Official Languages Committee on March 19th, 2019

[Alupa Clarke, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Madame Huws, it's an honour to have you through televised conference. I knew a bit about Wales, but I didn't know that there were so many particularities and that there was a commissioner. Thank you very much for taking the time to speak with us.

I'll go right to the subject at hand. You have punitive measures in your regulatory functions, including up to £5,000 in fines. In terms of all the measures at your disposal, which do you find have the most impact when you have to use one of them?

[Meri Huws]

I have adopted a policy of escalation. Post-investigation, when you find that an organization is not compliant, our first response would be to seek a rapid remedy for that and essentially require them to comply within a specific period of time.

I have avoided using fines because fines don't change behaviour. There is always a danger than an organization pays a fine and continues not to comply, so we work very hard with organizations to change non-compliant behaviours.

The one thing we've found to be useful is requiring a work plan that we monitor to ensure that they achieve compliance. Rather than hitting an organization very hard with financial penalties, it's far more effective, in my belief, to work with them to achieve compliance. I'd happily use fines if an organization just ignores me, but I do find that working side by side works well.

[Alupa Clarke, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

In those instances where you do use the fine, who is the fine paid to? Are these paid to collective funds or a place where fines are amassed to be used to address the lack of services, for example?

[Meri Huws]

The money would come into this organization.

I'll just say that we have never, ever used a fine.

[Alupa Clarke, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Okay, I see. That's interesting.

If you had to, the money would come to your organization, and you would use it for your own structural needs or anything else?

[Meri Huws]

That's a good question, and I can't answer because we've never been in that position. I'm certain the Welsh government might have an opinion on that.

[Alupa Clarke, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

When it comes to your relationship with whichever tribunals exist, I would like to better understand your relationship with them, because we're considering adopting the model of administrative tribunal.

Would you personally take a cause to the tribunal on behalf of an individual or an organization?

[Meri Huws]

No. The Welsh Language Tribunal has a very specific remit. The Welsh Language Tribunal polices me. Its prime focus is to ensure that I am reasonable, proportional and legal in the way I operate.

There are two types of case that are referred to the tribunal. One would be where someone has complained to me as a regulator about an organization that isn't complying with Welsh language standards; I have investigated; I possibly have decided they are complying; and the complainant doesn't agree with me. They can refer the case to the tribunal, and it has to be on a legal ground.

The second type of case would be where I have investigated an organization; I have found that it is not complying; and it believes that my judgment is not appropriate. We have a case at the moment where an organization believes that my interpretation of a complaint about its reception services is not appropriate, and it has gone to the tribunal.

Essentially, the tribunal monitors me as a regulator. I'm the person who actually looks at cases. If I have received a complaint and I believe it is very serious, and I have found that an organization is not complying with its duties, I can refer that case to the civic courts. I could actually then seek a court injunction to require it, if it doesn't comply with what I believe is compliance.

What you were looking at as a tribunal duty of investigation and enforcement sits with me. Our tribunal is there to ensure that I do not make any decisions that are inappropriate.

[Alupa Clarke, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

That's interesting.

[Meri Huws]

There are very few cases that are actually referred to the tribunal. We're still in single figures.

[Alupa Clarke, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

How do you say “thank you” in Welsh?

[Meri Huws]

You say diolch.

[Alupa Clarke, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Okay, diolch.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you, Mr. Clarke.

We now go to Jean Rioux.

[Jean Rioux, Liberal, Saint-Jean, QC]

Okay.

Commissioner, thank you very much for sharing your experience before you leave for other pastures, as you have announced.

We know that, in Canada, bilingualism is part of our identity. The wish is for everyone to speak both languages. That is not the reality; it is an ideal.

Do you consider your country bilingual? Is your objective for everyone to speak both languages, or is there really a concentration of Welsh speakers in a more specific region?

We know that Canada has a very unique phenomenon of immersion schools where people can learn the other language.

Can you give us an overview of the situation of bilingualism, if there is one, in your country?

[Meri Huws]

Yes, of course.

To start with, we are a very small country. We have approximately three and a half million people and approximately 20% of them speak Welsh. So 20% of the population speaking Welsh is an interesting demographic because if you look at children from three years of age to 18 years of age, approximately 50% of that population speak Welsh because of the impact of education.

We have immersion education in some places in Wales and we have Welsh medium education as well. We have a growing young population who speak Welsh and a dying older population who would have learned the language at home. Our growth area is very definitely among young people who are learning the language as a consequence of education.

If you look at the map of Wales, traditionally the predominantly Welsh language areas are on our west coast, which is the coast facing Ireland, the coast furthest away from England. That has traditionally been the area where the Welsh language is strong.

Economically, that is a poor area. It's an agricultural area and it's suffering from outward migration. People, young people, are moving away from that area. We're losing traditional Welsh-speaking communities in that area. Our growth areas, because of the profile of Welsh speakers, are our cities, such as Cardiff where I'm sitting at the moment, and in places such as Swansea and large industrial towns in the eastern part of Wales, closest to the border with England.

We have a changing demographic of growth in areas where the language has not been spoken as a natural language, as a home language, for a century or two in some areas. We are dealing with an emerging population of new speakers. Our biggest challenge is retaining those people as Welsh language speakers as they come out of the education system. We're trying very hard to ensure they can move into employment where the Welsh language is seen as a skill and that they see value in having the Welsh language as a skill.

We are dealing with a changing demographic and education is critical for us, but also for me. Securing a Welsh or bilingual workplace is also a key driver in ensuring that those young people remain Welsh speakers.

[Jean Rioux, Liberal, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you.

We are looking into the possibility of having an administrative tribunal.

I understand that, as commissioner, you have enforcement powers and that the administrative tribunal is an appeals tribunal based on your rulings, as you explained earlier.

The option we are focusing more on is one where the commissioner would promote bilingualism and ensure the security of people in minority situations, whereas the tribunal would have more enforcement powers. What do you think about that perspective?

[Meri Huws]

I have powers of regulation and coercion where legal duties have been placed on public bodies. I also have that promotional role. We have had to debate in Wales as to whether we can have both roles within one person. I believe very strongly after seven years that we can. We need to have appropriate governance to ensure that we keep those roles apart within the office, but I do see them working very well together. We require an organization to comply but we can also provide them with tools through our promotion work, which aid them in that compliance. For example, we've provided non-statutory guidance to organizations on appropriate translation, appropriate simultaneous translation or textual translation. We can require compliance, but we can also enable them to comply. I find that beneficial.

I also find it beneficial that I can deal with complaints, because my experience is that an independent commissioner can work rapidly where that is required. If a complaint comes in and it is serious and has immediate effect, I can intervene very quickly, whereas—possibly—an administrative tribunal would not be as fleet of foot, would not be able to move as fast. I do find that useful when we have serious complaints that come in and we need to respond quickly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you very much.

We'll go now Mr. François Choquette.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Commissioner, thank you very much for joining us today by videoconference.

I see that this is still a young institution. It has been in existence for seven years. I want to begin by thanking you for your services as commissioner. I understand that the end of your term is approaching. I am sure that your services have been well appreciated. We know how difficult and important a commissioner's work is, especially in official languages. I believe that Welsh is now an official language of the United Kingdom.

I will tell you about a situation here, in Canada, to explain our thought process on the need to have an administrative tribunal whose role would differ from yours. Here is an example.

In 2014, an incident took place on Parliament Hill, and the RCMP had to respond in a more involved manner. A gunman opened fire on the Hill. Some citizens did not have services in French at the time. Complaints were made against the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the RCMP.

We are in 2019. The commissioner agreed to examine those complaints and has made three very simple recommendations: first, assess the language skills of people working for the RCMP on the Hill; second, implement an intervention process to inform the officers on language obligations; third, have a complaint acceptance process—in other words, determine how complaints submitted directly to the RCMP are received and processed.

The commissioner's report was issued around 2015. The RCMP has taken no action on the Hill following those three recommendations. The commissioner even did a follow-up and, once again, there has been no response. We are now in 2019 and none of the three recommendations, which are fairly simple in my opinion, have been followed.

So we are dealing with uncooperative agencies. What would be your role? What could you do that the Canadian commissioner cannot do? He can make recommendations, but there are no consequences.

[Meri Huws]

The initial difference would be that, if I were to investigate following a complaint, I would have requirements rather than recommendations made of the organization, so my judgment would lead to statutory requirements with which they are required to comply. If they do not comply, I can then escalate within my organization, within the commissioner's office. We can move to a position where I impose a fine or I move the case forward immediately to a court to obtain an injunction. Rather than having a series of recommendations, I have a series of legal requirements that I can impose on, in your case, the police.

That role has greater teeth than recommending change; I “require” change.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

If I understand correctly, over those seven years as commissioner, when you came across similar situations, you issued no recommendations, but you rather imposed what you call legal requirements. After imposing those legal requirements, did you have to take things further or did the institutions respond positively to your demands?

[Meri Huws]

My experience, on the basis of seven years, is that in 99% of cases we have immediate compliance. We've investigated Welsh government on a regular basis, whether it's non-compliance..... They have responded to the legal requirements. We are starting to see possibly one or two organizations that are not complying as quickly as is required, and we are looking to escalate those organizations, but, certainly, I have rigorous compliance powers. They are strong. I certainly know, in talking to other commissioners, that my powers are substantial, which is why the tribunal was created in order to ensure that I do not abuse my powers.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

We'll now go to Darrell Samson.