Official Languages Committee on June 13th, 2017

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Welcome, everyone, to this meeting of the Standing Committee on Official Languages.

The Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages is represented by Ghislaine Saikaley, the acting commissioner, Pascale Giguère, director and general counsel, Mary Donaghy, assistant commissioner, and Jean Marleau, acting assistant commissioner.

This morning we will be considering the 2016-17 annual report of the Interim Commissioner of Official Languages.

You have the floor, Madam Commissioner.

As usual, you will have the floor to start off the first hour, and we will then move on to questions and comments from committee members.

[Ghislaine Saikaley, Interim Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Honourable members of the committee, good morning.

This year, the annual report is divided into three chapters. The first chapter looks at the 150th anniversary of Confederation, which we have the pleasure of celebrating this year. The second chapter addresses a number of topics related to new opportunities for official languages. And the third chapter deals with leadership in the public service. Let's look at these subjects one by one.

First, in the months leading up to the 150th anniversary of Confederation, the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages made a significant effort to ensure that federal departments and organizations would take linguistic duality fully into account in their activities and in the services to be provided to the public during this high-profile Canadian event.

We will also be taking part in the celebrations, using this opportunity to better promote the fundamental role that linguistic duality has played in Canada's history and its importance for the future.

The celebrations will not be limited to 2017, because in two years we will be celebrating another important milestone in Canadian history. In 2019, the Official Languages Act will turn 50. This would be a good time to conduct a review of the federal language policy, given how much Canadian society has changed since the last revision of the act in 1988.

This evolving context, including technological developments, means that it is time to think about amending the act. The government should address this situation and assess the relevance of updating the act. That is certainly what we plan to do at the office of the commissioner, in consultation with official language minority communities. It may be the only recommendation in this annual report, but many other recommendations were made in various files during 2016 and 2017.

Throughout the year, advances in some of our files have brought new perspectives to key areas, such as support for early childhood development.

On October 3, 2016, Commissioner Graham Fraser released his report entitled, “Early Childhood: Fostering the Vitality of Francophone Minority Communities”. This report revealed that, in francophone minority communities, early childhood development is hindered by a lack of resources, a shortage of staff at early childhood centres, and fragmentation of services.

It also confirmed that the lack of funding earmarked specifically for early childhood in the “Roadmap for Canada's Official Languages 2013-2018: Education, Immigration, Communities”, has made these communities vulnerable and often unable to meet their own needs.

Over the past 12 months, the office of the commissioner has participated in consultations conducted by Canadian Heritage that will help to develop the next official languages plan, which will be released shortly. We noted that the groups that were consulted focused on the promotion of linguistic duality, the vitality of official language minority communities, and the active role of the federal government.

With regard to access to justice, on October 20, 2016, the federal government announced changes to the appointment process for superior court judges. These changes responded to the recommendations made by Commissioner Fraser and his counterparts in Ontario and New Brunswick in their 2013 joint study, “Access to Justice in Both Official Languages: Improving the Bilingual Capacity of the Superior Court Judiciary”.

Many of the office of the commissioner's interventions in 2016-17 were intended to support the leadership demonstrated by certain institutions and to encourage others to do the same.

The office of the commissioner supported the efforts of those who worked to implement the act within their jurisdiction. We also encouraged the use of more strategic approaches to find solutions to systemic problems and produced tools to help institutions better comply with the spirit and letter of the act.

Despite all of these encouraging signs, there is still a lot of work to do in terms of respect for official languages, as demonstrated by this annual report, which indicates that the Office of the Commissioner received a total of 1,018 admissible complaints in 2016-2017. We have not seen such a high volume of complaints since 2009-2010, when we received 876 complaints against CBC/Radio-Canada regarding the CBEF radio station in Windsor, Ontario. As usual, the majority of the complaints, 565 of them, pertained to communications with the public.

In March 2017, the Office of the Commissioner completed its investigation into complaints about the lack of service in French on Parliament Hill. Since the complaints on this issue were filed in 2015, responsibility for security on Parliament Hill has been transferred to the Parliamentary Protective Service, which has established a number of operational procedures, including reminders and training programs, to ensure that all of its employees are aware of the requirements under the act and comply with them at all times.

A total of 183 complaints dealt with Part V of the act, regarding language of work. This issue remains a cause for concern.

We have also noted a significant increase in the number of complaints filed under section 91 of the act, with 192 complaints pertaining to the language requirements of positions. This high number is also worrisome.

It is in this context that the commissioner wrote to the President of the Treasury Board in May 2016, asking him to amend the directive on official languages for people management in order to address his recommendation concerning the linguistic profile of supervisory positions, which appeared in the commissioner's 2010-11 annual report. We have begun a dialogue with the Treasury Board Secretariat to examine this matter more closely.

Changes are already taking place at some federal institutions with respect to the language skills required for supervisory positions in regions designated bilingual for the purposes of language of work. In 2016-17, Shared Services Canada, Health Canada, the Public Health Agency of Canada, the Canada Border Services Agency, and the National Gallery of Canada endorsed the office of the commissioner's position on the required language level.

This year, instead of carrying out a report card evaluation of federal institutions, we conducted our own consultations with several official language minority communities and federal departments to gather their comments on the effectiveness of our interventions, specifically our work with federal institutions, our studies, and our promotion of linguistic duality. The results are encouraging. The people we consulted appreciate the office of the commissioner's work and want us to do more. You received a letter today with more information on the results of this consultation.

It is important to celebrate victories, but I am also aware that significant challenges remain nationwide. According to projections recently published by Statistics Canada, the number of francophones in the country will steadily decrease between now and 2036.

This projection demonstrates the importance of current efforts to assist francophone minority communities across the country in becoming host societies.

Even if we are rightfully concerned that the status of the French language is threatened by demographics, the public opinion of the majority appears to be constantly improving.

In a Nielsen survey commissioned by the Office of the Commissioner in early 2016, 88% of respondents said they support the objectives of the act. Another interesting statistic is that 96% of respondents stated that Canadians should be able to receive federal government services in the official language of their choice.

I wanted to end on a positive note, in keeping with the beautiful weather that has finally arrived!

Thank you for your attention.

I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you very much for your presentation, Madam Commissioner.

We will now proceed immediately to the comment and question period.

Please go ahead, Ms. Boucher.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Hello, Madam Commissioner.

Thank you all for being here today.

I read your report carefully and have trouble understanding why the number of complaints rose by more than 40% in 2016-17. That does not really make sense, to my mind. With all the official languages reports that have been published in the past, how can it be that, in 2016-17, francophones outside Quebec still have trouble being served in their preferred language? Have you taken steps to reduce the number of complaints?

[Ghislaine Saikaley]

The number of complaints fluctuates from year to year. For a number of years, they were decreasing. Since 2012, they have been increasing. It is always difficult to explain these trends.

This year we have seen an increase in two sectors in particular, including services to the public. As you said, it seems that Canadians have complained more often about not receiving services in their preferred language. So there were more complaints of that type.

There has also been a big increase, as I said, in complaints involving the linguistic profile of positions in the public service. It seems that public servants are more aware of their obligations, which is not a bad thing in itself, and that might also explain the increase in complaints about services to the public. Are Canadians more aware of their rights and are they increasingly demanding that those rights be respected, leading to an increase in the number of complaints?

As to our efforts to reduce the number of complaints, I think all the Commissioner's activities that are part of his role of influencing federal institutions are having an effect. All the presentations given by our staff, all the tools we develop, all the reports we write—whether investigation reports that include recommendations, audit reports or others—are all tools specifically intended to improve the performance of federal institutions. These various methods are expected to have a positive effect in reducing the number of complaints.

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

Yet this is not the first year that these same findings have been reported. It is always the same thing, report after report. Perhaps people are more aware and are complaining more often, which is a good thing. Your role is becoming increasingly difficult, however, because even though you are receiving more complaints and are trying to resolve more problems, the complaints keep piling up.

I would like to talk about something else. In your report, which I read in great detail, you talked about early childhood and about anglophones in Quebec. You reported—I worked in Quebec so I already knew this—that the anglophones of Quebec are not recognized as a minority by their own provincial government.

You made some recommendations about early childhood in particular. How can we help the anglophone community of Quebec, knowing full well that it is not even recognized by the province? What kind of challenge does that pose for you?

[Ghislaine Saikaley]

As you know, we published a study last year on early childhood development. When we began that study, we quickly realized that the needs in Quebec were quite different. That is why the study looked at early childhood outside Quebec.

Moreover, as the annual report indicates, we are now looking into the situation of anglophones in Quebec to see what role the federal government could play to support the anglophone minority there.

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

You must also know that the situation in Quebec is unique, since Bill M-30 prevents the federal government from acting in areas under Quebec's jurisdiction. That is the reality you have to deal with, as do we. That is why I am asking what we can do, together, to encourage reflection about this, not only in the rest of Canada, but also in Quebec, so the Quebec government recognizes the anglophone minority in the province. If we want to help that minority, we have to go through Quebec. Other approaches can be taken elsewhere, but that is not possible in Quebec. Your approach to this must be therefore be even more targeted.

[Ghislaine Saikaley]

Absolutely. Our approach must reflect those problems and specific characteristics.

As to recommendations, it is certainly possible to recommend that the federal government work jointly with the province, for instance. We can assert our influence in the recommendations we make.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Lefebvre, you have the floor.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Madam Commissioner, thank you very much for being here to present your report. I think the timing is good.

You said it is time to think about overhauling or revising the Official Language Act, which is nearly 50 years old. The last time Parliament revised the act was in 1988. I agree with you. I hope the committee will consider this in the fall. I know the Senate has also done some work on this.

You would like to begin a study of a potential reform of the Official Languages Act. I would like to know how you would proceed. What are your objectives for that study?

[Ghislaine Saikaley]

First of all, we would directly consult the communities affected, which means francophone and anglophone official language minority communities.

We would review the information we have gathered over many years as regards the challenges in the application of the Official Languages Act. There are of course new ways of offering services since the advent of the Internet and social media. We appeared before Parliament with regard to a matter relating to court administrative services, specifically as regards the publication of decisions on the Internet.

That is how we would conduct our study and come to a position that would also reflect our consultations. We do of course expect to be invited to appear during the study that the Senate committee has begun. We hope that would also further our study. Generally speaking, that is how we would proceed.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you.

Your report indicates a record number of complaints. It just keeps going. How would this revision of the Official Languages Act help reduce the number of complaints by ensuring that better services are provided as stipulated by the new act? I would like to hear your thoughts on that. How would a revision of the act support your services and promote greater compliance with the Official Languages Act by the federal government and thereby reduce the number of complaints?

[Ghislaine Saikaley]

Perhaps the wording of certain sections of the Official Languages Act needs to be clarified to ensure that federal institutions fully understand their obligations. For example, we have to make sure they fully understand what constitutes active offer. That might involve education.

The act could be worded more clearly. We have to make sure that federal institutions fully understand their obligations and perform better, which will probably reduce the number of complaints.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

I completely agree with you.

Thank you very much.

I will give the floor to my colleague Ms. Lapointe.

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

Thank you very much.

I would like to thank the witnesses for being here with us today.

I would like to pick up on my colleague Ms. Boucher's question about access to early childhood services in Quebec. I would like us to be clear about something. School boards in Quebec are either anglophone or francophone, but I do not think early childhood centres are subject to that same requirement.

If I open a home-based daycare, does it have to be francophone or may I offer services in other languages? I would like to hear your thoughts on that.

[Ghislaine Saikaley]

I do not have any information on that, unfortunately. I am not sure if some of my colleagues might.

[Mary Donaghy, Assistant Commissioner, Policy and Communications Branch, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages]

Thank you, Ms. Saikaley.

Ms. Lapointe, thank you for the question.

Together with the Quebec Community Groups Network, or QCGN, we have started looking into these matters in detail in Quebec. We are seeing how Quebec differs from the other provinces that have a francophone minority population. You already saw this in the report that Mr. Fraser tabled last November. In francophone communities outside Quebec, early childhood is important to a young child's francophone identity. It is a way to connect young children to the francophone community, in the hope that they will continue to be educated in the French-language system, deepen their knowledge of French, and acquire a francophone identity.

As to the situation in Quebec, the dynamics are completely different. Identity issues are neither fundamental nor a priority. In the education sector, the situation is different in Quebec.

We have started to understand, however, that there is a link between language and health and well-being in the case of young anglophone children in Quebec. In smaller anglophone communities—I am not referring to Montreal—there is socio-economic pressure. The discussion of early childhood must reflect that context.

That is the work we have begun. We have not determined exactly when we will publish a study or a report. That remains to be determined, but we will definitely finish in the next 12 to 18 months. I expect we will come back here to talk about our findings and recommendations.

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

Thank you for that clarification. There is indeed a difference and it is important to talk about it.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Choquette, you have the floor.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank the witnesses for being here with us and for presenting their very important annual report, although it is more an account of what has been happening for some time, touching on aspects we are still working or that require further work.

In particular, you mentioned a great increase in the number of complaints related to section 91 of the act, as regards the linguistic classification of positions.

In this regard, the Radio-Canada journalist Catherine Lanthier wrote an article about French being in decline in the federal public service. Roughly translated, it says:

The current situation in the public service is causing dissatisfaction at all levels, including the highest levels, according to an internal report obtained by Radio-Canada under the Access to Information Act.

Moreover, the article quotes the following remark that was heard in the public service:

Not a word of French is spoken at certain deputy ministers' committees.

The article also quotes the following report excerpt:

A new deputy minister arrived who spoke only English. From one day to the next, all the assistant deputy ministers stopped speaking French, even the francophones.

This is not a new concern. Even Mr. Fraser mentioned it. He sent a letter to the prime minister. He said that something had to be done, that it was urgent, and that he was getting a lot of complaints about this. Yet we still see this problem today.

I know there is a working group, headed up by Mr. Borbey and Mr. Mendelsohn, that is examining the language of work issue. I see differences, however, between your position, which is similar to mine, and the government's position. This is worrisome. The government said that people must be able to speak their preferred language only in regions designated bilingual, whereas in my opinion, the act very clearly stipulates what the Commissioner's office pointed out, namely, that the act “gives the right to every employee in these regions, regardless of the linguistic requirements of their position”.

Can you clarify your position? What will you do to convince the government that each employee must be able to work in their preferred official language?

[Ghislaine Saikaley]

You already mentioned the Mendelsohn-Borbey report, which we are expecting very soon. We are very eager to read its findings, the recommendations or good practices it suggests, and to see how the government will respond.

As to section 91 of the act, as I said, last spring, in view of the increasing number of complaints in this regard, Mr. Fraser wrote to the President of Treasury Board to reiterate the need to change the directive informing public servants that positions should be at least BBB in regions designated bilingual. Our position is that they should be at the CBC level.

A working group was then created. The members are still meeting and are making progress...

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

What is the name of that working group? Does it have a name?

[Ghislaine Saikaley]

No. It is made up of employees from Treasury Board and from our offices who meet regularly to discuss these issues in order to arrive at a position.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

What is there to discuss? The current competency level is BBB and that requirement has to be increased. It could be CBC. The objective is to have higher linguistic requirements. Just so everyone understands, a BBB profile is an average competency level. For your part, you would like to see higher competency levels for management positions.