Official Languages Committee on Sept. 22nd, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 30 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Official Languages.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Monday, May 30, 2022, the committee is resuming its study of Bill C-13, An Act to amend the Official Languages Act, to enact the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act and to make related amendments to other Acts.

Today's meeting is in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House Order of Thursday, June 23, 2022. Members will attend in person or with the Zoom application, as we are now used to doing.

To ensure an orderly meeting, I would like to outline a few rules to follow.

Before speaking, please wait until I recognize you by name. If you're on the videoconference, please click on the microphone icon to unmute yourself. When you're not speaking, your mike should be on mute.

Interpretation is available for those of you joining us on Zoom. You have the choice at the bottom of your screen of floor, English or French audio. For those in the room, you can use your earpiece and select the desired channel.

As a reminder, all comments should be addressed through the chair.

For members in the room, if you wish to speak, please raise your hand. For members on Zoom, please use the raise hand function. The clerk and I will manage the speaking order as best we can, and we appreciate your patience and understanding in this regard.

Before we hear from our first witnesses, I would like to welcome, via Zoom, our clerk, Ms. Legault, and her assistant, Ms. Labelle.

I would now like to welcome our valiant witnesses.

Appearing in the first hour, we have the Association des collèges et universités de la francophonie canadienne, represented by Lynn Brouillette, Chief Executive Officer, and Martin Normand, Director, Strategic Research and International Relations.

We also have the Public Service Alliance of Canada, represented by Alex Silas, Regional Executive Vice-President, National Capital Region, and Rosane Doré Lefebvre, Communications Officer. They are also joining us via videoconference. Mr. Silas comes from one of the most beautiful regions in Canada, although I won't tell you what region that is.

With that said, we will begin with Mr. Normand, who will be discussing issues important to the people he represents regarding the modernization of Bill C-13.

We are listening, Mr. Normand.

[Martin Normand, Director, Strategic Research and International Relations, Association des collèges et universités de la francophonie canadienne]

Thank you very much for this opportunity.

The ACUFC welcomed this bill when it was first introduced. The fact that all federal institutions will now be required to take the positive measures they consider appropriate to ensure more opportunities for francophone minorities to pursue quality learning in their own language throughout their lives, including at the post-secondary level, is a major improvement over Bill C-32. Even more significant, institutions will now have to deliver on this commitment knowing that the federal government has acknowledged the specific situation of French in this country.

We nevertheless wish to make three suggestions for clarifying part VII with respect to cooperation with the provinces, scientific research in French and other administrative measures.

I will start with cooperation with the provinces.

Federal institutions have a duty to ensure that positive measures are taken to enhance the vitality of the francophone minorities and to support and assist their development.

However, under the new subsection 45.1(1) introduced by the bill, the federal government recognizes the importance of cooperating with provincial and territorial governments in the implementation of part VII of the act. This provision, as drafted, could be interpreted to mean that the federal government's commitment to the vitality of the minorities is subject to a sharing of jurisdictions.

We believe the federal government cannot walk away from this commitment. Its willingness to cooperate with the provinces and territories must not undermine the vitality, development or maintenance of strong institutions. Instead the bill must establish favourable conditions for developing positive measures that will have a direct and continuing impact and be effectively and equitably implemented across the country.

We suggest that every reference to cooperation with the provinces and territories be reviewed to dispel any ambiguity regarding the federal government's exercise of its spending power to enhance the vitality of the minorities. If the implementation of positive measures were to depend on cooperation with the provinces and territories, the federal government's measures might ultimately be applied unevenly if reluctant governments refused to cooperate.

Now I will discuss scientific research in French.

The official languages reform document states that the federal government wishes to support the creation and dissemination of scientific information in French. However, we feel that the wording of new subparagraph 41(6)(c)(iv) is more restrictive and less ambitious. It provides that one of the positive measures the federal institutions might take would be to "support the creation and dissemination of information in French that contributes to the advancement of scientific knowledge".

The reform document suggests that those measures would support the creation and dissemination of scientific knowledge created by the francophone research community. However, the bill implies that all types of information are considered equal and that they may come from various sources. For example, the translation into French of information produced by federal institutions could qualify as scientific knowledge, which would be redundant, having regard to what is already provided in part IV of the act, which concerns communications with the public.

We suggest that this subparagraph be reviewed to make it more consistent with the commitment expressed in the reform document. The original version was much more foundational for the post-secondary sector than the version proposed in the bill.

Turning now to other administrative measures.

A modernized Official Languages Act is not an end in itself. It is merely one piece, albeit a very important one, in the whole architecture of Canada's language regime. Other administrative measures must emerge, including two that will definitely follow from this bill.

The first such measure will be regulations establishing the terms and conditions under which the obligations set forth in part VII are to be performed. Those regulations may clarify the nature of the positive measures, the consultations they require, the accountability models respecting them, and the direct effects of government decisions. However, new subsection 41(3) does not establish a schedule on which those regulations will be made. The same possibility was introduced in the 1988 act, but no regulations subsequently emerged. We suggest that the act include a timetable for making regulations respecting part VII.

The second measure is the policy on francophone immigration. We simply want to express a wish, that the policy that is developed accommodate the international clientele of post-secondary institutions, an immigration pool that is essential if we are to achieve the objectives of the federal government's francophone immigration strategy.

Many stakeholders have great ambitions for this act, but history tells us you can never legislate on political leadership. A firm moral commitment from the political class will always be necessary. We ask you to lend substance to this commitment and to cooperate so the bill is promptly passed and we can work together on the next foundational measures that will enable Canada to progress toward substantive equality of English and French.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Mr. Normand.

Pardon me, but I forgot to inform the witnesses that they had five minutes each for their presentations. However, you didn't exceed your five minutes, Mr. Normand.

Mr. Silas, you come from a magnificent region, and you have the floor for five minutes.

[Alex Silas, Regional Executive Vice-President, National Capital Region, Public Service Alliance of Canada]

Mr. Chair, members of the Standing Committee on Official Languages, I want to thank you for your invitation to appear on the subject of Bill C-13.

My name is Alex Silas and I am regional executive vice-president of the Public Service Alliance of Canada for the National Capital Region. I am also proud to be from Acadie, the most marvellous region in the country.

PSAC represents more than 230,000 workers across Canada and around the world. Our members work in federal departments and agencies, crown corporations, universities, community service agencies, indigenous communities and airports. We represent workers who use French in the workplace, or who wish to do so, across Canada.

First of all, it is important to acknowledge that all workers have the right to speak and work in the federal public service in the official language of their choice. I believe we all agree on that. Unfortunately, although that's true on paper, improving bilingualism in the public service simply does not appear to be a priority for this government. PSAC sincerely believes that the federal government can do more to promote and protect the official languages in our institutions.

This unfair situation became more obvious during the pandemic. Most people worked at home and saw each other only virtually. It was harder for our francophone members to work during that time as a result of information sent in English only, work meetings without interpretation and managers who were unable to communicate effectively in their second language, and those are only a few examples of the language barriers that our members have reported and that were exacerbated by the pandemic.

If we want to build a dynamic, diverse and bilingual public service, we have to establish a climate in which employees can work in the language of their choice and are encouraged to do so. The federal government has a duty to provide the tools they need to get there. The Canadian public service should be a place where the employer encourages and supports bilingualism.

Bill C-13, the first major reform of the Official Languages Act in more than 30 years, is a step in the right direction, but it lacks the necessary punch to protect French in Canada or to promote bilingualism across the federal public service.

The timing is right because PSAC is currently negotiating with the Treasury Board on behalf of more than 165,000 employees. We are proposing several measures to improve bilingualism in the federal public service, in addition to new provisions for indigenous workers who speak or write in an indigenous language in the performance of their duties. With the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation approaching, we should not forget to support indigenous languages in Canada.

Raising the bilingualism bonus is one of the examples of what we're seeking at the bargaining table. The bonus has not been updated since 1977 and has remained at $800 for nearly 50 years. The government has refused to change its position despite our repeated requests that it review its policy. What's worse is that, in the 2019 report, the government even proposed to eliminate the bonus. We feel that's entirely unacceptable.

If the government really wants to support official languages, PSAC believes it must raise the bilingualism bonus to acknowledge the value of work done in both official languages and offer more language training to encourage anglophone and francophone workers to improve their second language. PSAC also proposes that an additional amount be allocated to federal workers who speak an indigenous language in order to attract and retain more indigenous workers and acknowledge their life experience.

We know from information gathered by the Joint Committee on the Use of Indigenous Languages in the Public Service that 450 federal workers use indigenous languages in the course of their work. They deserve to be recognized for the value they contribute to the federal public service.

As Parliament has taken legislative action to increase recognition of indigenous languages, the federal government, as an employer, should set an example and officially acknowledge the contributions of its employees who use indigenous languages in performing their duties.

Lastly, if the government, as the employer, truly wants to support official languages, it has a duty to make language training accessible to employees free of charge. More language training is required to encourage anglophone and francophone workers to develop their second language. We also ask that the Treasury Board stop contracting out language training and focus on creating its own training and translation program administered by public service workers who can focus on the specific requirements of the federal public service.

PSAC hopes that the government will reverse its decision and agree to the language demands we have made at the bargaining table. It is high time the employer made the right decision. We would also like the committee to take this opportunity to support official languages in the public service because Bill C-13, as currently drafted, is toothless legislation.

Thank you for your time, and I would be pleased to answer your questions.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Mr. Silas.

We will now begin a first round of questions, in which every intervention will be six minutes, with the vice-chair of this committee.

Mr. Godin, you have six minutes.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Right off the top, I'd like to let the representatives of both groups know that my remarks will be quite short, because the time allotted to us today is very limited, as it has been throughout the process regarding the modernization of the Official Languages Act.

First, I'd like to go to you, Mr. Normand. You mentioned immigration and political leadership. Does Bill C-13 meet the needs of your organization?

[Martin Normand]

We spoke out about Bill C-13 as soon as it was introduced. Generally speaking, it's consistent with our ambitions. We had issues with certain parts of BillC-32, but they were resolved by Bill C-13.

Today we suggested some amendments to clarify certain aspects, but the bill has what it takes for us to be able to move forward.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

You're satisfied the see four lines about immigration in the bill.

[Martin Normand]

Our view is that the bill sets forth the government's commitment to develop an immigration policy. We have expectations for that policy, particularly regarding the international clientele of our institutions. We want to be able to implement that policy as soon as possible so it has a foundational impact on our institutions and the communities that accept those students, and to support the federal government by helping it meet its francophone immigration targets.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Just to confirm what you're saying.

You're satisfied with the content of the bill and therefore the fact that the government will require the Department of Citizenship and Immigration to develop a plan, even though there will be no accountability, evaluation or indicators.

[Martin Normand]

We're satisfied that it states the commitment to develop a policy. That's more that an action plan.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

We're nowhere near achieving a result. The commitment to develop a policy is the most pragmatic thing, but it's good that you're satisfied.

Our objective is to ensure that the modernization of the Official Languages Act is implemented as soon as possible, but we're nevertheless going to take the time to do things right. What we want is to stop the decline of the French language in Canada, which is a bilingual country.

Do you think the bill is an adequate response to the situation and that it will start halting the decline of French once it's enacted?

[Martin Normand]

Even though we're reinforcing the act, it will be enough to stop the decline of French. The entire architecture of the Canadian language regime has to be reinforced.

A whole series of administrative measures were announced in the official languages reform document released in February 2021. We think that the act, the next action plan and the administrative measures set forth in the official languages reform document constitute a whole that could slow or reverse the decline of French.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Thank you.

I'll direct my other questions to Mr. Silas, from the Public Service Alliance of Canada.

The bill provides that employees may work in the language of their choice. However, we know that, since the anglophone majority predominates, francophones simply avoid speaking French and join that group.

How will the bilingualism bonus alter the fact that francophone employees unfortunately can't work in French? How will that promote an increase in the use of French in the Canadian public service?

[Alex Silas]

Thank you for your question.

It recognizes the work that employees do and the fact that they can speak both languages. It will also encourage more workers to take training, which must be more accessible, to improve their second language skills, and that will create a more bilingual work environment in the federal public service.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

You said in your statement that the Treasury Board should develop and offer language training that's accessible and free of charge. Can you tell me how accessible and free training will help halt the decline of the French language in Canada?

[Alex Silas]

The fact that this training is made available will stop the decline of the French language in Canada because it will be an opportunity for federal public service employees to improve their second language and thus to feel more comfortable speaking it. Francophones will speak French with their colleagues and ensure they're understood, and anglophones and allophones will be able to speak both languages and ensure they're understood too.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

What tools do we have to encourage the use of French in the public service? I know the bill offers a choice in that regard, but are there any other amendments we could make to the bill to give it more teeth?

You said the bill lacked punch. Can you help us give it a little more?

[Alex Silas]

You could raise the bilingual bonus. Incentives should be offered to promote both official languages and make training more accessible, and to ensure it's given by the federal public service, not by contractors.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Thank you, gentlemen.

We would be pleased to read and consider any other information you could provide us for the purpose of proposing amendments.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Mr. Godin.

Mr. Serré, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to both witnesses for appearing before the committee and sharing their ideas for improving Bill C-13 and helping the official language minority communities across the country to move forward.

I'll start with you, Mr. Normand.

You mentioned cooperation with the provinces and favourable conditions. You said we should review some of the policies set forth in Bill C-13. I'd like you to tell us more about that.

The provinces' jurisdiction over education and the federal government's role obviously have to be considered. Your members include many post-secondary educational institutions. Without encroaching on provincial jurisdictions, how could the federal government take part in the process without really telling them what to do?

With respect to post-secondary education, Laurentian University and Campus Saint-Jean are obviously facing some significant challenges.

Do you have any suggestions for amending the bill and helping the federal government work with the provinces?

[Martin Normand]

We obviously recognize that post-secondary education is a provincial jurisdiction. However, we also think that, given the federal government's commitment to enhance the vitality of the communities and support strong institutions across the country—that commitment is set forth in the Official Languages Act—it can nevertheless play a role in education. It can use its spending power to establish measures to support and sustain the post-secondary education sector.

Here's the concern we have regarding cooperation with the provinces. We at ACUFC have relations with seven or eight departments; we don't just work with the Department of Canadian Heritage. Positive measures could be created in a whole range of departments. They could be perceived as the responsibility of the provinces, but they would have been introduced by the federal government in the hope of contributing directly to the vitality of the communities.

If we rely too much on cooperation with the provinces in introducing positive measures, we could wind up deploying those measures unequally across the country. In other words, positive measures would apply in certain provinces, but not in others. Some post-secondary institutions would benefit from those measures, whereas others wouldn't, and the institutions would be competing with each other as a result of that uneven deployment. They won't have the same power to act if they don't have access to positive measures designed by the federal government but rejected by the provinces.

We have to develop the right vocabulary to ensure that measures are fairly deployed in cooperation with the provinces. We could come up with a mechanism to ensure the provinces are aware of the positive measures introduced so they aren't surprised. That mechanism might be a specific forum or space where the provinces and territories can discuss issues with the post-secondary institutions. In short, there has to be a better arrangement to prevent the provinces from resisting and ultimately rejecting positive measures introduced in their jurisdiction.

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

Major improvements to positive measures have been made in bills C-32 and C-13. What positive measures should we focus more on?

[Martin Normand]

Positive measures will follow from the regulations. We'll propose them once we know how a positive measure is defined. They won't be set forth in the act but rather in the action plan and other plans in the provinces. Since official languages are a crosscutting issue, they may extend beyond the scope of the action plan.

However, there's one that we can think of. A budget of $121 million over three years was promised to support post-secondary institutions, and the Liberal Party promised to double that and make it permanent. The extra step that we'd like to see would be to ensure that the mechanism for distributing that funding meets the actual needs of the institutions and isn't limited to ad hoc projects. Those kinds of projects can definitely address emergencies, but they don't have a foundational impact on the network as a whole. Consequently, we have to find the right solution so that money has the impact the federal government would like it to have within the institutions.