Official Languages Committee on March 21st, 2024

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Thank you very much.

I would like to pick up on something you said. If I understood correctly, you referred to there being some opposition between francophones and diversity. Could you elaborate on that please?

[Geneviève Tellier]

Right now, francophones sense there is a dichotomy between themselves and diversity, that is, that they cannot go hand in hand. That is often mentioned with regard to appointments. It is a question of skills once again. Diversity takes priority over francophone candidates.

Why could there not be diversity among francophones? Look at what is happening in Quebec and elsewhere. There is an extremely diverse francophone community in Toronto. I also see that in the classes I teach. I teach in both languages at the University of Ottawa, but there is more diversity in the classes I teach in French than those I teach in English.

So I challenge you to prove that there is no diversity among francophones.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Are you relating this to the Governor General?

[Geneviève Tellier]

That is the most obvious example, but not the only one. I have given you others, which are actually counter-examples.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Yes, I liked that.

I have another question, for Mr. Silas, from New Brunswick.

Welcome to you and everyone else in attendance.

Mr. Silas, you said something that I found interesting.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

You have less than 15 seconds, Mr. Samson.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

If I understood correctly, you said that if the supervisor is a unilingual anglophone, it is very likely that people will speak English only. Is that what you said? I paraphrased your remarks.

[Alexandre Silas]

Absolutely. If there are 20 people at a meeting, and just one person is speaking English, everyone will switch to English.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

That is an excellent question and I thought I would have to interrupt you, but you finished your answer just as the time ran out.

I will now give the floor to the committee's second vice-chair, Mr. Beaulieu, from the Bloc Québécois.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here.

Since I have been in Parliament, I keep hearing that the official languages are an urgent matter, but nothing seems to change.

Do you think we are making progress or slipping backwards?

My question is for everyone.

[Geneviève Tellier]

I see both. Progress is being made in the public space. Canadians are aware of language-related issues. So there is progress on that front. Further, knowledge of both official languages has increased, I would say. In Ontario for instance, French immersion schools are very popular. So there is that awareness.

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

Yet the figures from Statistics Canada show that bilingualism is increasing a lot in Quebec, primarily among francophones, but is not increasing among anglophones in the rest of Canada. Things are at a standstill.

[Geneviève Tellier]

What I meant is that people are paying attention to the issue now. That represents progress, in my opinion.

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

I agree with you regarding the public space.

[Geneviève Tellier]

On the other hand, is there any progress in the federal government? I don't think so. That said, one of the main problems is the lack of data. If I could make a recommendation to the committee, it would be to insist on obtaining the data. Sound data is essential.

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

Yet there have been a lot of studies. For a long time, Statistics Canada denied that French was in decline. Now there is some openness to this, which may be why we hear more about it in the public space. Will that last? That remains to be seen.

My next question is for the witnesses from the Public Service Alliance of Canada.

Linguistic requirements in staffing or appointment processes are something we have talked about more than once, so we have to ask why knowledge of French would not be required from the outset. As you said, Ms. Tellier, people who do not speak French are appointed to positions on the condition that they learn it, but in many cases that is not effective. So why not require knowledge of French from the outset?

Mr. Iacono asked earlier how to proceed if no candidates are found. It is a chicken and egg situation. If knowledge of French is required, people will make sure they acquire that skill. When it is not required and people can take training after the fact, that is not effective.

What do you think?

[Alexandre Silas]

I agree with Ms. Tellier that it should be an essential requirement, not a secondary one.

I would add however that people can learn French or English. That is why we are calling for more training opportunities. Public servants, whether anglophones or francophones, want more opportunities to become bilingual so they can get ahead in the federal public service.

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

I agree with you that there should be more language training. I do think that knowledge of French should be required from the outset though, because without that I am not sure any progress will be made. That is what we have seen in a number of cases, that of the Governor General in particular.

It is not just a question of learning opportunities. Some people are not good at languages and it seems to be very hard for them to learn a new language. We saw that with the CEO of Air Canada, who said he was taking French classes every day but that it was very difficult.

There is something I would like to know. When he appeared before the committee, PSAC's regional executive vice-president for Quebec said that “systemic discrimination is deeply rooted in the federal government” and that it is taken for granted that English comes first, even in Quebec.

Would you say there has been any change or do you think we are sliding backwards more than moving forward?

[Alexandre Silas]

It isn't just in Quebec. I think that this situation occurs everywhere in Canada where there are francophones. There are francophones all over the country.

Clearly, the advancement opportunities aren't equitable. Most of the advertised senior management positions are unilingual English or bilingual. Unilingual French positions don't come up very often. The same goes for training opportunities. Training opportunities are more common for anglophones who want to improve their French than for francophones who want to improve their English.

Moreover, draft documents are often sent out in English only. When francophones say that they can't comment on the drafts because the documents are only in English, they're told that the final version will be translated into French. If the drafts are only in English, it means that feedback from francophones isn't wanted.

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

We see it here in the government too. In commissions, we sometimes receive reports in English only.

If that's the way that things work in the government, we can imagine the situation in the private sector. The government is supposed to set an example.

I would like to ask another question.

The committee heard from witnesses who specialize in language training. They told us that, as you said, a centralized model was needed. They explained that, initially, the training was centralized. One school trained all public servants. Later, in order to cut costs, language training was decentralized. Since then, the various departments have been able to outsource language training. We've really seen a drop in quality in this area.

Do you agree that the old model should be reinstated, with one language school for the public service covering all departments, similar to what the Translation Bureau used to do?

[Alexandre Silas]

Yes, absolutely.

Outsourcing saves money in the short term, but studies show that costs are higher in the long term.

The Canada School of Public Service employees do important work. I think that the language training services that the school used to provide to federal public service employees should be reinstated. This training must also apply specifically to the federal public service.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Mr. Silas.

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu.

It's now the NDP's turn.

Ms. Ashton, you have the floor for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank the witnesses.

My questions are for the Public Service Alliance of Canada officials.

You spoke about the bilingualism bonus. During the negotiations with Treasury Board, you asked for a review of the bilingualism bonus directive. You specifically asked for an increase in the bonus, from $800 to $3,000.

In your opinion, why didn't Treasury Board agree to increase the bonus?

How would a review of the directive strengthen bilingualism in the public service?

[Alexandre Silas]

We all agree that $800 in 2024 isn't the same as $800 in 1977.

I think that there's a lack of will. There's a lack of desire to tangibly recognize the contribution of both official languages in the federal public service, or to acknowledge that bilingualism in the public service is vital in order to better represent and serve Canadians.

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

How can well‑paid jobs help, particularly before the hiring process, make it easier to attract and retain the bilingual employees needed in the public service?

We know that a great deal of outsourcing is taking place in the public service in general, and not just when it comes to language training. Do you think that this undermines efforts to retain bilingual employees in the public service and to encourage people to enter it?