Official Languages Committee on Nov. 13th, 2020

[Raymond Théberge]

The situation you describe is not unusual. It is happening across Canada because of the popularity of immersion programs. Over the last five years, the number of students in immersion programs has increased by 20%. Last year, we began research into the shortage of teachers of French as a second language. We chose to do it in Vancouver because immersion is very popular there, as it is in British Columbia. In fact, it is popular across Canada. The teacher shortage is the first limitation.

Also, school boards very often try to limit enrolment. In some areas, lotteries are used to assign spaces. In my opinion, the federal government supports the teaching of French as a second language through the action plan for official languages. It has even provided funding to try to address the shortage of teachers, both of French as a second language and of French as a first language.

We must never forget the role of the provinces in education. It is extremely important. Every student must be able to receive provincially funded education. Any additional costs are often supported through education agreements. If we are not able to provide quality second-language training, it has an impact on the bilingualism rate. In fact, we can see that it has not increased much over the last seven or eight years. This is the challenge facing Canada. It makes it difficult to find bilingual personnel, whether in government, at Air Canada or anywhere else. The need for bilingual staff is phenomenal. For me, that's all about education. So we have to ask ourselves what is the best way to support second-language education.

My time is up, I think.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Commissioner.

Mr. Arseneault, you have the floor for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Since the second hour was supposed to be devoted to the estimates, I'm going to ask questions on that. However, I am tempted to ask about the modernization of the Official Languages Act. I am going to let myself be tempted one last time.

Mr. Commissioner, can you tell us briefly what your priorities are in terms of positive measures? In concrete terms, what could be those positive measures you refer to?

[Raymond Théberge]

Let me tell you about a case we have experienced previously. Let us take the example of an agreement in the media sector. We must ensure that this type of agreement takes into account the needs of the community. We must therefore consult with the community to determine what should be in the agreement in terms of support for the community. It could also be about immigration. Very specific points could be included to define how an immigration policy should go about promoting francophone immigration, for example. Things often happen a little randomly.

In light of the Gascon decision, which you are certainly very familiar with, since you are a lawyer, any measure can currently be seen as a positive measure in the context of Part VII of the Act. We really need to define very clearly and very precisely what it means for an institution to include positive measures for the community. In all of this, the missing link is often consultation with the community.

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

Thank you very much.

I will go back to the estimates.

In your preamble, before you started answering all our questions, you talked about a total budget of $21.5 million, which includes everything: salaries, activities, and so on. Just after that, you talked about funds being divided into three, including funds for the protection of official language rights. Is that part of the total budget?

[Raymond Théberge]

It's $21.5 million for everything, including tax!

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

Okay.

You specify the three areas to which these amounts are devoted in a proportion of about one-third each: the protection of official language rights, the advancement of English and French, and internal services. You say that, for the year 2020-2021, only 75% of the budget has been obtained because of the pandemic.

Is that correct?

[Raymond Théberge]

It was until now, but we will be receiving the remaining 25%.

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

So you will make it through?

[Raymond Théberge]

We will!

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

Let me ask you a hypothetical question. You are suggesting that we give more powers to administrative tribunals. Have you considered what the best possible budget could be to modernize the act in accordance with your recommendations?

[Raymond Théberge]

We have not allocated any amounts; nothing like that. It is very difficult to conceive of the needs of an organization, given the little information we have on future decisions. If I am told that my 18 recommendations will be implemented, I can work towards that. If there is a regulatory framework on active offer, if there is a regulation on Part V or a regulatory framework for Part VII, it is clear that this will add tasks, but it is too early to predict those things.

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

Okay.

I see I have about 30 seconds left.

If you had a recommendation to make for this year or on the budget that will be adopted later, what would it be? It's a hypothetical question, since we are still in a pandemic.

[Raymond Théberge]

In my opinion, we should have the opportunity to review our activities and submit any given project to Treasury Board, for example. I am not talking about funding for current programs; I am talking about funding for new programs. I think we need to think about that.

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

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

We will go to Mr. Beaulieu for two and a half minutes.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

It is indeed difficult to limit the discussion to the budget.

Mr. Commissioner, you say that the planned spending for the advancement of English and French for 2020-2021 is $7.1 million, 33% of the total budget. Does this amount include activities to promote the official languages? Can you give us some examples and tell us what it would mean in Quebec?

[Raymond Théberge]

In concrete terms, the regional offices do the promotion in schools and federal institutions. Staff from our Montreal office give presentations in anglophone and immersion schools. They also work with the Quebec Federal Council. They travel to various regions of Quebec, to the remote communities in the north, for example. Those sorts of promotional activities happen in every province, whether in Manitoba, Saskatchewan or anywhere else.

We are trying to reframe the promotion so that we can speak more to the majority. We used to talk about promoting linguistic duality, but now it is important to address both majorities and minorities. We often talk among ourselves, but it is important to talk to others as well.

We also have research projects, specifically on immigration and on section 91. Those sorts of promotional activities bring up issues or themes that we can shed light on or pay special attention to. In the past, we had promotional items, booths at conferences, for example, with a view to better promoting linguistic duality.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Basically, in Quebec, you mostly promote more services in English.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Mr. Beaulieu has only 15 seconds left.

Mr. Commissioner, I'm asking for a short answer, please.

[Raymond Théberge]

We promote the official languages and linguistic duality.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you very much for your co-operation.

Ms. Ashton, you have the opportunity to ask Mr. Théberge the final questions.

You have two and a half minutes.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Mr. Commissioner, the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada has published a series of recommendations, and we would like to focus on one of them, which we have addressed today. The lack of a central agency within the government to enforce the Official Languages Act enables the various departments to pass off the responsibility to each other.

Who do you think should ultimately be responsible for applying the act?

[Raymond Théberge]

We are very conscious of the fact that the governance of the Official Languages Act is shared within the federal government. Parts IV, V and VI are primarily the responsibility of the Treasury Board. Part VII falls under the Department of Canadian Heritage, but that is mainly about coordination.

As to where the best place is, some questions need to be answered first. Clearly, there is a need for a central agency. Is it Treasury Board or the Privy Council? That kind of thinking needs to continue.

In 2003, there was a minister responsible for official languages, the Honourable Stéphane Dion. He was supported by a committee of deputy ministers to make sure that the Official Languages Act was implemented.

The concept of shared responsibility does not work very well within the government. It is therefore important to clearly define the roles and responsibilities of this agency, to ensure good stewardship of the Official Languages Act and to ensure that action is taken quickly when there are setbacks.

It is therefore up to Parliament to decide on where good governance of the official languages can best be ensured.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

To manage the processing of complaints, would an administrative tribunal allow you to focus on promoting and protecting official languages in Canada?

What would such a tribunal look like?