Official Languages Committee on Feb. 21st, 2017

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

I know, except that with this ruling, it becomes a constitutional obligation that is outside the jurisdiction of the provinces. That's what I understand.

As a lawyer, I know everything the federal government has to do to respect the Charter, but the Supreme Court of British Columbia ruling seems to say that, from a constitutional point of view, the provinces have that obligation. If Statistics Canada did not exist today, the provinces would have to do a census.

Have I understood the ruling properly?

[Mark Power]

Yes.

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

Perfect.

My next question follows up on Mr. Samson's comments.

Subsection 24(1) of the Charter begins with these words: “anyone whose rights or freedoms [...] have been infringed or denied [...]” Let's stop with “infringed”, since that word is followed by the word “or” and not by the word “and”. Among lawyers, let's agree on that.

My thinking was along the same lines as Mr. Samson's. This has been going on for 35 years and an additional 20 years will be added to that. Are there any lawyers who have begun to study the possibility of asking for an exceptional recourse in order to remedy the loss of all of these generations of young students in schools? Could we ask for a “turbo” recourse to accelerate the French or English education of official language minorities?

[Mark Power]

You know that lawyers love conflict. At a certain level, we are pleased. On the other hand, these schools are what count. The communities don't want revenge for the past 50 years. They want a future that makes sense and that will allow parents to transmit their language and their culture to their children.

In order to do that, schools are needed. To obtain those schools, the managers would have to contact the departments of Education and let them know that this or that school in Saint John, New Brunswick, or the new school in Moncton, is already full, and that other rights holders cannot register there. The managers should present data and ask for funds to build schools, whether they come from the province or are granted through the federal-provincial strategic agreement.

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

Do I have any time left, Mr. Chair?

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, François Choquette]

You have one minute left.

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

That is the problem in Canada, which is the most beautiful country in the world—and I truly believe that. We have to respect the federal and provincial fields of jurisdiction, and it is difficult to get involved in another jurisdiction, whether federal or provincial.

I know I am tiresome, but I want to get back to that matter. The British Columbia Supreme Court decision about the French-language school board seems to be an answer to that nice excuse or shield that the provinces can use, which is that no one touch anything under their jurisdiction.

I want to talk about this again. Mr. Power, you answered in the affirmative. A British Columbia Supreme Court decision has just stipulated that the provinces have a constitutional obligation to enumerate the rights holders and ensure that section 23 is respected. However, we know that in order to respect the rights of minorities, the articles must be interpreted in a very broad way, and not in a restrictive manner.

[Marc-André Roy]

At point 2 on page 4 of our document, it says that section 23 of the charter applies to both the federal and provincial levels. There was a judgment where British Columbia was a party. As Mr. Power explained, since the federal government was not a party in the dispute, it was impossible to make a decision that applied to it. However, that does not mean that the charter does not apply to the federal government. It cannot do things that would run counter to section 23 of the charter.

Let's look now at page 6...

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, François Choquette]

Could you be brief, please.

[Marc-André Roy]

On page 6 at point 5.1 it says that subsection 91(6) of the Constitution Act, 1867, specifies that the federal government is the government that is responsible for the census.

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

It is the only one.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, François Choquette]

Thank you, Mr. Roy.

I now yield the floor to Mr. Généreux, who has six minutes.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank all of the witnesses for their presence here with us today.

Mr. Boileau, you referred to the IDF. You said that you analyze raw data. In Ontario, you interpret raw data differently from elsewhere in Canada. Did I understand you correctly on that?

[François Boileau]

The calculation method is different.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

So it is the calculation method.

[François Boileau]

The data are handled differently.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

By saying that, are you not saying that Mr. Corbeil from Statistics Canada is correct in his opinion that there's no point asking different questions or adding questions, since in reality the provinces will make their own subjective interpretation of the data, as you do in Ontario? Did you not just confirm that he is correct—I am being the devil's advocate here, let's be very clear—when you say that you have the raw data and everyone has the same data, but that they are interpreted to some extent according to your needs or according to factors that are specific to your province? If we asked other questions, we would probably get different raw data. However, based on the data you collect or interpret, are you in a position to meet needs in a different way, as compared to what is done in other provinces? Do you understand me?

[François Boileau]

Yes, I understand your point of view, but the basic questions have to be the right ones. We can't invent a calculation method on the basis of questions that will not give us the answers to all of the questions we are asking ourselves. In Ontario, the IDF allows us to calculate the number of francophones. I am not referring to the number of rights holders. It's impossible to know that, because we would need to change some of the questions in the census. The rights holders and the francophones are not necessarily two overlapping groups under constitutional law, section 23 and so on. What we can demonstrate...

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Excuse me, but is your interpretation different when it comes to allophones, for example?

[François Boileau]

Yes, because we use a calculation method that allows us to determine who is a francophone, but we are not talking about school rights. We are talking about categories of rights holders, i.e. the three categories under section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. One of the questions broaches the topic, but not the other two, and we can't in Ontario invent a calculation method that would allow us to obtain answers to questions that are not being asked. We don't have that much imagination.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Fine. I do not underestimate you, quite the opposite.

Mr. Power and Mr. Roy, your presentation was very, very interesting. The reality which Mr. Corbeil expressed the other day is that Statistics Canada must set priorities in the census. As I was saying earlier to Ms. Lanthier during the break, the organization has some strategic choices to make, and if we add language questions I suppose that at some point we are going to have to decide where we eliminate other questions. There is a sort of battle at Statistics Canada, you might say, to see whether questions are going to be added.

Personally, I don't believe it's a matter of cost. I'm a printer, and I know that we can make the font smaller and do a lot of things to include various elements on one sheet of paper. However, if we add questions, how can we make sure—because I think we are really at a historic crossroads—that we will elicit relevant answers? If we really want more conclusive data, we have to make the changes now, and not in 5, 10 or 20 years. How can we, as members of the committee, exert pressure on Statistics Canada for the purpose of obtaining conclusive answers to questions, so that we may improve all of the services delivered to the communities?

[Mark Power]

First, put your foot down and recommend that this be done in your report. Second, I think that this idea of limiting the number of questions asked in the census is a red herring. I think that Canadian men and women are mature enough to answer more questions.

Mr. Roy already explained that certain language-related questions could be removed from certain forms. For instance, there is a question about the regular use of French in the home, or its absence. Before exploring that question, we need to know the language of the adults' primary schooling. As we speak, the hierarchy of questions is reversed.

Mr. Généreux, I invite you to go to page 7 of the presentation. If I have not already convinced you and if you are looking for arguments to use with Statistics Canada, read point 5.4. It says that what distinguishes the requests from minority official language communities as opposed to other groups is not only the fact that they have rights, but the fact that the Official Languages Act—a federal act—requires that certain proactive measures be taken. This isn't an interpretation that happens at two in the morning after a glass of wine, Mr. Généreux.

Then, please consult the document on page 8. Paragraph 43(1)(d) stipulates that the Minister of Canadian Heritage, the Honourable Mélanie Joly, and Mr. Casey, the parliamentary secretary of the minister—take measures “to encourage and assist provincial governments to support the development of English and French minority communities generally and, in particular, to offer provincial and municipal services in both English and French and to provide opportunities for members of English or French linguistic minority communities to be educated in their own language”. That's the point.

Since you represent a Quebec riding, I can anticipate a question regarding infringing on provincial jurisdiction. According to subsection 91(6) which we have already discussed, the answer is no.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Fine.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, François Choquette]

Unfortunately, Mr. Généreux, your time is up.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

And yet I had just started.