Official Languages Committee on Nov. 29th, 2018

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

We will resume now.

I would invite Ms. Lambropoulos to speak.

[Emmanuella Lambropoulos, Saint-Laurent, Lib.]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to both commissioners for being here with us today.

You mentioned harmonizing what goes on at the provincial and federal levels with regard to commissioners. The Office of the French Language Services Commissioner of Ontario and the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages of Canada recently went through a process whereby they harmonized. Can you please go into more detail and tell us why it's important to have this happen?

[François Boileau]

Are you talking about our agreement within our own commissioner's office?

[Emmanuella Lambropoulos]

Yes.

[François Boileau]

Okay.

It's very simple. We have an agreement as well with New Brunswick, and New Brunswick has an agreement with OCOL as well. What we do is this. We know that complainants usually don't know exactly who is in charge where. We find the place for them to go. If I receive a complaint in regard to a federal institution, then I will tell the complainant but also, if the complainant agrees, I will track this complaint to my federal colleague so that he in turn can take over. It's less hassle for the complainant, per se.

We also have an agreement to further our communications. We do share our own priorities. The fact that we had a study done together on access to justice in official and minority languages speaks to the fact that we do talk to each other. The fact that we created a report on immigration also speaks to the fact that both of us wanted to speak to our different governments at the same time and say the same thing. That was also a clear message that we work together and are asking the federal government and the provincial government to work together as well.

[Emmanuella Lambropoulos]

Thank you very much.

You made reference several times to the role of the commissioner, that basically they act as protector, as promoter, as mediator. We heard from so many of our witnesses that this role should maybe be divided and not all be under the belt of one single person. However, you said that it's important to keep them all together, and that doing so would benefit the communities.

Can you please go into more detail about that? You also mentioned that they can't be too strong about something, because they also have to be a mediator. Don't you feel that maybe they're not as effective because they wear all of these hats?

[François Boileau]

The former federal commissioner used to use the line that his role was “part cheerleader, part nag”. In a way, it's true; we do have that role, and it's an important role. It's a reminder for government of our own obligations. It's also a promoter role. Whenever I go to conferences, I meet so many people throughout the province at different levels. Be it a mental health organization in Barrie or be it children's aid societies in the north, I meet with many anglophones. I don't arrive there saying, “You have an obligation.” I arrive there talking about the French community—its importance, its history, its role—and being an advocate for the French community, speaking about French in the world and how it is not a language in decline. Sometimes anglophones think that, because they don't have it in their faces on a daily basis, but actually it's a very fast-growing language in the world. There are 200 million French-speaking locutors today. There will be more than 700 million by 2050.

With regard to this job, at the end of all of my presentations I tell people that I hope my message was clear. This is not about making sure you offer the service because you are obligated to but because it's the right thing to do. It's the right thing to do for the individual, the family and the community. If you don't want to do it because you don't believe in this, then do it because you have an obligation.

That's how I conclude all of my presentations.

[Emmanuella Lambropoulos]

Mr. Carrier, do you want to add a comment?

[Michel Carrier]

I'm not sure I understand your question about wearing too many hats and being less effective.

As Mr. Boileau said earlier, we are cheerleaders. We're the only ones. Several years ago, I recommended that the Legislative Assembly strike a committee similar to this one that would enable provincial MLAs to take part in projects designed to promote official languages and the vitality of the linguistic communities. We are here as leaders, but we have to be supported. We can play this role, but the fact remains that the political aspect must also play a role. When that will doesn't appear on the political side, perhaps we're less effective.

I have to say this troubled me. I was suffering slightly from a Jesus syndrome from time to time. When things weren't going that well, I thought it was our team's fault, but that wasn't the case. We believe in it so much. Mr. Boileau and I are so involved and so keen for it to work that we find tools and develop mechanisms. However, if we aren't supported by the people from the Legislative Assembly and Parliament or by the federal Commissioner of Official Languages, things may not move forward as fast as we would like.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much, Ms. Lambropoulos.

Now will continue with Mr. Blaney.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to both commissioners for their highly informative testimony.

I very much appreciated the recommendations you made in the first hour, particularly those concerning the modernization of the act, governance and a department that would oversee everything.

Mr. Boileau, I liked your recommendation concerning the Treasury Board, which would coordinate all institutions in implementing the act.

I have a question. You said that you commissioners didn't want coercive powers and that a tribunal would have the effect of judicializing everything and thus reducing political accountability.

Could the Treasury Board have coercive powers and use them to implement the Official Languages Act?

[François Boileau]

Absolutely.

That's what we're aiming for. Regulatory powers are already provided for under the Official Languages Act. However, very few regulations have been made to implement the act. Nevertheless, if there were more regulations and they defined the consequences of failure to achieve the objectives of the Official Languages Act, it would then fall to the departments to explain their poor decisions. That would clearly indicate that it's not an outside arbitrator who ensures implementation of the act, but rather the government, which is accountable and oversees the measures taken.

If there are any complaints, they'll always go to the federal Commissioner of Official Languages. Then it won't be solely up to him and his team to verify everything that's done in government. He doesn't have the resources to do so.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

To retain his independence and role as an advisor, he can't play the policeman either. That's what I'm understanding here this morning.

Mr. Carrier, I enjoy listening to you. You studied in Ottawa, but you've made your career in New Brunswick. Could you tell about the role of the Université de Moncton? The other day, Mr. Dupuis from the FCFA told me that educational institutions are a bit like the top of a pyramid. Can you tell me how you view the role of the Université de Moncton in the evolution of the francophonie in New Brunswick?

[Michel Carrier]

It has been vital and essential to have a francophone university for Acadians. It enabled many people to study at university in French when the only francophone universities were in Quebec or elsewhere.

The Université de Moncton, its faculty, employees and students have become leaders in the Acadian community. We see a lot of them.

Take Mr. Arseneault, for example. They aren't all winners, but well...

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

He wasn't listening, so that's all right.

[Michel Carrier]

Earlier, during the break, we talked about the role of lawyers who have gone through the law faculty at the Université de Moncton. It's invaluable, especially in the area of language rights. It's an authority. We've developed a common law language. The Université de Moncton is essential to the vitality and survival of the francophone community in New Brunswick.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

Would you say that New Brunswick has been a social and economic winner thanks to the founding of the Université de Moncton and that it has been a plus for all the people of New Brunswick?

[Michel Carrier]

Absolutely.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

I see Mr. Samson, who wants to talk about Nova Scotia. I don't know whether he went to the Université de Moncton.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

I'm going to tell you about that. That's my story too.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

You are an advisor.

If I were in the government this morning, I'd be wondering how we could continue advancing linguistic duality in Canada while avoiding repercussions. I'd like to hear what you have to say on that point. How can we continue demonstrating the constructive and positive value of duality and of the positive steps we're taking.

You mentioned populism. I'd like to hear what you have to say on that, if possible. I have a few minutes left.

[Michel Carrier]

We're all troubled by the populist movement around the world. Everyone has his or her own interpretation of what's happening. I think people in that group feel detached and not heard. They don't feel they're part of the decision-making process.

Yesterday, I was listening to an excerpt from an interview that former Prime Minister Harper gave on the subject of populism.

These people don't understand the issues of free trade and markets. They're detached, troubled and dissatisfied and therefore advocate simplistic solutions for complex issues.

Here at home, that results in the resentment of official languages, which has always existed in a small segment of the population. Now, perhaps people are a little more attentive because of this populist movement, which aims to solve everyone's problems in a simplistic manner. Official bilingualism has often been an easy target for these people. Social media provide forums where they can exchange ideas.

So if we want to approach these people, and if we want them to understand the situation more clearly, we'll have to demystify a lot of things. Myths persist. Earlier we talked about billions of dollars in spending, but you also have to talk about the benefits.

The Conference Board of Canada recently published a study stating that the contribution of bilingualism to Canada and Ontario amounts to billions of dollars.

I think one feature of a democratic system is that we continue to dialogue with people who consider these questions.

Perhaps we'll have to find better tools because this populist movement. We don't know it well. We're learning on the go. I've found that a little more difficult since I came back five years ago as a result of that movement. We can't give up if we want a society that holds together, that acknowledges the value of everyone, of the ethnic communities, the official language communities and so on. We'll have to continue talking about this. So I don't have a solution.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you very much, Mr. Blaney.

Now we go to Nova Scotia with Mr. Samson.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Once again, thank you very much.

First, I want to thank all four of you for being here.

Mr. Carrier, thank you for your ongoing work. Thanks to you too, Mr. Boileau. You have an even bigger national profile today, and you clearly show how important your work is. I'm going to address that in a few minutes.

Before I begin, I want to say this to my colleague opposite: the Université de Moncton hasn't just been very good for New Brunswick society.

Here's a brief historical review. When I went there, approximately 40% of New Brunswick students were from Quebec. First, that let them gain a year by not going to Cégep, and, second, they wanted to be engaged in the francophone community outside Quebec and to meet and work with Acadians from everywhere.

Personally, I did my entire education in English. There weren't any French schools where I lived when I went to school. We spoke French at home, unless an anglophone was there, and when I had to choose a profession, I had to decide whether I wanted to live in and continue contributing to francophone society. I had to find a francophone university. There was one in Nova Scotia, which is essential, and another in New Brunswick. We couldn't go to Ontario because there were no French-language universities there. There still aren't today. Life is tough.

I'm going to try to ask a few specific questions because I'm known for my long preambles. I found something extremely interesting in the two presentations you made. You addressed some very important points.

Mr. Carrier, you talked about aligning federal and provincial offices, and that's very important. There are many instances in New Brunswick in which service is offered solely in English.

Can you talk about that?

[Michel Carrier]

Thank you for your question.

It's hard to be clearer than I was in my brief. We think some confusion is created by the discrepancy between the two levels of government.

I believe that will help improve the vitality of the French language in New Brunswick.