Official Languages Committee on March 21st, 2018

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we are continuing our study on the issues related to the enumeration of rights-holders under section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Joining us today from Statistics Canada, we have Jane Badets, assistant chief statistician, Social, Health and Labour Statistics, and Jean-Pierre Corbeil, assistant director, Social and Aboriginal Statistics Division.

Ms. Badets and Mr. Corbeil, you will have about 10 minutes for your presentation. Then, as usual, we will have a round of questions and comments from the members of Parliament.

Ms. Badets, go ahead.

[Jane Badets, Assistant Chief Statistician, Social, Health and Labour Statistics, Statistics Canada]

Thank you.

Good afternoon. I will make my presentation in French and English.

I would first like to thank you for inviting Statistics Canada to appear today to talk about the progress in our work on the enumeration of rights-holders.

As we said at our meeting on October 3, 2017, Statistics Canada is fully committed to applying all its science and expertise to adequately and quickly respond to the need to enumerate the children of rights-holder parents under section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Consequently, Statistics Canada specifically created an advisory committee on language statistics. The list of members of this new committee was sent to you in December.

Given the many issues surrounding language statistics in Canada, the mandate of Statistics Canada's new advisory committee on language statistics is much broader than the enumeration of rights holders. However, since this issue is a priority, most of the committee's first meeting held at Statistics Canada's offices for the entire day of January 25 was dedicated to it.

In addition to the permanent committee members who were selected based on very specific skills and expertise, Statistics Canada invited three other experts as guests, who shared their expertise and knowledge of the issue to ensure that all needs regarding the enumeration of rights holders are considered.

That first meeting of the advisory committee on language statistics, which was also attended by several Statistics Canada employees, was very productive and extremely useful for our agency and all participants. A number of suggestions, comments and proposals were discussed and debated. The presentations and discussions focused most notably on the processes and timelines for the 2021 census content consultation and touched on considerations of a technical, scientific and methodological nature regarding any changes to the content and wording of questions in the census. Each of the potential questions that aim to enumerate rights-holders was then discussed and debated amongst the various experts, not only in terms of their legal and methodological implications, but also with regards to the collection strategy.

As a follow-up to that advisory committee meeting, Statistics Canada analyzed and took account of the comments and suggestions provided by the committee members in order to act quickly and work on questions to test in the 2021 census qualitative tests, which will be conducted in the spring of 2018.

As agreed and in reference to the October 3, 2017, motion by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Official Languages, a draft of the questions to be used in qualitative tests will be sent to you before March 31.

Moreover, Statistics Canada methodologists have been consulted on the enumeration of rights-holders as part of the 2021 census. A working group made up of experienced analysts and methodologists has recently been set up to ensure that the best statistical methods are used to enumerate this population in the 2021 census or, in the long term, through alternative means.

As you can see, Statistics Canada has been very proactive in this important issue, and it will continue to take its role and responsibilities very seriously. Thank you very much for your attention.

Jean-Pierre Corbeil and I will be pleased to answer your questions on the topic.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you very much, Jane.

We will now move on to questions and comments.

Mr. Généreux, go ahead.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank Ms. Badets and Mr. Corbeil for being here today.

First of all, what was the committee's influence on the decision to make this reflection. I know the answer, but I want to hear you say it.

[Jean-Pierre Corbeil, Assistant Director, Social and Aboriginal Statistics Division, Statistics Canada]

In fact, the committee did not influence Statistics Canada's decision to move forward. Statistics Canada was already moving forward thanks to the support, suggestions and advice of the committee.

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

The process was already under way.

[Jean-Pierre Corbeil]

Yes.

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

Right. I thought we had an influence. I wanted to pat myself on the back, but it doesn't matter.

[Some hon. members]

Ha, ha!

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

The expert committee that was set up has surely found potential pitfalls. I imagine that these experts have made assumptions to arrive at the right questions.

Are there minutes of the expert committee meeting? If so, could the committee know what was said? If not, could you tell us what potential pitfalls you might encounter?

I think everyone means well and has good intentions. We want to recognize as many rights-holders as possible, but for that, we must ask the right questions. There were some potential pitfalls, but we shouldn't all fall into the same trap. I imagine the experts have made suggestions to that effect.

[Jean-Pierre Corbeil]

Before this expert committee met, we submitted questions. Given the large number of people, it would have been difficult to come up with such questions at the time of the meeting. The objective was to present the various complexities of enumerating the rights-holders. Obviously, the questions submitted were debated and discussed.

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

Have the questions been submitted for consideration or could they be included directly on the questionnaire?

[Jean-Pierre Corbeil]

They were questions that could be included on the questionnaire, and we need to agree on the wording.

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

No pun intended, but you have already gone straight to the heart of the question.

You went directly to the point of whatever the question would be.

[Jean-Pierre Corbeil]

That was the main goal, since we knew it was a complex issue. We wanted the best exchanges possible. Several discussions did not go in the same direction. Perceptions were different depending on the region where someone lives in the country or according to skills. We had very enlightened opinions from legal experts. It had to be discussed.

The situation in Quebec is different from the one outside Quebec, given section 23 of the Charter of the French Language. All sorts of things were discussed.

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

I want to make sure I understand.

The committee didn't meet to decide on the relevance of having new questions on the questionnaire, but to determine what the questions would be. The committee didn't consider the relevance of questions for enumerating rights-holders.

[Jean-Pierre Corbeil]

That's correct.

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

It was already established. It is important that we know it.

[Jean-Pierre Corbeil]

It had already been recognized that it was relevant. The goal was to find the best methodology.

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

Mr. Corbeil, I don't know if you remember, but the first time we met, last year, it wasn't as clear as that on your side. Or that was the feeling I had anyway.

That's why I wanted to make you say earlier that the committee had an influence. I remember your telling us that, to add questions to a form, you had to remove others to prevent it from being too lengthy or from having too many questions.

Does this mean that you made a deliberate choice to remove some questions? That's not what I understood last time, but perhaps I misunderstood.

[Jean-Pierre Corbeil]

No. We discussed it with members of the advisory committee. The reason we put together a solid team of methodologists and skilled analysts from Statistics Canada was just to examine alternative methods.

In 2016, close to 70% of the population completed the electronic questionnaire. This raises questions about the use of the electronic or paper questionnaire. Are there new ways to use the electronic questionnaire in a way that doesn't burden the respondents? All these issues were discussed.

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

Right.

I hope my colleagues will pursue the matter of the electronic questionnaire further because it raises several other questions. This potentially opens the door to going much further on the issue of rights-holders. I don't know if the advisory committee has evaluated the possibility of looking for even more specialized questions.

[Jean-Pierre Corbeil]

We proposed a number of questions for enumeration. I think we came to a pretty clear understanding of which questions we should at least try to test.

Of course, following the advice of the members of the advisory committee, these questions have been changed. There have been discussions about whether we should take this or that direction. I think the questions we will be sending you by March 31, as agreed, actually reflect the status of the situation as a result of the discussions with the members of the advisory committee.

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

Okay. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Ms. Lapointe, you have the floor.