Evidence of meeting #22 for Official Languages in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was draft.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Emeritus Professor, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
Increased funding for French language learning seems to me to apply in Quebec. That's a pretty good—
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
I looked in the public accounts, and there's no more money. Anyway—
Emeritus Professor, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
Well, talk to the right people.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yvan Baker
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu.
Colleagues, since we only have 10 minutes left, I'm going to have to shorten the second round of questions.
I will now give the floor to Mr. Dalton for two minutes.
Conservative
Marc Dalton Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Cardinal, you use very strong words when you talk about the draft regulations. You say three years were wasted due to laziness. We can really hear your frustration.
You've told us a bit about the history, but why are we in this situation after all these years, with draft regulations like these?
Emeritus Professor, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
That's a good question.
I would say that, behind the why, there is political will. This is fundamental. Where should the leadership come from at Treasury Board to make sure that the regulations make sense? That leadership has to come from the Treasury Board Secretariat. It has to come from the highest level. Over the past three years, there has been a lot of movement, a lot of changes have taken place. Every change delays the drafting of the regulations, and civil society applies pressure, particularly the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada.
Conservative
Marc Dalton Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC
Thank you very much, Ms. Cardinal.
Mr. Desgagné, you told the committee on October 9, 2025 that nothing had changed, that there was inaction and that we had taken a step back. Could you tell us more about that?
Liberal
Denis Desgagné Executive Director, Réseau pour le développement de l'alphabétisme et des compétences
Our sector is that of skills. You can look at the brief we submitted to the Standing Committee on Finance. You'll see exactly what hasn't changed. It sounds a lot like what Ms. Cardinal was saying, basically, in her entire story. The non-formal and informal considerations are in the act, but not in the draft regulations. So it's a step backwards in that sense. That absolutely has to be in the regulations.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yvan Baker
Thank you, Mr. Desgagné.
I will now give the floor to Mr. Villeneuve for two minutes.
Liberal
Louis Villeneuve Liberal Brome—Missisquoi, QC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Cardinal, we have only two minutes, so I'll ask you a short question. You may have time to answer it.
In our study on the draft regulations, what lessons can we learn from other regulations made under the Official Languages Act? What is you view on that?
Emeritus Professor, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
What you're saying is interesting. There is another set of regulations for the Official Languages Act, the one that pertains to part IV and concerns communication with and services to the public. I don't know if you've looked at those regulations. They are very straightforward, meaning that they clearly explain what constitutes a demand, a significant demand and the number. Everything is defined, and things are clear.
Compare that to the regulations under part VII and you will see that the scenario is different. As I said, making regulations is optional. The decision was made to adopt regulations for part VII because having regulations was deemed to be important.
The regulations do not reflect the importance that has been placed on them, in my opinion. If you take the regulations for part IV as a model, which may be not be usable as a model, you can see that there is at least some rigour, which is lacking in the draft regulations for part VII. I'm sorry for those who drafted it, but it doesn't have that rigour. The language of these draft regulations is imprecise; it's not regulatory language.
Liberal
Louis Villeneuve Liberal Brome—Missisquoi, QC
Okay.
Why do you say the regulations couldn't be enforced? I'm not an expert like you, but I'm curious.
Emeritus Professor, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
A record of the results of analyses is to be kept, but we don't know where it will go. Who is keeping a record, and for whom? Why? If a record is being kept, what will it be used for?
Then, it is proposed that guidance be provided on possible positive measures that could be taken if that was deemed necessary. That's not clear enough. It's not specific enough, especially when we know the entire history of positive measures from 2005 to 2025. We know that there have been positive measures, so it seems to me that there should be a little more clarity and that a pre‑study should be conducted on the measures.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yvan Baker
Thank you, Ms. Cardinal.
Your time is up, Mr. Villeneuve.
I'll give the floor to Mr. Beaulieu for one minute.
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
It's a bit paradoxical, since the FCFA and various groups felt that part VII or several parts of the Official Languages Act weren't being enforced or sufficiently implemented. It was decided that this responsibility should be given to the Treasury Board, which holds the purse strings and can force institutions to act. However, we see that the Treasury Board is not interested in that. We met with the minister, and he did not even know that he is the one who manages the application of part VII. There's always a lack of will, regardless of the means used. Basically, it's as if the federal government's approach to the Official Languages Act was very superficial, and the same mistakes have been repeated for 50 years.
Mr. Desgagné, we will try to incorporate non-formal learning into the draft regulations.
Ms. Cardinal, I don't know whether you agree with that vision.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yvan Baker
The time is up.
Please answer in just one or two sentences, Ms. Cardinal.
Emeritus Professor, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
Thank you for all your questions. I wish you all the best in your work, and I hope that the draft regulations will be completely revised to make them more relevant and useful, and to give them greater scope.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yvan Baker
Thank you, Ms. Cardinal. We really appreciate it.
We have two more members who will ask questions. It's not over yet.
I will now give the floor to Mr. Godin for two minutes.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Krajewski, we haven't heard you speak much, unfortunately. We'll get right into it.
In your introduction, you talked about transparency when it comes to language clauses.
My question is for either Mr. Desgagné or Mr. Krajewski. I would like to hear your comments on certain measures.
The draft regulations state that the inclusion of the provisions under paragraph 41(7)(a.1) should be promoted by informing the parties of the expectations and objectives and by proposing provisions for inclusion in the agreement.
What I suggested to the Treasury Board Secretariat was to add paragraph 7(1)(c), which seeks to make public the provisions that the federal government will put in the proposal. We understand that, we don't take part in the discussions at the negotiating table, but we would like to know, at the outset, what has been put in by the federal government. That's an obligation in the act. Then we'll see the final outcome of the negotiations. Do you think that's a good idea?
Chair, Réseau pour le développement de l'alphabétisme et des compétences
Yes, I do. If I may, I would say that this is one of the specific points we addressed in the brief we submitted—
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Thank you. I'm sorry to interrupt. I just wanted to confirm that you felt that this was a positive element.
There is another point I would like to raise about federal institutions. Earlier, you talked about other ways to resolve conflicts, instead of having to go to court. Can you tell me more about that?
Chair, Réseau pour le développement de l'alphabétisme et des compétences
To be brief, yes, the idea is really to avoid always having to turn to the commissioner or the Federal Court to resolve conflicts. The idea is to provide alternative methods for resolving internal conflicts within the department with a well-defined procedure—