read the bill, however, I see that there is a lot of talk about offices and agencies, and not about the digital provision of services.
Do you think that the act should contain some way of protecting official languages while taking into account the fact that the government will increasingly be offering digital services in French and English throughout the country?
Legal Counsel, As an Individual
I am not aware of what has been done, nor of what will be done. I have often been told that the digital provision of services would not diminish access to those services in both languages. I think that the obligation of publishing in both languages applies also to digital formats. Normally, that should be done simultaneously.
What is complicated, however, is that our entire system is based on institutional bilingualism and not on personal bilingualism. The French-speaking population is proportionally decreasing in Canada. And so we must resist the idea that Canada is a multicultural society where everything is uniform. We can't forget history, no more than we can forget the fact that there are two official languages.
In my opinion, the provision of services in French should not be based on numbers. It is rooted, rather, on fundamental principles established when the decision was made that our country would be bilingual at certain levels. Even though the government must be encouraged to do better, I think it will be increasingly difficult, simply because there aren't enough bilingual people, at the individual level.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Denis Paradis
Thank you very much, Mr. Justice.
On behalf of all my colleagues, I would sincerely like to thank you for being here, for your presentation this morning, for your comments, and for answering our questions. Please know that our committee is very grateful to you.
If we wanted to continue this discussion with you, could we invite you again?
Legal Counsel, As an Individual
I am available, and quite determined to help you to the extent that is possible, and to share some of my experience. However, I want to reiterate that I am not representing anyone besides myself here.
Liberal