Official Languages Committee on March 21st, 2024

[Alexandre Silas]

Absolutely. There are major retention issues in the federal public service. We're talking about investing in the vitality of both official languages, and also in the recognition of indigenous languages in the federal public service. Yes, it's an investment, but a significant one. It will lead to a better quality of service for Canadians in the official languages.

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

The PSAC has been very clear on the importance of recognizing and valuing indigenous languages in the public service. Advocacy groups say there are barriers to learning French in marginalized communities, in parts of, say, western Canada where I am, and particularly in indigenous communities.

How do we fix this? How do we address the systemic gaps in language training so that we can strengthen bilingualism in the civil service, so that we can also value what indigenous language-speaking public servants or potential public servants could bring to the table? Do you have any recommendations?

[Alexandre Silas]

Absolutely.

There was a joint study between the employer and the union that showed that there are hundreds of workers in the federal public service who use an indigenous language in writing or orally every day to serve the communities that they're in. This is something they have to do. This is something they need to do to communicate with these communities, and it's not being recognized at all. It's not included in the bilingualism bonus, which needs to be increased. Yes, including that in the bilingualism bonus....

Let's go back to increasing opportunities for training. These are trainable skills. These are skills that people want to learn. However, there need to be more opportunities for training, and that training needs to be done in-house in the federal public service because if it's privatized, it's going to cause more problems. We need to bring that in-house.

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

Okay.

We know that workers in Canada are facing very difficult times, and we know the PSAC has always been a strong supporter of anti-scab legislation, which, of course, the NDP spearheaded in Parliament earlier this year.

I'd like to hear from you. Does the Conservative Party's position opposing anti-scab legislation historically, despite the blip we saw on the voting record just recently, worry your union membership? Also, can you speak to how important anti-scab legislation is to supporting working people, whether in the public service, the federally regulated workplace or beyond?

[Alexandre Silas]

Absolutely.

We have members on strike right now in non-public funds, CFMWS. They've been on strike for 67 days as of today. They're being replaced by scab labour from DND. Active military personnel are doing their work. Active military are being forced or being ordered to do scab labour. Of course, it's of huge concern to our members.

The largest gap in the anti-scab legislation being proposed by the federal government is that it doesn't include workers in the federal government. That definitely needs to be expanded. I think that we need to go further and pass anti-scab laws provincially, as well. The right to unionize, the right to organize and the right to strike should be protected in Canada, so legislation like this not only needs to be implemented but needs to be expanded.

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

Thank you for this clear message.

How much time do I have left, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

One minute.

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

Okay.

I'll focus again on French and English language training. You also talked about the need to bring these training services into the public service. Can you repeat that recommendation for us?

[Alexandre Silas]

Absolutely. No one knows the needs of the federal public service better than the federal public service employees. As I said earlier, in the short term, outsourcing appears to save money. However, in the long term, it actually costs Canadian taxpayers more. Providing these services in‑house, in the Canada School of Public Service, would not only help improve training and better develop bilingualism in the federal public service, but would also be a good long‑term investment for Canadians.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Mr. Silas and Ms. Ashton.

Bernard Généreux, you have the floor for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank the witnesses.

Ms. Tellier, I would first like to thank you and congratulate you on your distinguished career. I read and keep up with you. I have always considered your points of view extremely fair, even though I find that you're hard on the Conservatives in general. That's fine, however. This morning you're being hard on the Liberals. I agree that the Liberals' approach to appointments in recent years has sent the wrong message. Obviously, we'll need to address this in the future. The way that Mr. Iacono—who is speaking while I'm speaking—asked his questions earlier shows, I imagine, a type of Liberal philosophy in this area. With 40 million people living in Canada, can't we find people who are both bilingual and competent, and even trilingual in many cases?

I just hired a perfectly quadrilingual young lady in my office. Young people today are increasingly open to learning languages. In Canada, we know that parents are lining up outside for 24 hours to register their children in French immersion schools. People, especially young people, are extremely keen right now to learn English or French, especially French.

What do you think of the current Liberal philosophy of appointing people who are unfortunately not bilingual? We're a de facto bilingual country, with two founding peoples. I don't understand why this isn't automatic. How do you explain this?

[Geneviève Tellier]

I don't understand it either. When I came to Ottawa—I won't say how long ago—to this bilingual institution called the University of Ottawa, I was struck by the lack of bilingualism. I'll make a comparison with the University of Ottawa to explain how this applies to the public service. The issue still arises when it comes to conducting research and having excellent researchers who speak French. There's still this dichotomy between conducting excellent research and speaking French, on the grounds that you can't do both. However, it's a false debate.

I agree with you. Among Canada's 40 million inhabitants, there should be some bilingual people. This should be seen as an asset. I think that an educational effort should be made earlier in life. People should learn early on that we're in a bilingual country and that they need to know both languages. This should also be taught at university.

Something came to mind earlier while I was listening to a question. I would love to see the public service reach out to universities to tell them that it needs bilingual candidates, especially in public administration programs. I floated this idea on my end, but it hasn't caught on. If a person comes from a bilingual university and proves that they have taken courses in English and French, this should equate to public service language tests. It isn't complicated to implement. We just need people to think about these aspects and provide guidance on how to cut costs, make the system more effective and send a message too. I think that this message concept doesn't exist and that people work in silos. That's what happens in the federal public service. We each work on our own side, and we use French in Quebec and English in other places. That's the perception. In other bilingual institutions, the logic is much the same.

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

No doubt you have been keeping up with the discussions concerning the passage of Bill C‑13, aimed at updating the Official Languages Act, which hadn't been amended in 50 years. How will these changes strengthen bilingualism in Canada? Will the new legislation provide mechanisms to improve the situation of French in Canada?

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Please take 20 seconds to answer.

[Geneviève Tellier]

Yes. Certain appointments must be bilingual, and the commissioner has greater powers. However, as I said earlier, unless these measures are actively implemented and strong leadership is in place across the board, the situation could revert to how it was before.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Ms. Tellier.

Mr. Drouin, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

If Mr. Iacono was speaking, it's because he worked as a public servant while you were in the government, Mr. Généreux. He's still suffering the after‑effects.

Ms. Tellier, let's get back to the subject at hand. You teach public administration. I'm interested in executive performance. Do you know whether senior executives are paid for promoting both official languages in their own departments? If not, should this be factored into their performance bonus?

[Geneviève Tellier]

The short answer is that I don't know.

Bilingualism bonuses seem to pose an issue. Again, you're saying that bilingualism is an asset, not an essential skill. If the position requires bilingualism, it must be better paid. In other words, the overall salary must be improved. The federal public service needs to attract the best people, the people with the best skills.

A few years ago, I did a study for the Quebec treasury board on retaining young people in the public service. The salary isn't the main factor for them. People are in the public service for the common good, and bilingualism—meaning serving the public in both languages and promoting the use of both languages—is part of the common good. It's wrong to think that salaries or bonuses will solve everything. Bonuses were a thing of the past.

I would lean more towards better pay. Federal public service jobs must be competitive. The public service competes with the private sector, but it has its advantages. Its jobs are highly sought after and they provide major benefits in terms of both working conditions and the work that people do. People aren't there to make a profit tomorrow morning so that the company's share price can rise. People do other things, and they like that. You can count on that. If bilingualism is required to obtain these positions, yes, it costs money. If the people who want to enter the public service—and young people do—know that a good job requires bilingualism, they'll learn the other language.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Okay.

Young people want to enter the public service, but the issue is that it takes too long. The federal government is competing with KPMG and Deloitte, where young people are hired within 24 hours. In the government, it takes a long time. I feel sorry for my generation given the lack of talent right now. Talent isn't being nurtured in our young people, in the federal public administration. That's an issue. However, it's another matter.

[Geneviève Tellier]

We saw the same thing with the Quebec treasury board. We came to the same conclusions. The Quebec government has some absolutely fascinating positions, but they take 18 months to fill. In this type of situation, the government is bound to lose people.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Aside from regulations and legislation, how can the federal public service develop a corporate culture to ensure that both languages are spoken?

I'll give you a mundane example. Anglophone members of Parliament come here. They take courses in French. On top of that, they'll spend an evening in French and have fun speaking French. Yes, they may make a mistake or two, but no one judges them. Do you know whether any managers organize French‑speaking days in the office, even though a team is made up entirely of English speakers?

[Geneviève Tellier]

Yes, that can work. I think that it's a matter of setting an example. If you believe in it and manage a team, the message will get through. Again, the example must be set at the highest levels.

I'll share a personal anecdote. When I was a student, I did internships. I was offered an internship at the Department of Finance, here in Ottawa. I had the choice between this internship in Ottawa and an internship at Hydro‑Québec. I chose Hydro‑Québec because I was told that, in Ottawa, on Wednesday mornings, people spoke French in the department. I figured this meant that, for the rest of the week, they spoke only in English. The Hydro‑Québec internship was in Rouyn‑Noranda, not in Quebec City or Montreal. The bottom line is that, for relatively similar positions, the language aspect came into play. I didn't realize this at the time.

You can have activities to promote French. However, if you don't believe in them and you're simply doing them out of obligation, it won't work. The key is not to be a francophone, but rather a francophile.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Absolutely. That's why I'm saying that, beyond the regulations, beyond the act, how do we develop this organizational culture?

[Geneviève Tellier]

I think that if your recruitment process makes it possible to recognize these Francophiles, that is to say not those who can speak French, but rather those who show a sensitivity towards French, you will enrich your workplace and the lives of your employees.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you very much, Ms. Tellier.

Mr. Beaulieu, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.