Evidence of meeting #35 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 quebec.
A recording is available from Parliament.
10:35 a.m.
Vice-President, Barreau du Québec
The Société québécoise d'information juridique.
10:35 a.m.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
Thank you.
Mr. Bloom, do you think Quebec should have its own official languages commissioner?
10:35 a.m.
Director, Association of English speaking Jurists of Quebec
A commissioner's office?
10:35 a.m.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
An official languages commissioner, as Ontario and New Brunswick each have.
10:35 a.m.
Director, Association of English speaking Jurists of Quebec
Yes. In fact, a request to that effect was made to the government, but it wasn't interested. It's response was that ministers were responsible for all Quebecers within their ministerial portfolios and had to deal with all problems, regardless of whether they were the problems of the majority or minority groups. Theoretically speaking, the government is right. Practically speaking, however, that's not how things work in reality. We would very much like to have a commissioner or some sort of office in Quebec that was responsible for anglophone affairs.
10:35 a.m.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Aylwin, the $200,000 in funding given to SOQUIJ was discussed earlier. That's peanuts for an organization that has to translate hundreds and hundreds of decisions.
What would the annual cost of translating all Quebec judgments be?
10:35 a.m.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
At some point, it will be necessary to make a choice and decide what to translate and what not to translate. That choice should not be based solely on the quality of the judgments.
Who will decide what gets translated, where and when will it be translated, and who will foot the bill?
10:35 a.m.
Vice-President, Barreau du Québec
I don't want to say it's the unfortunate rule of three, but we translate about 75 judgments a year. The $200,000 in funding made it possible to translate 80 more judgments. Considering that judges in Quebec issue some 22,000 decisions a year—
10:35 a.m.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
I agree with you on that.
Earlier, Mr. Bloom said he was hopeful that, in the government's next action plan, for 2018-23, it would turn on the tap and a lot of money would be flowing for the translation of more judgments.
How much do you hope to receive?
10:35 a.m.
Director, Association of English speaking Jurists of Quebec
It's not for us to say how much money would be necessary. The chief justices of each court know what their needs are. Currently, in each case, they decide whether there is merit in translating decisions and key judgments that could have an influence in the rest of the country or elsewhere in the world.
10:40 a.m.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
Pardon me, but is it up to the chief justices in the other provinces to decide whether a certain judgment warrants being translated into French? If so, who pays for that in Canada's other provinces?
10:40 a.m.
Director, Association of English speaking Jurists of Quebec
I have no idea. Grants do exist, but I don't know how the money is used.
In Quebec, the chief justice of every court decides which judgments should be translated. Clearly, if the judgments could be influential or of particular importance in the rest of the country or elsewhere, judges will try to see to it that they are translated. Thus far, the court judges, themselves, are often the ones doing the translation, which means that an extra burden is being imposed on judges who are more bilingual than others and able to write in both languages. They are being relied on to do a job that would normally be done by a translation service.
10:40 a.m.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
Mr. Aylwin, let's come back to the rule of three you just mentioned. A $200,000 grant made the translation of 80 more judgments possible, in addition to the 75 judgments translated initially. From that, we could say that the cost of translating 160 judgments is half a million dollars. You said that judges in Quebec deliver 22,000 judgments a year. According to the rule of three, translating all of those judgments would cost several million dollars.
10:40 a.m.
Vice-President, Barreau du Québec
It's hard to say exactly how much because it depends on the number of pages we are talking about. Court of Appeal judgments are usually lengthier than those of administrative tribunals.
10:40 a.m.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
What I'm really wondering is what the ideal amount would be. In your view, what amount of federal funding would be appropriate to ensure enough judgments were translated to give Quebec better representation in the body of Canadian case law?
10:40 a.m.
Vice-President, Barreau du Québec
That's an excellent question.
In an ideal world, all the Court of Appeal judgments, at least, would be translated. The mere fact that these cases have made it to the Court of Appeal means they carry a certain degree of importance. Three, sometimes five, judges have considered the questions of law, so the court's judgments are worthy of being disseminated.
I'm a lawyer at Fasken Martineau, and when I joined the privacy group, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, or PIPEDA, was coming into force. Quebec had already had protection of personal information legislation in place for 10 years, and the federal commissioner called upon us to educate English-speaking Canada on the body of case law that Quebec had built in 10 years, since the decisions had never been made accessible.
It was the federal commissioner's idea to take that step in that context. It was a small initiative involving a sliver of the decisions rendered. Unless a myriad of initiatives like that one are undertaken in each area of law, more translation resources will be necessary.
10:40 a.m.
Conservative
10:40 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Denis Paradis
Thank you very much, Mr. Généreux, but looking at the clock, I see it is now Mr. Samson's turn.
10:40 a.m.
Liberal
Darrell Samson Liberal Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you all for joining us today.
I'd like to delve a little deeper, if I may, into the matter of the law's influence on Canadian society.
It's being said that Quebec has little interest in translating its case law. In fact, the Government of Canada decided to withdraw its translation grants. That really worries me.
What concerns me tremendously is the influence and advancement of the law and cultures in society. By taking the position that not translating Quebec's judgments isn't all that serious, the Quebec government is missing a huge opportunity to influence Canadian society through its culture, people, thinking, and so forth.
I commend English-speaking Canada for the fact that Quebecers consult anglophone case law, common law precedents, and use what is going on elsewhere as the basis for their decisions. Why, then, would the reverse not be just as important?
It's crucial. It goes well beyond a simple matter of money and translation. It has to do with making sure the country's two founding peoples share the fruits of their labour and work together to help society grow. We are completely missing the boat here.
I'd like to hear your thoughts on that.
10:40 a.m.
Some hon. members
Ha, ha!
10:45 a.m.
Some hon. members
Ha, ha!
10:45 a.m.
Liberal
Darrell Samson Liberal Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS
Actually, I wanted to hear your thoughts on that.
10:45 a.m.
Vice-President, Barreau du Québec
It cuts both ways.
We are here today to shine a spotlight on the situation in Quebec, but I think you need to look at the big picture as well.
Does every jurisdiction in Canada go to the trouble of translating its judgments to make sure the case law is accessible to Quebec, New Brunswick, and Ontario's and Manitoba's francophone communities? I don't think so.
I think it goes both ways. Quebec fulfils its constitutional duty to deliver judgments in the language of the party before the court. With the Charter of the French Language, Quebec has acquired an imperfect tool for the non-legal translation of judgments. In our view, that is not adequate.