Evidence of meeting #8 for Official Languages in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was pandemic.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Thank you, Mr. Dalton.
We will continue with Mr. Duguid, who will have the floor for five minutes.
November 26th, 2020 / 4:40 p.m.
Liberal
Terry Duguid Liberal Winnipeg South, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to our guests for their excellent presentations this afternoon.
A number of our speakers today have mentioned and emphasized the word "proactive", and I couldn't agree more. While we are in the middle of a pandemic of a magnitude we haven't seen in a century, we know there are floods, ice storms and other disasters coming our way. In Manitoba where I live, many southern Manitoba communities are either entirely or majority francophone, and I don't think they're getting the information they need during these very difficult times.
In his report the commissioner recommended that one option for enhancing the federal government's ability to respond to the act would be to establish an expedited translation service for emergency or crisis situations. Again, this entity could be ramped up quickly and then could be ramped down quickly depending on the situation. I wonder if any of our speakers would have a perspective on that.
4:45 p.m.
Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Royal Military College of Canada and Department of Political Studies, Queen's University, As an Individual
From the perspective of someone who works for the federal government, because I work at Royal Military College and I know what translation may look like and how long it can take in the federal public service, I think the official languages commissioner's idea is great and could definitely serve in a time of a pandemic, or different type of crises like floods. Generally speaking, outside of pandemics, translation services could be enhanced across the board in the federal public service.
4:45 p.m.
Professor, Faculty of Law, Common Law Section, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
I would add as well that Canada is blessed with probably some of the best translators in the world, and to mobilize them in an emergency, I think, just makes common sense. Increasing their capacity to function and deliver their work to the federal government is a crucially important idea. Again it requires, I would think, amendments to the Official Languages Act to include sections on emergencies so that this imperative would be made crystal clear in the act.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Terry Duguid Liberal Winnipeg South, MB
I'm not sure how much time I have, but maybe I'll get a last comment and response from those of you who want to respond.
I'm from Manitoba, which is majority English, of course. All the daily briefings, as someone has noted, have been in English. Even Radio-Canada asks their questions in English, which is interesting. I'm very concerned that the Franco-Manitoban community is not being served well. It has implications for the health and safety of those who speak French, which is often their only language. We have personal care homes that are entirely French. We have the Saint Boniface Hospital that is French in nature. We have limited jurisdiction as a federal government. I wonder if any of you would have any comments on that, because we can only go sometimes where the provincial government will allow those kinds of partnerships. Some of our provincial governments are focused on austerity and not on expanding services, but contracting them.
May I have a comment from any one of you?
4:45 p.m.
Postdoctoral Fellow, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
I'll respond.
Thank you for your question, Mr. Duguid.
You have to understand that official languages must not be subject to austerity considerations. Government develops budgets for the delivery of services, which should include services in both official languages where the legal framework provides. We would obviously like the broadest variety of services and communications possible to be accessible, even where legal frameworks aren't as robust.
The federal government's role is to set an example. If, despite its language obligations, the federal government is unable to provide the minimum of what is required under the act, the provinces might consider that they're also free to do what they want with respect to their own language obligations.
The provinces and territories have limited ability to discharge their responsibilities, but, by setting an example, the federal government could induce those governments to be more generous and proactive.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Thank you, Mr. Duguid.
I now turn the floor over to Mr. Beaulieu for two and a half minutes.
Go ahead, Mr. Beaulieu.
4:45 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
I'd like to go back to Mrs. Cardinal's response. From what I understood, the issue of services during the pandemic is, above all, a governance issue. Consequently, if the language planning model isn't changed and French continues to decline in and outside Quebec, we may still be able to provide more services in the minority official languages by improving governance.
I recently read one of Mrs. Cardinal's articles, and I'd like to know if her thinking is still the same. She writes:
In these conditions, the future of French in North America is being determined in Quebec because it is the only francophone state on the continent. Its survival will likely depend on either the creation of a sovereign francophone state or a redefinition of Canadian federalism in which the territorial principle plays a larger role.
Do you still think that, Mrs. Cardinal?
How does that apply to the subject before us?
4:50 p.m.
Emeritus Professor, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu.
To answer your first question, I've never questioned the type of language planning behind the official languages model in Canada. The issue in the present instance, which is a crisis management situation, is governance. In all circumstances, we have the Official Languages Act the other acts, whether we're talking about a territorial or a personalistic regime. The prevailing acts will not necessarily improve the situation. The problem is that these acts don't mesh with each other. That's why I say we're facing a governance issue. You get the impression that there's the Official Languages Act on the one hand and all the others on the other and that there's no connection between the two. That's really important.
4:50 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
I agree with you, but it will be hard to apply that to reality if there are fewer bilingual people, fewer anglophones who speak French and simply fewer francophones.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Pardon me, Ms. Cardinal.
Mr. Beaulieu's time is up, but he can come back and finish what he wants to say in the next round. Two and a half minutes go by quickly.
Ms. Ashton, you have the floor for two and a half minutes, please.
4:50 p.m.
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm taking this opportunity, first, to give notice of a motion. I'd like to table the following notice of motion with the committee for debate at its next meeting:
That the committee invites the Minister of Official Languages to appear to update the committee on her commitments in her mandate letter, notably the progress made with regards to the modernization of the Official Languages Act, to make sure that Air Canada provides fully bilingual services to its customers, and to strengthen the powers of the Commissioner of Official Languages.
Now I would like to address something that's very important to me both personally and politically. Yesterday was International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women. The committee must speak out, and its members must set their political differences aside and clearly state that the cartoon that was published in La Presse on November 20 last, in which the member for Saint-Laurent is shown being slapped by a line of people, was unacceptable. Violence against women is a serious scourge that kills thousands of women and girls in Canada and around the world.
Consequently, Mr. Chair, I want to give notice of the following motion: That, while reiterating its support to freedom of speech and to freedom of press, the committee:
a) Recognizes that despite differences in political vision from parties and Members of Parliament, must debate in a respectful climate;
b) Condemns misogyny and violence against women in all its forms;
c) Condemns the cartoon published in La Presse on November 20th, in which the MP for Saint-Laurent is drawn being subject to violence.
Mr. Chair, I request the committee's unanimous consent to debate immediately and quickly adopt this very clear motion.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Thank you, Ms. Ashton.
First of all, I note your first motion, which you have introduced for debate at the next meeting.
As you know, however, according to internal administrative rules, the committee may not discuss or debate a motion until 48 hours after the motion is introduced.
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
Mr. Chair, with all due respect, I also requested unanimous consent, and I am making my request in that context.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
I will suspend for a few minutes, ladies and gentlemen, and then come back.
5 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
We will resume our study.
Ms. Ashton, as time is passing, you have 30 seconds left. I wanted to tell you that the first motion you introduced is a notice, whereas the second is a request for consent to continue.
Consequently, I would ask the committee whether it agrees to debate Ms. Ashton's motion. We require unanimous consent.
5 p.m.
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
To clarify matters, I would like to say that the motion was sent as I was speaking.
