Official Languages Committee on Feb. 12th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Please answer in one sentence, because the time is up.

[Annie Proulx]

If the act states that this is to the extent possible, the regulations will reflect this.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Mr. Godin, your time is up.

I'll now give the floor to Mr. Villeneuve for two minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The act states that federal institutions must base their analysis, to the extent possible, on evidence‑based findings when assessing potential positive measures and negative impacts. Yet the draft regulations don't specify how this information should be gathered or used.

Wouldn't more explicit wording have been helpful to ensure a rigorous and consistent approach across federal institutions?

[Carsten Quell]

We'll certainly consider this proposal. I gather that you would like more details on how evidence‑based findings are collected and used by federal institutions.

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

I think that this would indeed be important. Thank you for taking note of this.

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

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

You have 50 seconds left, Mr. Villeneuve.

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

The Official Languages Act calls for positive measures to be taken to implement the commitments set out in part VII. Subsection 41(6) specifies that these measures must be concrete and taken with the intention of having a beneficial effect.

The regulations don't seem to provide any further clarification regarding the scope. Would the inclusion of a provision on the purpose of the regulations, clarifying their spirit and goals, be helpful in guiding the implementation?

[Carsten Quell]

We'll have to look at whether your suggestion goes beyond the framework of the act in terms of the definitions or mechanisms that can be included in the regulations.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve.

On behalf of the committee, I'd like to thank the witnesses for joining us.

We've now reached our limit of time.

Colleagues, we normally spend a bit of time chatting with people in the room during the break between panels. I'd ask you not to do that today in order to maximize the time we have to hear from the FCFA representatives.

I will now suspend the meeting for one minute to welcome the second panel of witnesses.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

I call the meeting back to order.

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to meeting number 21 of the Standing Committee on Official Languages.

As discussed, we are saving the last five minutes of the meeting to talk about Ms. Burke's nomination.

I would now like to welcome the second panel of witnesses.

From the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne, we have Ms. Liane Roy, president; Mr. Alain Dupuis, executive director; and Mr. John Mark Keyes, professor, who is joining us by video conference.

You will have five minutes for your opening remarks. Afterwards, we will move to a question period with the members.

Ms. Roy, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Liane Roy, President, Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.

Thank you for inviting us today to share our thoughts on the proposed draft regulations on part VII of the Official Languages Act. With me today are Alain Dupuis, our director general, as well as Mr. John Mark Keyes, a former department of justice official. Mr. Keyes has recognized expertise in draft regulations.

I don't need to remind anyone of the number of years spend modernizing the act and the significant effort invested in this endeavour. This committee played a critical role in improving the bill, which was ultimately adopted in the spring of 2023 by 300 votes in the House of Commons. It was a historic moment, and the magnitude of that vote sent a clear message about the legislator's intention, which was to take strong and bold action to slow the decline of French in Canada.

The proposed draft regulations, as prepared by the Treasury Board Secretariat, do not fulfill the promise of Official Languages Act, and nor do they reflect the intent for change that Bill C‑13 intended.

As you know, the modernized act introduces a new differentiated approach paradigm recognizing that French, one of the two official languages, is vulnerable and requires specific safeguards, and promotional measures. And yet, the proposed draft regulations don't seem to take any of that into consideration. Instead, they cling to the old paradigm of symmetry between French and English.

The document also clearly lacks clarity, especially when it comes to how positive measures are adopted. It simply repeats what the act already says. There is such a lack of willingness in this proposed draft to convey the importance of protecting and promoting French that, if it were to be adopted in its current form, the new momentum that you, parliamentarians, wanted would be brutally thwarted.

In light of that, I'd like to remind everyone of four essential FCFA recommendations.

First, the regulations must stress that positive measures should have a positive, tangible and verifiable impact. They must be developed and implemented in effective consultation with official-language minority communities.

Second, positive measures must rely on analyses collected in dialogue and consultation activities, as well as research and evidence. The proposed draft regulations are vague and lax in this regard.

Third, the regulations must include an obligation for federal institutions to develop frameworks and action plans based on specific indicators. That is the only way to assess the gaps to substantive equality for linguistic minorities and take the necessary measures to reduce them.

Finally, regarding co‑operation with provinces and territories, the regulations must specify that federal institutions are required to promote the inclusion of language clauses at all stages of transfer agreement implementation, including framework protocols, bilateral agreements and action plans.

Dear members of the Standing Committee on Official Languages, the FCFA has been following the implementation of the Official Languages Act for 50 years. We spent several years explaining to federal institutions what a positive measure is. We have regularly proposed public policy solutions to improve the lot of francophone communities that have been brushed aside in this proposed draft regulation. Our recommendations, which TBS is familiar with and which have not changed since June, are rooted in our experience.

Not only is it important for the secretariat to go back to the drawing board, it must also listen to the communities. Otherwise, we fear that all this work over the years to modernize the act will have been for naught.

Thank you. We look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you very much.

We'll now move to questions from members. Once again, colleagues, I'm going to be strict on time.

Mr. Godin, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Dupuis, Ms. Roy, for joining us. I know you've been involved in the modernization of the Official Languages Act for a number of years. We've had a chance to work together, and I thank you for the work you do.

You represent a staggering number of official languages organizations and official languages minority communities across the country. I am happy to work with you on this mission to grow both official languages, knowing that, as you said, French is the most vulnerable of the two.

Ms. Roy, I'm going to ask you a very simple question.

Maybe you were here earlier for the Treasury Board Secretariat presentation.

Do you see anything in the proposed draft regulations on part VII any of the elements you raised when your organization was consulted?

[Liane Roy]

Very few of the elements we raised during the consultations were taken.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Let's use a percentage, because that's the question I asked the Treasury Board Secretariat.

Roughly, what percentage does that represent?

It's an order of magnitude. I'm not looking for a specific number.

Is 10% of what you proposed in the regulations? Is it a comma in an ocean of words?

[Liane Roy]

I'll be generous and say 20%.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

From what I understand after listening to your presentation, after all the efforts you've put in, you're really disappointed.

What do you think should be the main priority, the essential element that must be included in part VII of the regulations?

[Liane Roy]

You'll be able to read our suggestions in our brief, but based on the deficiencies we noted, our priority would be positive measures.

That's why we'd like to add an element to the regulations to clarify the purpose of positive measures, establish a clear process for developing and adopting positive measures, include a process for considering the negative impacts on our communities, and create and publish performance indicators for positive measures.

Also, community analyses are essential for effective and ongoing dialogue and consultation, but they can't happen without impact indicators and evidence. I can go on; I have more.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

No, actually, I have more questions for you.

From what I understand, you'll be submitting a brief to ensure the secretariat takes your proposals into consideration and keeps more than 20% of them.

Can you give us more details on how to define positive measures, the process and the indicators?

Help them help us, kind of thing.

[Liane Roy]

Absolutely. We've been doing that since 2023, but we'll keep going.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

You know you have to hit the nail on the head more than once.

[Liane Roy]

Yes, we'll keep doing it.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

I'll ask you another question.

The famous language clauses are a new concept in the act. I suggested to the Treasury Board Secretariat that it add the obligation to include and make public proposed provisions for all agreements negotiated between the federal government and the provinces.

Do you support that? Do you think that's an essential element that must be included in the regulations?

[Liane Roy]

I completely agree with you.