Official Languages Committee on Nov. 26th, 2020

[Stéphanie Chouinard]

Thank you, Mr. Généreux.

I think Ms. Lalonde was headed in the right direction.

We had a lot of examples in Ontario, especially at the start of the pandemic. The information coming from the Ontario government wasn't available in French on various matters. The Franco-Ontarian population, educated or not, young, old or whatever, tuned in to Radio-Canada and listened to François Legault's press conferences. It was really a problem. People had to search for the right information, local information, elsewhere than on Radio-Canada.

In the article that Mr. Normand and I wrote, we limited ourselves to the official languages. However, we also noted that information in other languages, including indigenous languages, as in Ms. Echaquan's case, was part of the health and public safety equation. I realize, however, that this aspect is outside the committee's jurisdiction.

The fact that health is a provincial jurisdiction was brought up several times. So what can the federal government do to clarify information and communications?

I realize that no member of the Green Party sits on the committee, but I'd like very briefly to review a proposal of the Green Party's new leader, Annamie Paul. She claims that the federal government could have acted as a leader and tried to encourage the provinces to cooperate more effectively and to coordinate their initiatives to clarify communications with and responses to the public. I think it would be worthwhile to focus on that proposal, even though I know the federal government doesn't want to encroach on areas of provincial jurisdiction. It would nevertheless have been appropriate to establish a central point where information from all provinces and territories could have been available in both official languages, for example.

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

You mean information from Canada, not necessarily from Quebec, don't you?

I'm going to tease Mr. Beaulieu a little. That means that Quebec was useful to the rest of Canada. He must be happy about that, of course. That's just a joke.

You've just told us something essential, and that the ability to communicate in both official languages at any time and in any place, particularly in the health sector, is essential to Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Mr. Généreux.

Pardon me, Ms. Chouinard, but time is up.

Ms. Martinez Ferrada, you have the floor for four minutes.

[Soraya Martinez Ferrada, Liberal, Hochelaga, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I also want to thank all the witnesses here present. As my colleague Mr. Blaney said, it's really fascinating to hear you on these issues.

Ms. Chouinard, I'd like to go back to the topic of health and the question my colleague Ms. Lalonde asked. I'd like to give you an opportunity to say more about the subject without asking you the same question again.

There are federal-provincial working groups in all departments and therefore cooperative meetings with all the provinces. On the one hand, how can we go beyond that cooperation, and, on the other, what more can we do apart from set an example?

I'd also like to return to another point that Ms. Cardinal or Mr. Larocque discussed, the autopilot issue. I think that raises the question of organizational culture change in our vision of official languages.

Looking beyond legislation, how do we do that? How do we begin this culture change so that it becomes something innate in our government?

I have a final question for you. You said that all leaders in prominent positions, such as that of chief health officer, should be bilingual. As you know, our government has demanded that judges be bilingual. In prominent positions such as those, you have to be able to understand what people say and to express yourself adequately so that everyone clearly understands one another.

Do you think that senior officials and managers should also be bilingual?

[Stéphanie Chouinard]

Yes, the discussion about judges has been going on for a long time. In the bill introduced by Alexandrine Latendresse, the NDP reemphasized how important it is for parliamentary officials to be able to speak to Canadians in both official languages.

However, I think the fact that the position of chief public health officer of Canada is not designated bilingual is an anomaly, particularly in view of everything we've seen since last March.

Are there any other positions that have flown under the radar and that should be designated bilingual? I can't name them today, but there probably are some. I think it goes without saying that Supreme Court justices must be bilingual. It's important that you examine that issue, particularly in the context of the pandemic.

[Martin Normand]

If I could—

[Soraya Martinez Ferrada, Liberal, Hochelaga, QC]

Pardon me for interrupting, Mr. Normand.

I would just like us to address the issue of organizational culture change.

[Martin Normand]

That's exactly what I was going to discuss.

There's one point that we haven't yet addressed on that specific issue.

The media have published stories according to which, even in the public service, many employees felt they were losing their right to work in their language of choice during the crisis. In the midst of the emergency, once again, people had to take the easiest path, as my colleague Ms. Cardinal said earlier. They switched to English because it was simpler and easier, and that's why coordination work and multidisciplinary teamwork are thus essentially done in English.

As my colleague Ms. Chouinard said, that really stems from a lack of leadership within the public service, which was slow to catch the bilingualism wave that started in the mid-1960s. That wave requires more than just bilingual people who understand both the act and the imperatives associated with its implementation in order to ensure that French assumes its rightful place in coordination efforts, the organizational culture and cooperation with other levels of government.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you very much, Mr. Normand.

Mr. Beaulieu, you have the floor for four minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm going to let Ms. Cardinal finish the answer she had started to give.

As I said earlier, if the momentum of the Canadian language planning model continues, there will be fewer and fewer French speakers and bilingual people apart from francophones.

Will we eventually have trouble finding people to provide services in French?

[Linda Cardinal]

Thanks for your question, Mr. Beaulieu.

You're right. This opportunity that all Canadians, anglophones in particular, have to become bilingual must absolutely be maintained in Canadian society, thanks in part to the federal government. The linguistic security that francophones enjoy, particularly in Quebec, must also be enhanced.

Quebec has a key role to play in promoting French in North America. The fact that the province has prepared a guide for francophones outside Quebec is an indication of its desire to move closer to the Canadian francophonie. And that has been very well received. In addition to Quebec's leadership, the federal government also has a leadership role to play in ensuring genuine equality between English and French in Canada.

I'd like to go back to a point concerning your study. You are all working on a study report that we are eager to read. However, you mustn't forget how important it is for you to rely on research and compelling data, particularly when language is viewed as a public health and safety issue.

Much research has shown that patient safety is essential. Provincial governments have stressed the importance of patient safety. With regard to official languages, we can show that francophone patients in minority communities may be misdiagnosed if they are not served in their language.

In a minority setting, it can make all the difference if patients can speak to their physicians in French rather than English. For example, if a francophone says he has "mal au cœur", other francophones will know that means nausea. But if he says it to an anglophone doctor, the latter may hear the word "coeur" and think he's having a heart attack. The result may be a misdiagnosis.

Major mental health issues may soon appear, and we must ensure that people get care. Communication is fundamentally important in the health field. It must be clear; people must be able to understand.

Research has also shown that language is very important during post-treatment convalescence. It is one of the conditions for healing. When we say that language is a public health and safety issue, we have research-based examples that show the language issue cannot be taken lightly.

Getting back to Ms. Martinez Ferrada's question, the action plan must include a francophone lens and a culture change across all of government. In previous action plans, officials opted for the interdepartmental approach, but we're going beyond interdepartmental here. Action must be taken to expand employees' ability to work in the official language of their choice, and that also means the ability of officials to work in French, as the report by researchers Borbey and Mendelsohn shows.

I invite you to review that very good report, which proposes promising ways to improve the situation and clearly shows that there's a sociopsychological dimension to the situation of French. For example, some francophone federal employees are afraid to speak French because they think they won't be able to earn promotions.

What public service employees can do, for example, is write reports in French first and then translate them into English. Thanks to artificial intelligence, it takes three minutes to translate a report from French into English. If the report is drafted in French, it will also take three minutes to translate it into English.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you very much, Ms. Cardinal.

Ms. Ashton, you now have the floor for four minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Larocque, Ms. Cardinal and Ms. Chouinard, you came and presented a brief to the Standing Committee on Official Languages during our last study on the modernization of the Official Languages Act in 2018 and 2019.

The committee has prepared a report on the subject, and we think the time for consultation is over; the government must act. My impression is that the white paper is a stalling tactic designed to delay tabling of the bill. In fact, government members essentially confirmed in the House yesterday that there will be a new round of consultations.

How would you characterize the work the committee has done on modernizing the act? Do you think the consultation was enough for the government to table a bill? What updates might be necessary in view of the health crisis?

Mr. Larocque, do you have any comments on the subject?

[Dr. François Larocque]

I think the consultations already conducted are more than enough to prepare a bill. The government has in hand all the data it needs to prepare a bill that could be properly debated in Parliament.

It's obviously important to take into account what we're discussing this evening. Studies such as the one Ms. Cardinal and I are preparing and the one that Ms. Chouinard and Mr. Normand are writing are also very important and will help fuel the discussion.

However, I don't think the publication of a white paper should delay the tabling of a bill, if that's what you're asking, Ms. Ashton.

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

Thank you, Mr. Larocque.

Ms. Chouinard and Ms. Cardinal, can you give me your views on the subject?

[Stéphanie Chouinard]

I agree with what Mr. Larocque said. If the white paper is an opportunity to base the modernization of the Official Languages Act on a broader conversation about the place of official languages in Canada's machinery of government, then there's a significant amount of discussion to be done.

It may involve other statutes and regulations. I'm eager to see what kind of white paper Minister Joly is preparing. However, that won't prevent the modernization of the Official Languages Act. This committee and the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages have already done background work on the modernization of the act.

[Linda Cardinal]

I'm going to piggyback on what Ms. Chouinard just said.

The consultations that have been held to date and the reports that have been published are very important. What we have right now is a new political situation. When the consultations began a few years ago, the place of French in Quebec was not part of the equation.

I've said several times, and I even published it in an article in Le Devoir, that if Quebec doesn't take part in this exercise, that will confirm the fact that the Official Languages Act is an act that solely concerns the official language minority communities. However, it's a major Canadian act that concerns all Canadians, including Quebeckers.

Although we should wait a little because we want to ensure that all the parties in Canada support the new official languages bill that we introduce, we can very well welcome the white paper. It will help establish a dialogue on reforming the act. However, the one doesn't exclude the other.

The white paper will definitely be followed by an Official Languages Act. Let's hope we don't have to wait for the next election to have a new and reinforced statute.

[Martin Normand]

If I may, I'd like to add a final point to our response.

In view of the emergency situation, many federal and provincial institutions have innovated in order to act quickly. They have used new technologies to improve service delivery.

We must seize this opportunity to improve service delivery to francophones in rural areas, remote areas and largely minority areas that don't otherwise have a chance to receive their services in French. We have to seize the opportunity while continuing this discussion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you very much, Mr. Normand.

Thank you, Ms. Ashton.

That's all the time we have. I want to thank all the witnesses for being available on such short notice. Thank you for being here with us today. It was extremely interesting.

So thanks to our witnesses: Linda Cardinal, professor emeritus at the University of Ottawa; Stéphanie Chouinard, assistant professor in the department of political science at the Royal Military College of Canada and in the department of political studies at Queen's University; François Larocque, professor in the law faculty, common law section, University of Ottawa; and Martin Normand, postdoctoral fellow at the University of Ottawa.

I also want to thank all the staff here with us. I join Mr. Blaney in saying that they are doing an excellent job.

Mr. Blaney has something he wishes to add.

Go ahead, Mr. Blaney

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

I'll be very brief, Mr. Chair.

I would just like to mention that my colleague, Mr. Mazier, had some questions prepared for the witnesses that he could not ask.

Through you, Mr. Chair, I would ask if it would be possible for Mr. Mazier to send his questions to you, so he could get answers from the excellent panel of witnesses we had today?

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Exactly, Mr. Blaney. For sure.

Mr. Mazier, just send them to me or to the clerk, and we will ask the witnesses if they can reply to them.

Thanks, everyone, and I will immediately bring the meeting to an end. Good evening.

The meeting is adjourned.