Official Languages Committee on May 11th, 2017

[Allain Roy]

Yes, but I think that involves the Centre canadien de français juridique, which already provides training to prosecutors and other professionals. It would be possible to work with them on joint initiatives. Another possibility might be session sharing with prosecutors and judges, and the pooling of exercises. The Centre canadien de français juridique does, however, already serve a specific group of clients.

As for KortoJura, yes, we do have certain objectives when it comes to assessment.

Ms. Bonnin could speak to that.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

I'd like to know how you determine a person's second-language proficiency. Do you know whether the Centre canadien de français juridique uses a similar scale to ascertain that someone with level 1 proficiency can get by in the other language and that someone with level 4 proficiency is very competent in both languages?

[Françoise Bonnin]

As far as I know, the Centre canadien de français juridique doesn't necessarily do assessments, at least, not in the same way that we do. We have developed tools that have been tested and validated by judges. We currently have demand from all legal professions where people have some degree of involvement or interaction with the court. We therefore have the ability to develop tests like the ones Mr. Fortin described, not just with language experts, but also with legal experts. We want to offer testing to those who need it, and we know the demand is huge because we are working on developing those markets. There is demand at both the provincial and federal levels, and we know that demand is tremendous. We are ready to meet it because we have a product that has been tested in the case of judges.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you. I think my colleague has a question for you.

[Leona Alleslev, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

There is no question that you guys have an incredible course, and we are lucky you have the program that you do, so thank you very much for that.

From what I hear, there probably is some more work to do in having more judges able to become bilingual. You said you had about 100 judges come through the program. Could you give me a feel for what percentage of those achieve level 4 and how many times they need to come back to be able to achieve that?

[Normand Fortin]

All of it would depend on whether....

I am speaking in English and I know you're going to say that I have an accent that's not Canadian—

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Leona Alleslev, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

As do I.

[A voice]

We all have one.

[Normand Fortin]

The judges go back home after their week of training. It all depends on whether they have a trial in the second language. You know, you use it or lose it. Sometimes they regress, but they come back to another session.

Some of them tell us they are able to at least do the the plea. And some are at level 4.

[Leona Alleslev, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Approximately how many are able to? We need to understand it in terms of the volume. How many are going through the program and therefore how long, approximately, does it take, and can they get it the first time they come into the program? That will have a distinct impact on whether and how quickly the federal government—were they to take away self-assessment—might be able to look at this.

[Denise LeBlanc]

One of the obstacles is the lack of training or education sessions in-between the longer training sessions and the tutoring. In terms of being able to function in a second language, especially in a legal setting, you can appreciate that if you only go to formal training sessions twice a year, and you don't necessarily get the opportunity to use your skills in-between, it's very hard to progress.

That's one of the aspects we are reflecting on in considering what will happen in the next five years. I has an impact on the length of time, if you will, before a person can reach level 4.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you, Ms. Alleslev.

Mr. Généreux, you may go ahead for three minutes.

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

Thank you all for being here. I won't ask for anything in return, but I did find you two new clients.

Picking up on the earlier discussion, I gather that what you developed for judges could be used in other fields, as you said, Mr. Fortin. The day before yesterday, the committee met with nurses, and we would very much like to have a Canadian exam that would recognize our nurses and make it possible for them to write the exam in French.

Your product could also be of use to newcomers to Canada, who have to undergo French testing. Even though they speak French, they aren't able to pass the test. I don't know what the problem in Canada is. We aren't equipped with the tests to determine that people are truly capable of understanding our culture and history.

As I have often said, no one is against virtue, but, when it comes to a bilingual judiciary, the government makes a clear distinction between a judge who is bilingual and one who is functionally bilingual. We have heard that on many occasions.

According to your four-level assessment scale, which level of proficiency must a judge reach in order to be considered functionally bilingual? I think the government's desire to introduce a legislative requirement that Supreme Court justices be bilingual could prove problematic. Which level of proficiency on your scale would judges need to show that they are truly bilingual and thus meet the requirement for appointment to the Supreme Court?

I know people who are fluently bilingual. For example, I think Thomas Mulcair is bilingual; he speaks both languages fluently, in my opinion. Clearly, though, he is not a judge, but, rather, a lawyer. I imagine that, if he wanted to become a judge and pass your test, he would have to attain level 4. Is there a level 5 for those wanting to become Supreme Court judges? Do they meet the requirement if they achieve level 4?

[Normand Fortin]

My sense is that they would have to achieve level 4.

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

You think they would need to be at level 4?

[Normand Fortin]

Yes, because level 4 means that the person is able to function in either an anglophone or a francophone environment.

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

In your view, then, that person would be considered fluently bilingual?

[Normand Fortin]

Yes.

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

That means they would be more than just functionally bilingual. I see the “functionally bilingual” requirement as problematic. To my mind, a judge is not bilingual when they are able to hear and understand a case in the other language but unable to speak that language, which they apparently understand. I think that, in addition to understanding everything, a judge has to be able to communicate and converse in every respect in both English or French, in other words, both official languages.

[Denise LeBlanc]

That depends on how you define “functional”. I would agree with you if “functionally bilingual” meant someone who could function fluently in a courtroom in both languages.

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

There's no definition. At least, I haven't seen one so far. I have never seen a definition for what constitutes a bilingual judge or the level of proficiency required to indicate that a judge is bilingual.

As I said, no one is against virtue. At the same time, though, if a legislative requirement is introduced, some anglophone provinces might not have enough bilingual judges. If it becomes necessary to identify a second category—one that designates an individual who is functionally bilingual and therefore not fluently bilingual—are we to understand that some provinces will never have enough bilingual judges for appointment to the Supreme Court? That is what I wonder.

[Normand Fortin]

Allow me to explain how we put together the test, because that might answer your question. We, ourselves, did not sit down and make up the content; the information came from judges. They were the ones who told us that, in order to perform a particular function, it was necessary to be fluently bilingual, whereas, for other functions—

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

Yes, I see.

[Normand Fortin]

In the case of Supreme Court judges, you would need to work out with them what the requirements are to perform their duties in that environment.