Thank you very much, Mr. Beaulieu.
Well, you're right. The Official Languages Act is very innovative, especially when it comes to part VII, its preamble and its principles of interpretation. It's really very interesting. I've had a chance to talk about it at many conferences. Canada has innovated in the official languages space by incorporating the concept of substantive equality.
However, once the concept has been incorporated, you have to have tools and methodologies for substantive equality. That's what the draft regulations should be doing, but they're not doing it. Instead, their policy approach is based on inertia and resistance, rather than innovation. This approach resembles part VII of the 1988 Official Languages Act, which was all talk. It's as if the draft regulations are also all talk and no binding action. However, the part VII regulations must support the implementation of that part.
Public servants also need to learn how to work with part VII. They've had many years to learn how to develop positive measures. At this point, we have to wonder about Treasury Board leadership. You know, when the reform was under way and there were all the consultations on modernization, I never supported the idea of putting Treasury Board in charge of Official Languages Act coordination just because it's a central entity. I've always believed in Canadian Heritage's leadership, and the draft regulations lead me to believe that I was right, since they reflect a policy approach to implementing part VII, rather than a more concrete approach.
For example, even Statistics Canada could collect data that make it possible to compare all francophone communities in Canada, rather than always comparing francophones outside Quebec with anglophones in Quebec. This kind of approach will have to be developed one day, and the regulations could support that.
Regarding consultations, again, it's a learning curve—