Official Languages Committee on Feb. 9th, 2022

[Raymond Théberge]

So the answer is no. We haven't met with the minister.

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

Okay.

It's fairly disappointing to hear that.

Last week, the Minister of Immigration held a press conference entirely in English.

The issue of francophone immigration doesn't seem to be a priority for the government, nor does meeting with you or taking immediate action.

I'd like to ask a quick question about targets.

The recommendations to raise the targets to 7% have not been acted upon.

What is your position on increasing these targets?

[Raymond Théberge]

Obviously, the immigration target needs to be raised. In fact, regardless of whether the exact target is 6%, 7%, or 8%, it has to be increased if we want to maintain the demographic weight between communities.

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada is the largest immigration player in Canada. There are agreements with the provinces, and some of them have a much greater role to play in the selection of immigrants.

When it comes to francophone immigration outside Quebec, one of the main players is Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Mr. Commissioner and Ms. Ashton.

We'll now move on to the questions of our [Technical difficulty—Editor].

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thank you so much.

I think to balance it, I will ask my questions in English, so we have both official languages.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Ms. Gladu, could you please mute your microphone?

The next question is from Mr. Dalton.

Mr. Dalton, you have five minutes.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Mr. Commissioner, thank you for your comments.

The Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages and the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie‑Britannique won their case before the Federal Court of Appeal, against Employment and Social Development Canada regarding employment contract agreements. The court stated that the federal government had failed to meet its linguistic obligations.

How should the new Official Languages Act address this problem?

[Raymond Théberge]

I'll come back to the answer I gave earlier.

The current version of the bill doesn't overturn the Gascon decision, in relation to the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique. However, the Federal Court of Appeal's decision overturns the Gascon decision.

However, if we want to ensure that Part VII of the act has much more effect, it would be really interesting to include in the bill some of the principles identified by the Federal Court of Appeal.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Does this decision have any negative repercussions?

[Raymond Théberge]

I don't see anything negative, I only see something positive.

Of course, the other part of the judgment dealt with Part IV, but it's not at all the same thing. The Federal Court of Appeal didn't overturn the lower court's decision. However, the Federal Court of Appeal decision really reinforced the principles at the heart of Part VII of the act. This reinforces the intent of Parliament at the time Part VII was developed. This is extremely important.

I think we need to build on this in the next version of the act. We'll probably have to add a regulation. This is definitely worth considering in the coming days or months.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Thank you.

Do you think the government could have been proactive on this issue?

[Raymond Théberge]

Since it was the other party in the trial, the government could obviously have withdrawn from the appeal. That being said, it's somewhat ironic because the government itself doesn't want to defend the Official Languages Act. If it had chosen to withdraw, it would have saved us three years.

However, I think that this is now part of the rule of law. A clear decision has been made, and in my opinion, this clarity is essential to ensure that Part VII of the act can support the vitality and development of our communities.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Would it be a good idea to strengthen the linguistic obligations of other positions, in addition to those of the Governor General and Lieutenant Governors and, if so, what are those positions?

[Raymond Théberge]

My position on this is quite simple: I believe that every important leadership position across the federal government should be filled by people who can speak both official languages, be it the president and CEO of the Canadian Museum of History or other Governor‑in‑Council appointments. This is extremely important because it sets an example.

If we don't set an example, we give others permission not to hire bilingual people in their organizations. Leadership leads by example, and it starts at the top.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Mr. Commissioner.

Ms. Kayabaga, you now have five minutes.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd also like to thank the commissioner for being with us to take part in this discussion.

Mr. Commissioner, I first want to ask you about your 2020‑21 report, which shows a decrease in the total number of complaints in 2018 compared to previous and subsequent years.

What do you think led to this decrease? What can the government do to keep the number of complaints at this level or lower?

[Raymond Théberge]

The number of complaints depends on the citizens. We don't necessarily know why there was a decrease that year. Complaints often come in waves and are influenced by what is happening in the environment.

This year, for example, we have already received over 5,500 complaints, which is five times the norm. If we look at the evolution over a 10‑year period, we see that the average was previously 500 complaints per year, whereas now it's around 1,000 complaints per year. As a result, the number of complaints has doubled.

This year, the number of complaints is exceptional, but it shows that Canadians are responding to certain events. They react viscerally when they feel their language rights have been violated. Sometimes we receive more complaints, sometimes less. I don't have a specific explanation for the decrease in complaints in 2018. That said, I can tell you that this year has made up for that.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Okay. I would like to add something about what my colleagues mentioned about international students and francophone immigration. The Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration is currently conducting a study on international students from francophone countries. The minister is also prepared to appear before the committee.

My second question is also about your report. You recommend that members of Parliament work together to pass legislation that benefits all Canadians. In this regard, what elements should be considered to achieve this objective?

[Raymond Théberge]

When bills are drafted, and I will use the example of the bill to modernize the Official Languages Act, there are basic principles on which it would be important to agree. I'm thinking in particular of the importance of official languages to the Canadian identity. It's a fundamental Canadian value that contributes to the development of our country.

It's also extremely important to recognize that official languages are part of a changing environment. We need a bill today to meet the needs not only of today, but especially of tomorrow. Society and technology are changing rapidly. Immigration has a significant impact on our country.

Official languages are part of a Canadian political project, as are multiculturalism and reconciliation. So it's important to see our work as contributing to building the nation.

That's how I see bills: as a way of consolidating our values through legislation that articulates them well.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Thank you for your answer. It highlights many of the issues on which the government has already begun a lot of work, as mentioned, as well as the issue of immigration of foreign students, which I have just talked about.

In a statement following the Federal Court of Appeal decision in Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique v. Canada (Employment and Social Development), you said that the remedies granted by the Federal Court of Appeal would have a positive and concrete impact on the vitality of all official language minority communities.

How do you think that will be achieved?

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

That is an excellent question, Ms. Kayabaga, but there is no time left for an answer.

We have just finished the second round of questions. We will now move on to the third round, in which the speaking time will be five minutes or two and a half minutes, depending on the party. I will specify the duration as each member begins.

We start with a five-minute turn.

Ms. Gladu, it's your turn.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Welcome to all the witnesses today.

In the private sector, when you want to drive a certain behaviour, you put the regulation in place. We have the Official Languages Act. You make sure everyone is aware of it, you promote it. I think people are aware of the law and what you're trying to achieve. Then you put in a consequence if they don't comply with the law.

What is the consequence if somebody does not comply with the act, for an individual or for an organization?

[Raymond Théberge]

We only deal with organizations. We only deal with federal institutions.

As I have said many times during this appearance today, currently I can make recommendations, which is what I do. I make recommendations and I can do reports. I can do special studies. However, at the end of the day, if a federal institution does not implement a recommendation, there is no real consequence.

As I mentioned earlier, there are a significant number of recommendations that are implemented by federal institutions. The issue is that very often, though, it doesn't change the behaviour of that institution, because we will get the same type of complaint from someplace else, whether it's language of work complaints or whether it's dealing with the public.

Also, it's important to keep in mind, to reference the business analogy, that the business model of government has changed a lot since the inception of the Official Languages Act.

For example, prior to 1992, Transport Canada opted—

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

I'm sorry. I have only a limited amount of time.

What do you think the consequence should be for an institution that doesn't comply with the act?

[Raymond Théberge]

First, we have to be able to have different tools. One would be the ability to negotiate binding agreements with federal institutions; and another would be the ability to give orders in terms of, "You haven't done what you were supposed to do, so this is what will happen.”

Another possibility, and this is more in line with maybe those businesses governed by federal charter, is that we could talk about monetary administrative penalties.

However, the reality is, right now, we make recommendations, and as we've received over 60,000 complaints, probably more recommendations over the years....