Official Languages Committee on May 30th, 2017

[Sara Wiebe]

Yes.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

One year later, you are waiting for the committee's report to start studying its recommendations.

[Sara Wiebe]

That is correct.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Okay.

Are you not yourselves starting to consider the possibility of implementing the recommendations of the special report?

Commissioners often say that they work hard to produce good reports. For instance, Commissioner Graham Fraser told me in 2013 that he had produced a report on access to justice but that it had been shelved. It is now 2017 and the report's main recommendations have not yet been implemented. That annoyed him.

This is a very important report. Mr. Fraser has retired, but perhaps he is listening to us today. He might be annoyed to hear that you have not begun considering his recommendations.

How can you explain that?

[Sara Wiebe]

Perhaps I should clarify. By talking about the work that needed to be done, I by no means meant to indicate that the work had not started. I've mentioned that we've been following the discussions of this committee very closely to hear from you and from your experts in terms of the advice you're hearing.

We're very much aware of the special report from Mr. Fraser, the former official languages commissioner. We've been reviewing it. I've been in active dialogue with my colleagues in the other departments that I've mentioned, but as I indicated, we are waiting for the advice from this committee so we can finalize our advice to our respective ministers, so that a determination can be made for the government to respond.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

I understand now that it is extremely important for the committee to complete its report and send it to you so you can begin studying the commissioner's report and the committee's recommendations.

[Sara Wiebe]

If I could just add again, just to be clear, it's not that we've not started the review. We have started the review, but again, I think it would be inappropriate of us to move forward on a response to the report from the former official languages commissioner absent the advice of this committee.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Okay.

Earlier, you answered a question from my colleague, Ms. Lapointe. I was somewhat struck, surprised, but not favourably so, by what you said about the other airlines and Air Canada. As you know, Air Canada is in a unique position as a former crown corporation. When it was privatized, it concluded a very specific agreement with the government, requiring it to continue to comply with the Official Languages Act.

We fight every day and file complaints regularly for the act to be upheld. Yet, if I understood correctly, you are now asking whether it is necessary for Air Canada to comply with all the conditions of the Official Languages Act.

Did I understand you correctly?

[Sara Wiebe]

I'm hoping that you've misunderstood, because I believe—

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

I hope so also.

[Sara Wiebe]

I tried to state quite clearly in my opening remarks that Transport Canada is very much aware of the obligations of the federal institutions within our control and their obligations with regard to the Official Languages Act. We are aware that this applies as well to Air Canada, and we expect those obligations to be met.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Thank you for that clarification.

You talked earlier about Bill C-49. It was a long time ago when Commissioner Graham Fraser called for legislation to clarify and strengthen the application of the Official Languages Act as regards air travel. Correct me if I am wrong, but in terms of legislation, Bill C-49 does not do anything for the official languages.

[Sara Wiebe]

As I mentioned, Bill C-49, the transportation modernization act, is just the first step for Minister Garneau in the implementation of this transportation 2030 plan. There are other elements and other policy issues that the department continues to study—

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Do these issues involve the official languages?

[Sara Wiebe]

I think the issue of official languages will be a specific area of study once we receive the advice of this committee.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Okay. The committee needs to be informed because certain people had doubts about the need for this report.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Yes, exactly.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

As you so clearly explained, the committee must indeed produce this report and then submit it to your department and to the other departments affected so that some of the commissioner's recommendations can be implemented. They might not all be implemented; they were the commissioner's suggestions. We must nonetheless ensure that Air Canada properly fulfills its obligations, something that it has unfortunately had difficulty doing thus far, for various reasons.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you very much, Mr. Choquette.

Let us now move on to Mr. Darrell Samson.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to the witnesses for being here today to provide information.

No doubt, we have work to do. On the other hand, I do not believe that our report will change the world. That said, our report should definitely highlight the areas where we believe the government must play a greater role.

We have for a second time welcomed officials from Air Canada. We have had the opportunity to have discussions with them. We have certainly heard interesting comments about airline companies and their official languages obligations.

There is very low compliance with official languages obligations on the part of service providers. Even though Air Canada appears to impose these obligations on them, it is obvious that these subcontractors do not comply with their official languages obligations to the same extent. That worries me.

In your efforts to improve the situation, you must really emphasize the obligations of service providers. When suppliers are given this responsibility, they do not have the right not to comply with these obligations. That is for sure.

I am pleased to hear that you are also looking at the other airlines in Canada. I think it should be a level playing field for everyone, up to a certain point.

What do you think about Air Canada's remarks that its official languages obligations undermine its ability to compete? It is not a question of money or costs. Air Canada has this formal obligation. What is your reaction to those comments from Air Canada?

[Sara Wiebe]

My day job is to work as a policy analyst. Whenever you look at a policy issue and you see that there's a policy anomaly, you wonder why that is. Right now, we have a policy anomaly with regard to the obligation of official languages with regard to Canada's air carriers, in that Air Canada is subject, but the other air carriers are not.

As one of your colleagues mentioned earlier, normally in this type of scenario you would have a situation whereby everybody has the same obligation, more or less. I think this is one of the considerations that we are debating as we take a look at the important issues and, again, the recommendations provided by Mr. Fraser, in terms of is it important that Air Canada continue to have that...that there be a lack of balance between Air Canada and the other Canadian air carriers? Because for them, they consider it a competitive disadvantage: they have obligations where others do not.

Again, we have to take a look at the various questions that we've been debating this morning. Is it important enough to retain that for Air Canada, given that we see the other air carriers already pursuing that, absent formal obligations? These are all questions that we're debating.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Yes, but with all due respect, we are not studying the possibility of reducing obligations. That is not what is at stake at all. The other carriers may do so, but on an exceptional basis. We can say that there have been some improvements, I agree, but we are not studying the possibility of reducing an obligation. This worries me considerably.

The second point I'd like to raise has to do with the decision in Thibodeau v. Air Canada, and with the whole issue of the Montreal Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air. I know that my former colleague Stéphane Dion had introduced Bill C-666.

What is your department's thinking on this?

[Sara Wiebe]

Perhaps on that question I could defer to my colleague, Mr. Blasioli.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Thank you.

[Daniel Blasioli, Senior Counsel, Legal Services, Department of Transport]

As you know, the devil is in the details, as they say.

This is being examined with all the other recommendations that former commissioner Fraser has provided. One of them, as you know, is a proposal to amend the ACPPA, the Air Canada Public Participation Act, to address the Thibodeau decision. That is being considered by all the departments that my colleague Ms. Wiebe has mentioned.

Again, we will be waiting for the committee's report to take into consideration as well on that issue.