Official Languages Committee on Oct. 18th, 2016

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

I do too.

[Sylviane Lanthier]

It ultimately causes problems.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you.

Mr. Choquette, you have the floor.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Mrs. Lanthier, thank you very much for being here today.

This is quite intense. Since we do not have a lot of time and I have a few questions to ask you, I ask you please to give me quite brief answers.

My first question concerns the new appointment of Judge Rowe to the Supreme Court. I think that appointment has been well received. The judge's curriculum vitae states that he is bilingual.

That is what we have been demanding for a long time. Yvon Godin, the former member for Acadie—Bathurst, worked very hard to table a bill on the bilingualism of Supreme Court judges, which I have re-tabled. Unfortunately, the Liberals seem to be saying they will not vote in favour of it.

What is your opinion on the subject? Should we continue to have only one policy on Supreme Court judges, or should we enact legislation requiring that bilingual judges be appointed to the Supreme Court?

[Sylviane Lanthier]

We must welcome the action taken by the Liberal government, which assured us the next judges appointed would be bilingual. This is an important step in the right direction. When it was announced, we said, and we maintain, that this practice should be included in an act to ensure it continues. We also think that is important.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

I have a question on another matter.

In his special report on Air Canada, the Commissioner of Official Languages made some recommendations on the importance of taking action now. He suggests that he be given more power so he can enter into agreements and that there be consequences if ministers and organizations fail to act on his recommendations.

What do you think about those recommendations by the Commissioner of Official Languages? Should he be given more power to ensure that organizations such as Air Canada comply with the Official Languages Act? Other organizations are in the same situation.

[Sylviane Lanthier]

You wanted a quick answer, so here it is: yes.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Excellent.

In the past few months, or even nearly a year, I have been trying to understand the amounts the federal government invests in official languages.

There are regular expenditures, of course, and there are those associated with the roadmap. I have some nice tables here, but I am having trouble seeing which amounts are increasing and which are decreasing.

I know you work very hard at the FCFA to understand these figures. Can you understand the amounts that are invested in official languages, those that are increasing, for example, and those that are decreasing? Ultimately, what amounts are being invested to promote and defend official languages?

[Sylviane Lanthier]

I am not sure we completely understand them all the time. It would probably be good to have information that is more comprehensible.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

What would be your recommendation for the next action plan regarding the clarity of information on money invested in official languages?

[Sylviane Lanthier]

Transparency is important for both the government and us. We do not just ask that money be invested in official languages. We want that money to be transformed into effective measures that are taken by our communities and by the government itself. If we cannot determine whether those measures are effective, we will not be able to prepare coherent midterm reports. We will not be able to take corrective action either or establish a constructive dialogue to determine how we can adjust and improve the way we do things.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

As regards the overall governance of official languages, it is somewhat difficult to determine who is responsible for what. For example, during the study on the situation of the Translation Bureau, the bureau was said to report to Public Services and Procurement Canada, that is to theHon. Judy Foote. However, she never testified before the committee on the situation of the Translation Bureau. Then we wondered who was responsible for it. We put the question to the Hon. Mélanie Joly (Minister of Canadian Heritage), who told us to speak to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement.

In short, it is hard for us to know who is responsible and who will ultimately be held accountable.

Would you have anything to suggest in that regard?

[Sylviane Lanthier]

In a study that we published on the Official Languages Act in 2009, we analyzed what was working well and what might be improved in that act. For it to be more coherent, we think the various parts of the act must form a whole and should be construed in relation to one another. To do that, a central government organization should be made responsible for implementing the Official Languages Act. In our view, that should be the Privy Council Office. However, if that is not possible, that responsibility could fall to the Treasury Board.

The problem with regard to Canadian Heritage, which we like very much and which is doing its job, is that the minister does not rank above other ministers. There are limits to what she can do. That is why we request that a central organization be given enough authority to breathe new life into the machinery of government as a whole.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you, Mr. Choquette.

Mr. Arseneault, you have the floor.

[René Arseneault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

We are talking about passing the buck to the Hon. Judy Foote or to the Hon. Mélanie Joly, but could you tell us the simplest way to ensure that the allocated amounts produce results on official languages and achieve set objectives?

[Sylviane Lanthier]

As I said in my presentation, we think some priorities are essential, particularly early childhood. We also think certain investments are essential, that is to say investments in community organizations. The idea is to be able to continue building the capacity of our organizations, given that it is through them that francophones are able to live in French.

We essentially think that the absolute priority for the next action plan for official languages should be to move the francophone communities back to the centre of the action. Francophones should be enabled to establish services, to build their own communities, and to be part of a living fabric that can bring French alive. That should be the main objective of the next action plan. We should determine how that can be done in health, education, and so on. We should really ask ourselves whether, by proceeding in this way, the government is investing not only in living in French, but also in the ability to live in French. We are the motor. So let us invest in the motor.

[René Arseneault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Several organizations represent the interests of francophones across the country and in various sectors. However, it all begins with a transfer of federal funds, which are allocated to the province and then to the communities. Then there is an interplay of forces striving to determine who will manage the money and for whose benefit. How can anyone be responsible and accountable in those conditions?

In view of this confused situation resulting from Confederation and the powers of various francophone organizations in and outside Quebec, how can anyone manage all that, have a clear idea where the funding goes, and determine how to achieve objectives?

[Sylviane Lanthier]

There too you are talking about federal-provincial agreements.

[René Arseneault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Earlier you said control had to be given back to the communities.

[Sylviane Lanthier]

Here is an example. Under the roadmap, it so happened that we responded to calls for tenders for projects and that those projects went to anglophone organizations that had proposed to provide services in French. Doing things this way does indeed deliver French-language services but does not build communities. There is a difference between the two.

We think the next action plan should look beyond the idea of providing service in French and strive to build communities. If you tell people they have to go to an anglophone centre to get French-language services, and if they are told they have to register for soccer with an anglophone organization, even if their matches are played in French, that is tantamount to telling them to go where they will experience the effects of assimilation, and they will probably decide to speak English since it will be simpler that way.

So what we—

[René Arseneault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Pardon me for interrupting you, but I have only six minutes of speaking time, and I do not have much of it left.

I understand what you mean. We see this back home in New Brunswick too.

Which organizations in the community could be designated as responsible for ensuring that funding is indeed transferred to where it must count, where you have to score points to achieve those objectives?

[Sylviane Lanthier]

Thank you. I understand your question.

I think the organizations representing the francophone communities are in the best position because they are horizontal, cross-sectional, and it is their mandate to see to the well-being of their community as a whole, not just the sector they work in. They are partners.

[René Arseneault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Perfect.

I come from Acadie. There are many and many different types of francophone organizations in northern New Brunswick, but they are all good types.

From the federal government's standpoint, we would really like to achieve these objectives, but how do we go about it? We cannot divide up the transfers for early childhood and allocate them to one specific organization in one province and another organization in another. How do we establish control and obtain the assurance that these resources will be managed logically and efficiently?

Which organizations are they? Have any organizations been designated? Has one organization been designated per province to speak on behalf of all the other organizations that have been grouped together? How can we do this?

[Sylviane Lanthier]

Mr. Arseneault, in most provinces and territories, there is a representative organization that plays that role, that speaks in policy matters on behalf of the francophone community, and that represents the francophone community as a whole and all sectors. So if you are looking for a partner that is in a good position, you should look there.

Most communities also have strategic or community plans for understanding where the community wants to go and what its priorities are. A federal or national action plan can definitely take on different forms to meet the needs of the various sectors. In those sectors, there are partners who already exist, are identifiable, and are working toward that end.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you, Mr. Arseneault.

Thank you, Mrs. Lanthier.

Now we will go to the second part, and you will speak to us about immigration. After that, we will do a go-round for those who want to ask questions or make comments.

Mrs. Lanthier, we are listening.