Official Languages Committee on Feb. 12th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you, Mr. Dalton.

I will now give the floor to Mr. Villeneuve for three minutes.

[Louis Villeneuve, Liberal, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you very much.

Good morning, Ms. Roy and Mr. Dupuis.

Ms. Roy, this is the second time we're meeting today. If I may, I'd like to tell you that if passion is any guarantee of longevity, you're going to live to be 100 years old.

How should the most relevant contexts for consultation be identified?

I'm thinking, for example, of a decision to protect a species at risk or to invest in national defence as opposed to a decision involving sectors that are key to the vitality of communities.

How do you see that?

[Liane Roy]

I just want to make sure I understand the question. Does it concern the terms and conditions of consultation activities?

[Louis Villeneuve, Liberal, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Yes.

[Liane Roy]

As we've already mentioned, institutions need to give us reasonable notice so that we can prepare. Some of our groups in civil society have very small teams. So we need notice. The various organizations' human resources and financial capacities must be taken into account. A schedule for consultations needs to be set jointly with the communities and federal institutions. Separate consultations need to be held with the various francophone and anglophone communities.

We also need to then receive the information related to those consultations so that we can continue to build on the evidence and the results. It's very important that reports be produced so that we can continue the work.

[Louis Villeneuve, Liberal, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you.

I'm sorry to interrupt you, but you know that we don't have much time. I wish I could ask more questions.

You suggested that positive measures should be based on each institution's primary mandate. Since that's not in the act, how would you recommend this criterion be included in the regulations in a clear way for each department?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

You have one minute.

[Alain Dupuis]

The purpose of the act talks about substantive equality. That's been recognized by the Supreme Court of Canada. That must be the standard for positive measures and enforcement of the Official Languages Act.

To achieve substantive equality for the official language of the minority, you can't just have related initiatives. Positive measures must be part of the primary mandate and comprehensive initiatives of all departments. Otherwise, the minority will never achieve substantive equality with the majority.

[Louis Villeneuve, Liberal, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you very much.

You're proposing that these regulations be reviewed every five years. Why do you want a five-year review?

[Liane Roy]

Because it's a big job and most institutions are going to have to develop action plans and continue to do the work. So we're saying that they could be reviewed every five years.

[Louis Villeneuve, Liberal, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve.

I will now give the floor to Mr. Beaulieu for a minute and a half.

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

Earlier, we talked about indicators, linguistic vitality and all that. You gave some examples. However, you didn't talk about the language used at home. You talked about the mother tongue. However, we've observed that, over the years, more and more francophones are switching to use English at home.

In your opinion, should that indicator, language transfers, be taken into account?

Should we try to reverse this trend?

[Alain Dupuis]

I'm going to go back to our brief, because I found the section on indicators. We want the measures to be evaluated based on access to government services in the minority language, the impact on socio-economic inequalities and access to employment, institutional vitality, access to education, the cultural, language and identity vitality of francophone minorities, the impact on the visibility and promotion of French and the restoration of demographic weight.

Those are all key indicators. In my opinion, what you're talking about is related to cultural and language vitality.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

You still have 20 seconds.

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

Language indicators have often been changed to give the impression that there are more francophones and that we comply with the act, where numbers can justify that. However, there's nothing preventing the government from changing the criteria rather than changing the indicators and skewing the picture a bit. It could reduce the importance of the criteria for the right to services in French.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

I'm sorry, but your time is up.

I will now give the floor to Mr. Bélanger for three minutes.

[Jim Belanger, Conservative, Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Efforts to modernize the Official Languages Act concluded with the passing of Bill C‑13 in June 2023. You say that there don't seem to have been many changes so far to protect French. There doesn't seem to be any interpretation or guidance for the officials who will have to enforce the act.

What do you think of the Treasury Board Secretariat aspiring to implement a new culture of impact within federal institutions?

[Alain Dupuis]

That is precisely the basis of everything we're asking for. We want regulations that won't give us more processes. What we want is more results. Right now, we fear that communities will be part of many more processes with no obligation to have a real impact on our communities and reduce inequality between the minority and the majority.

That's really what we want in the end. We want clearer and better defined processes so that we know unequivocally what needs to be done to get results for the francophone minority.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

I will now give the floor to Ms. Chenette for three minutes.

[Madeleine Chenette, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Thank you very much for being here.

We appreciate your expertise in this area, your leadership and your commitment to this matter.

Regarding the four points you raised in your opening remarks, which I find quite legitimate, I think the reason for the enforcement lag is that the government is very diversified. That's my theory. The various departments, whether we're talking about AI, defence, health or heritage, operate in very different dynamics.

You say that we don't just need a process. However, how realistic is it to ask that there be specific indicators in the regulations, as you did?

You provide a list of indicators, but it would be practically impossible to put certain indicators in place in some departments. However, that doesn't mean they don't have to make use of indicators.

We do need to ask for more evidence and, of course, consultations and indicators. However, should we require specific answers when there is enormous diversity between the departments?

Is that really realistic? At this point, isn't that counterproductive if we want to get things done?

[Alain Dupuis]

Obviously, a federal institution doesn't have to meet all the criteria I mentioned. However, all federal institutions can have an impact on the use and promotion of French.

[Madeleine Chenette, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

We agree on that.

Again, that's what you're asking for. The principles are not illegitimate, but how realistic is it to ask for clarification in the regulations? At that point, it's like putting things in the hands of departments that may not apply across all departments. They really have to commit if we want them to have an impact on the francophonie.

I'm wondering about your recommendations. What do they learn from one department to another?

A lot of times, departments don't know that they don't know. With all due respect, I'm saying that, when it comes to the francophonie, we haven't really worked on that. How do we go about it? Of course, Treasury Board has work to do, but we can learn a lot drawing inspiration from others. The challenge is not to be too restrictive so they can't say it's impossible to do that and decide not to develop that learning spirit.

In your recommendations, how specific do you want to be while ensuring enforceability?

I understand that these are processes, but diversity must be taken into account.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Mr. Dupuis, we have only 10 seconds left, so please provide a brief answer.

[Alain Dupuis]

I think the vocabulary used in our brief is broad enough to allow all federal institutions to analyze what's related to their mandate and their ability to act for better equality between the minority and the majority.

In our opinion, that's why we want every department to reflect. Right now, several dozen departments have the reflex of saying they have nothing to do with language. That's what needs to change in the culture of government.