Official Languages Committee on Dec. 9th, 2025

[Julie Boyer]

I talked a bit about that earlier. There is the power of mediation—in other words, the power to resolve an issue informally. That was added to the power given to the Commissioner of Official Languages.

He also has the option, if the issue in question is not resolved, to publish his investigation and the recommendations made to the entity concerned by a complaint.

In addition, he has the power to impose a compliance agreement on government organizations subject to the act. For example, if a department repeatedly fails to meet its official languages obligations, the Commissioner could impose a compliance agreement with increased follow-ups.

Finally, if that compliance agreement is not complied with, he could use his power to issue an order. That is quite serious.

Added to that is the power to impose administrative monetary penalties, the subject of our discussion today. That applies to entities that serve the travelling public.

[Giovanna Mingarelli, Liberal, Prescott—Russell—Cumberland, ON]

Thank you very much.

How do these administrative monetary penalties regulations work with those new powers?

[Sarah Boily, Director General, Official Languages, Department of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Chair, the power to impose administrative monetary penalties is a power of last resort. The Commissioner has to have tried everything first, through his other powers of mediation and the publication of investigation reports.

Attempts must be made to reach a compliance agreement at all costs before an administrative monetary penalty can be imposed.

[Giovanna Mingarelli, Liberal, Prescott—Russell—Cumberland, ON]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

There are 50 seconds left.

[Giovanna Mingarelli, Liberal, Prescott—Russell—Cumberland, ON]

Okay.

Do the regulations change the way the Commissioner will conduct his investigations or ensure compliance?

[Julie Boyer]

Thank you very much for the question.

It's not a matter of changing the way things are done. The regulations define what should be included in the notices of violation. There's a list of criteria that have to be met. Before imposing an administrative monetary penalty, the Commissioner must ensure that all criteria have been met in terms of what should be included in the report.

For example, the regulations refer to the date on which the alleged acts were committed, the date on which the Commissioner was informed of these acts, a detailed explanation of how the Commissioner determined the amount of the penalty, a list of all the criteria he considered, the method he used to assess the impact of each criterion, the assessed impact of each criterion, the method he used to determine the amount of the penalty, taking into account the assessment of the impact of each criterion, and any evidence mentioned or summarized in the report referred to in section 65.6 of the act.

It's prescriptive, but it wouldn't change the way he conducts his investigation. That gives him parameters to follow in producing the notice of violation.

[Giovanna Mingarelli, Liberal, Prescott—Russell—Cumberland, ON]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you very much.

I now give the floor to Mr. Beaulieu for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the witnesses for being here.

Why did it take so long, after the Official Languages Act was passed, for very specific regulations like this to be developed?

I think there are many more to come.

[Julie Boyer]

We talked about it earlier, and my colleague Richard Léger also explained it. We've done a lot of consultation.

Usually, the power to impose administrative monetary penalties is given to ministers, to departments. Here we're talking about a commissioner, an officer of Parliament.

First, it was something new, a new officer who could implement administrative monetary penalties. There was still some work to be done to compare it to other organizations that grant such power.

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

How long were the consultations?

[Julie Boyer]

They started in the summer, after royal assent, which was received on June 20. Collectively, we remember that.

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

How long did they last?

[Julie Boyer]

They continued until the following spring. Then, the drafting and research work took place, in co-operation with the other departments.

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

Consultations took place for over a year. People could send in responses, and so forth, for approximately one year.

Is that correct?

[Julie Boyer]

Yes, that's correct.

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

Okay.

The Commissioner of Official Languages recommended significantly expanding the scope of the regulations.

Why is only applicable to three entities?

[Julie Boyer]

There are more than three. There are—

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

There are four. My apologies.

[Julie Boyer]

Yes, exactly, there are four. The fourth category concerns designated airport authorities. There is a list of 21 airports, but this is prescribed by law.

It was always quite clear in the act that the target entities would be Air Canada, Marine Atlantic, Via Rail and airport authorities.

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

The Commissioner made a mistake then when he said he wanted to expand the scope to include all federal institutions with public service obligations, which are set out in part IV and part V of the act.

Correct?

[Julie Boyer]

This should have been specified in the act. Fortunately, one section of the act provides for a review every 10 years. It may take place then in five years.

I think it was specified that it would be in 10 years. It has already been three.

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

Why does this not apply to everything related to airport security services?

It seems very illogical to me. Employees at a restaurant, like Tim Hortons, in an airport will need to speak French, but not the security officers.

[Julie Boyer]

A lot of thought was given to this. The Canadian Air Transport Security Authority, or CATSA, is not subject to administrative monetary penalties because it is a Crown corporation funded entirely by parliamentary appropriations. It has no private revenues.

In the case of an administrative monetary penalty, it is the same as for government departments, such as Service Canada. An administrative monetary penalty is imposed in order to encourage the organization not to violate its obligations under the Official Languages Act.

If it does not cost anything because it comes from Parliament, it will not have the desired effect.