Official Languages Committee on Dec. 8th, 2020

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

I call this meeting to order. Welcome to meeting number 10 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Official Languages.

The committee is meeting on its study of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the government’s ability to deliver information in both official languages.

Madam Clerk, are there any alternates, and which participants are in the room?

[The Clerk of the Committee, Ms. Josée Ménard]

There are no alternates today, and no participants are in the room.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you

I have some information for those participating virtually.

Members and witnesses may speak in the official language of their choice. Interpretation services are available for this meeting. You have the choice, at the bottom of your screen, of either floor, English or French.

Before speaking, click on the microphone icon to activate the microphone. When you're done speaking, please put your microphone on mute to minimize any interference.

All comments by members or witnesses should be addressed through the chair.

Should members need to request the floor outside their designated time for questions, they should activate their mike and state that they have a point of order.

If a member wishes to intervene on a point of order that has been raised by another member, they should use the “raise hand” function. This will signal to the chair that they want to speak. Their name will then be added to a speaker's list. To raise your hand, click on “Participants” at the bottom of the screen. When the list pops up, you'll see next to your name that you can click on the “raise hand” button.

When speaking, please speak slowly and clearly.

Unless there are exceptional circumstances, the use of headsets with a boom microphone is mandatory for everyone participating remotely.

Should any technical challenges arise, please let me know. Please note that we may need to suspend the meeting for a few minutes, since we must ensure that all members are able to participate fully.

I won't read the information usually addressed to those participating in person, because no one is in the room.

Should you wish to raise a point of order, please activate your microphone, and indicate to me clearly that you wish to raise a point of order.

With regard to a speaking list, the committee clerk and I will do the best we can maintain the order of speaking for all members.

I also want to inform the committee members that the last five minutes of the meeting will be set aside for the adoption of the committee's budget.

I now want to extend a very warm welcome to our witnesses. For the first hour, we'll be meeting with Raymond Théberge, the Commissioner of Official Languages.

Mr. Théberge, it's our pleasure to welcome you again.

We'll also be meeting with Pierre Leduc, assistant commissioner, policy and communications branch; Ghislaine Saikaley, assistant commissioner, compliance assurance branch; and Pascale Giguère, general counsel, legal affairs branch, at the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages.

Please note that I'll be using a card to let you know that you have one minute left. When I use a red card, it's like in soccer. Your time is up.

Mr. Théberge, you have the floor for seven and a half minutes to give your presentation.

[Raymond Théberge, Commissioner of Official Languages, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon, honourable committee members.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to participate in the study on the impact of COVID-19 on the government's ability to provide information in both official languages.

Although today's meeting is taking place on a virtual platform, I would like to point out that I'm addressing you from treaty 1 territory, the traditional territory of the Anishinabe, Cree, Oji-Cree, Dakota and Dene peoples, as well as the homeland of the Métis nation. I'm happy to join you in your different territories and communities.

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Winnipeg South, MB]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Sorry, Mr. Théberge.

Mr. Duguid, do you have a point of order?

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Winnipeg South, MB]

Mr. Chair, my channel is on English and Mr. Théberge's translation is coming through at the same time as he is speaking in French. I think either the interpreters have to do something or he needs to put himself on the French channel.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Mr. Duguid.

I'll ask the clerk to help us fix this technical issue.

[The Clerk]

Mr. Théberge, you probably have an old version of Zoom. If you speak English during your presentation, please switch manually to the English channel.

[Raymond Théberge]

Okay.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Please continue, Mr. Théberge.

[Raymond Théberge]

As you know, the pandemic has greatly impacted Canadians’ lives. This unprecedented health crisis has exposed several shortcomings related to the respect of our official languages and the capacity to communicate equally in French and English.

These shortcomings didn't only happen recently, but also during several other emergency situations over the last decade.

Last April, I spoke to all the deputy ministers and official languages champions of federal institutions. I reminded them of the importance of meeting their obligations for communicating with the public and with their employees in both official languages at all times. This is essential to protect the health and safety of all Canadians.

Since the beginning of the pandemic, my office has received more than 100 complaints related to the crisis and 84 of them have been found admissible and are currently under investigation.

I also felt it was essential to better understand the problems faced by the public and to make specific recommendations for the federal government to address the gaps in communications with the public.

At the end of October, I published my report entitled “A Matter of Respect and Safety: The Impact of Emergency Situations on Official Languages.”

Some of the most striking examples that I've seen since the start of the pandemic include press conferences in a single official language; disinfectants labelled in a single official language; and briefing materials and alert emails sent to federal officials in a single official language.

My report also mentions unilingual alert messaging incidents that have occurred in previous crises such as amber or weather alerts.

Unfortunately, there are too many examples. One thing is clear: in addition to being a huge lack of respect, these deficiencies are completely unacceptable because they endanger the health and safety of the population in an emergency.

The 2,000 or so respondents to the questionnaire launched by my office last June were clear and precise: during an emergency, relevant information should be systematically provided by our leaders in both official languages, regardless of the level of government.

Some of the testimonies speak for themselves. Here are some examples.

One person expressed concern that measures regarding official bilingualism were quickly being called into question in emergencies. According to this person, whether the issue is labelling on disinfectant bottles or notifications from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, or RCMP, regarding dangerous situations, speed takes precedence over accessibility for Canadians in official language minority communities.

Another respondent told us that in a crisis, it was necessary for him to obtain communications in the language of his choice. He told us that in a state of stress, fatigue and crisis, it was quite possible that his capacity to understand a second language was weak, and that he might miss information that put his life at risk.

There will certainly be other emergency situations, but the problems of that witness must not be repeated. In my report, I propose solutions to the federal government to address the recurring problems of communicating with the public in both official languages in emergency situations. I find that in emergency situations, many federal institutions choose to provide a response immediately in only one official language and rely on translation to provide information in the other language. While I understand the need to communicate quickly in an emergency, it should never be at the expense of any of our official languages.

I therefore recommended that the government implement an action plan to facilitate the drafting and simultaneous delivery of emergency communications of equal quality in both official languages. This could include the establishment of an accelerated translation service for emergencies and crisis situations.

Another issue is that communications aren't integrated into the emergency preparedness and crisis management planning of institutions. Timely, clear and factual information isn't routinely provided in both English and French at the same time.

Formal plans and procedures should be amended to include clear directives to ensure that communications of equal quality are issued in both official languages simultaneously in emergency situations.

All managers and public servants involved in emergency or crisis communications should be trained to implement emergency communications plans and guidelines in both official languages.

Canadians expect to receive bilingual communications from their leaders in emergencies. These communications may come from all levels of government.

I therefore recommended that the federal government develop a strategy to encourage and support the various levels of government and to work with them to integrate both official languages into communications in emergency or crisis situations.

I believe that with this report, federal institutions now have the tools to address gaps when it comes to communications in both official languages in emergency situations. I urge them to implement in the coming months the measures I propose in order to make concrete progress in communications in both official languages.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Mr. Théberge, sorry, but you have 30 seconds left. Actually, your time is up. You've given your presentation, and my colleagues have read it. You'll have the opportunity to speak again during the question period.

I now want to give the committee members the opportunity to ask questions. Each member will have six minutes. Mr. Généreux will ask the first question.

Mr. Généreux, you have the floor.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Théberge, it's always a pleasure to welcome you to our committee. In April, you said that you contacted the official languages champions of all departments along with the deputy ministers.

Does this mean that they didn't listen to you?

[Raymond Théberge]

At first, we noted obvious shortcomings in a number of situations involving press conferences and communications. However, after we took action, there were some improvements. Remember that our report not only addresses the COVID-19 pandemic, but also emergencies in general.

Clearly, in emergencies, the government isn't equipped to meet the information needs of Canadians in both official languages.

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

Sorry, I'll stop you right there.

In recent weeks, we've met with witnesses, including Stéphanie Chouinard from Queen's University in Kingston. She literally called into question the automatic response of the government, regardless of the party in power, which seems to consider official languages a nuisance rather than a reality or an obligation. Quite frankly, I just about fell off my chair when she said that. If the government operates in this manner, no wonder it's so difficult to comply with the Official Languages Act.

I'll tie this in with the modernization of the Official Languages Act. Should we make sure that the new act includes parameters for emergencies in Canada?

[Raymond Théberge]

The preamble to a modernized act, for example, could certainly specify the circumstances in which the act applies. Right now, the Official Languages Act doesn't apply to labelling. A labelling act focuses on private businesses.

I have something to say about the automatic response issue. In my presentation, I was about to say that the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages celebrated its 50th anniversary and that, over those years, we've recorded 56,000 admissible complaints. In my opinion, this shows that we're still having a great deal of difficulty ensuring that federal institutions meet their obligations.

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

I'm troubled to hear that.

You said that you've received about 100 complaints since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, and that 84 of these complaints were being investigated. How are these complaints related to each other?

Is the issue still the safety of Canadians, or is it government communications?

[Raymond Théberge]

The complaints certainly focus a great deal on government communications. They also relate to the language of work of public service employees. For example, some people complain about emails or directives sent in only one official language.

During the pandemic, we saw an increase in the number of complaints from workplaces. Remember that there's a very strong link between the language of work and the language of service delivery. There must be consistency between part IV and part V of the Official Languages Act.

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

I try to look at the past and think that we can do better in the future. What can we include in the new legislation that would prevent what we just went through from happening again? We were hoping that this bill would be introduced before Christmas, which won't be the case. We're talking about a white paper, and we no longer know when it will be tabled.

This time, the issue is a pandemic. However, it could be an earthquake that hits the entire country or a tsunami—although that would be surprising. In short, you understand that there could be a national emergency other than a pandemic. In this case, we've had some real issues in terms of government communications, given the lack of an automatic response when it comes to official languages.

How can this type of automatic response be included in the act? Do you think that it's possible?

[Raymond Théberge]

In this new legislation—which we're still waiting for —there must be consistency between the different parts.

Moreover, some parts of the act don't contain any regulations governing them, such as part V, which relates to the language of work, and part VII, which relates to community development. Without regulations, it's much more difficult to clarify expectations and objectives.

A modern act should apply in all cases. One way to ensure this is to include provisions in the preamble, for example, or to set out recommendations.

It will also be necessary to think about ways to give more teeth to the act.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Mr. Théberge.

Thank you, Mr. Généreux.

Mr. Arseneault, you now have the floor.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Théberge. It's always a pleasure to welcome you to our committee.

I'll refer to the report that you wrote regarding the lack of communication in both official languages during the pandemic. You made three recommendations. It would take too long to address them one by one. I have only six minutes, and our chair is extremely strict about time.

I think that the third recommendation raises many issues in terms of enforceability. You're asking that the federal government, which has a great deal of expertise in official languages, develop a strategy to encourage and support the different levels of government. This means the provinces or maybe the municipalities.

You received complaints. Whether the communications concern forest fires, a pandemic, health or anything else, we must be able to understand them in our mother tongue. It's the language that we automatically favour.

What do you think of the federal government's encouragement towards the other levels of government?

[Raymond Théberge]

I'll provide a concrete example.

The national public alerting system is an initiative involving federal, provincial and territorial stakeholders, along with all emergency measures organizations. In this context, a forum is useful. By the way, the forum created in this area will likely be introduced soon. This forum will facilitate discussions between the provinces, territories and federal government.

We need to know how the federal government can use its expertise to ensure that alerts—such as Amber Alerts, forest fire warnings or alerts related to climate emergencies—are provided in both official languages.

Some progress is already being made. A test of the alert system took place last week. We noted that the alert was provided in both official languages, except in Saskatchewan and Alberta.

However, all stakeholders must work together. The system is extremely complex. I should add that it isn't just up to the federal government to address this situation. The provinces, territories and emergency measures organizations must also play a role, not to mention private sector providers.

The issue affects all Canadians. Keep in mind that an alert provided in both official languages will be understood by 98% of Canadians.

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

Amber alerts are a good example. As you may recall, last year, in Gatineau, we received a tornado alert in both official languages on our cell phones.

Do you think that the provinces and territories are open to the idea of working with the federal government, as encouraged?