Evidence of meeting #137 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 languages.
A video is available from Parliament.
12:30 p.m.
Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Royal Military College of Canada and Department of Political Studies, Queen's University, As an Individual
Actually, that's what the Gascon decision raised. If a regulation had given some details on the implementation of Part VII, we would have had a different ruling.
As for whether we absolutely must change the text of Part VII, I don't think so. There should be another way to breathe new life into Part VII.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Alupa Clarke Conservative Beauport—Limoilou, QC
I have another quick question.
As far as the Commissioner is concerned, when I spoke to other international experts, I noted that there was a lot of room for the idiosyncrasy of the individual in the position. As you said, never has a commissioner brought a case to court. I think I understood that.
12:35 p.m.
Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Royal Military College of Canada and Department of Political Studies, Queen's University, As an Individual
I wouldn't say “never”, but it's rare.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Denis Paradis
Allow me to interrupt, but the bells are still ringing, and I must have unanimous consent to proceed. You see the lights going on: that is calling us to vote.
12:35 p.m.
Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Royal Military College of Canada and Department of Political Studies, Queen's University, As an Individual
Yes, I'm familiar with the concept.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
12:35 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Denis Paradis
Mr. Clarke, your time has just expired.
We'll now go to René Arseneault.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Alupa Clarke Conservative Beauport—Limoilou, QC
I was finishing my question. May I wrap up quickly, please?
April 2nd, 2019 / 12:35 p.m.
Liberal
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Alupa Clarke Conservative Beauport—Limoilou, QC
Shouldn't the act be changed with respect to the Office of the Commissioner so that the individual in office doesn't always make decisions in a discretionary manner, as he or she sees fit? Shouldn't the act tell the Commissioner that he or she must do this or that every time?
12:35 p.m.
Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Royal Military College of Canada and Department of Political Studies, Queen's University, As an Individual
Yes. One way to make this a little more effective is to require the Office of the Commissioner to present its evidence in court.
I don't want to take up time by giving you a longer answer.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
Thank you, Ms. Chouinard and Mr. Jedwab.
We don't have enough seven minutes, or even eight minutes in my case, to ask all the questions we'd like to. I have one of each of you. I'll start with Ms. Chouinard. I'll proceed quickly.
I speak very quickly, too, Mr. Jedwab.
12:35 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Immigration and Identities, Association for Canadian Studies and Canadian Institute for Identities and Migration, As an Individual
That's fine; I understand everything.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
At the beginning of everything, I thought the way out to optimize language rights was the administrative tribunal. We have heard here from the only provincial Commissioner of Official Languages, the one from New Brunswick. He was testifying with Mr. Boileau from Ontario. They told us that they were not fond of an administrative tribunal, because the whole burden of such a tribunal rests on the litigant, the one who wants his or her rights recognized. A court requires lawyers. Some will say that this is not necessarily the case, but it requires preparation, it is complicated and it is lengthy. People give up. This discourages them from doing so.
As you said earlier, we heard from the Commissioner for Wales. It was an incredible breath of fresh air.
This is the basis for my thinking, which leads me to my question.
First, I think that the administrative tribunal itself is not the solution, but part of the solution. I would like to add to what Commissioner Michel Carrier of New Brunswick and Commissioner Boileau told us: first, the act must be clear and subject to such little discretion or interpretation that it does not lead to legal debates in the Federal Court or elsewhere. We must therefore strengthen this legislation, give it teeth and make it clearer.
Second, I liked that commissioner for Wales, who told us that only 13 of her decisions had been brought before the court. In each case, the only person who can use the administrative tribunal is the company that represents the state. It is never the litigant who has to use lawyers and put up with lengthy delays to get to court.
Tell me what you think about the following. Beyond its role as investigator, should the Office of the Commissioner also be given the power to make decisions and impose sanctions, by means of an independent service, which could be called the litigation service, or whatever? Then, the Crown corporation, or anyone who does not respect language rights, would be allowed to go to the administrative tribunal.
What do you think? First, the act would be clarified; second, an administrative tribunal would be created that would be somewhat similar to the one in Wales.
12:35 p.m.
Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Royal Military College of Canada and Department of Political Studies, Queen's University, As an Individual
Thank you very much for your question, Mr. Arseneault.
First, with respect to clarifying the act, I haven't been on the Earth for 50 years, but based on what I know from previous parliamentary debates on language rights in Canada, there has always been a compromise measure. Often, the legislator has decided to leave certain sections of either the charter or the act vague in order to make it easier to understand. We are aware of that.
12:40 p.m.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
Yes. It was because of a lack of political courage on the part of all successive governments. I dare say it.
12:40 p.m.
Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Royal Military College of Canada and Department of Political Studies, Queen's University, As an Individual
It would certainly be a challenge to make the act as clear as possible, but it will be your challenge as legislator.
12:40 p.m.
Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Royal Military College of Canada and Department of Political Studies, Queen's University, As an Individual
As for the other aspect, it is true that, on the one hand, the creation of a tribunal where individuals are responsible for reporting would weigh heavily on their shoulders, but on the other hand, it would allow them to report without having to go through the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages. An individual who believes that his or her rights have been violated would have another remedy if the Commissioner decided not to investigate for reason A, B or C.
The court challenges program could also be used.
12:40 p.m.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
The power to investigate and impose sanctions exists already. For instance, the Human Rights Commissioner uses it. In any case, in New Brunswick, we use it because we have the equivalent. I don't know what the legislation is at the federal level. However, having been a lawyer, I know that during investigations, the complainant is held by the hand and supported. The complainant doesn't have to worry about wasting time, paying lawyer and knowing the legislation before going to court.
What I see is a first step. The Commissioner plays this role, takes complainants by the hand, informs them of their rights by telling them whether they are right or wrong, and decides on sanctions. The Commissioner told us that she had never had to impose sanctions in the form of fines or money. Rather, she required a report indicating how the affected party was going to comply with the legislation. This is cumbersome and tiring for the person or Crown corporation being asked to do it.