The good news, Ms. Lambropoulos, is that a lot has changed since then. What we see at tab 4, on page 11, are the powers of the Commissioner of Official Languages as they were in the late 1960s.
It's nevertheless important and helpful that you've raised that. To tell the truth, it didn't work, and that led to a complete revision of the commissioner's powers. I'm glad you've given me the opportunity to mention that.
In the next tab, tab 5, you'll see the commissioner's powers and responsibilities since 1998, starting on page 23.
However, that doesn't alter the fact that your predecessors in 1988 opted for a model under which the Commissioner of Official Languages was supposed to be both a champion—I would say a cheerleader—and a police officer, in that he or she had to conduct investigations and issue reports. Commissioners also have the power to appear before the courts, should they wish to do so, without having to institute proceedings themselves.
It's our professional view that this duality doesn't work. One of our basic recommendations would be to separate the two roles. That's a further explanation for the administrative tribunal idea. In fact, lawyers aren't the ones recommending it. Even people who previously occupied the position criticize its inherent problems, and not just the francophones. Graham Fraser also said it publicly to whoever might wish to hear it.