It should've been done in the Official Languages Act, if you ask me. It may be a little late in the game to define substantive equality in the regulations. Defining what substantive equality means is no small feat. It's something our board has discussed. I often get asked what substantive equality in post-secondary education means. Figuring out what that looks like is a monumental undertaking. According to the type of analysis provided for in the regulations, it is possible to set targets in progressing towards substantive equality.
Here's an example.
I talked about the wall when it comes to research and the granting councils. They are one type of institution where people are very resistant to the idea of taking language obligations into account. Just read the government's recent responses to reports by the Standing Committee on Science and Research, in which the government belittles the contribution of francophone researchers and minimizes their concerns.
I can't say exactly what substantive equality in French-language research is, but I can tell you what it isn't: It's not what's happening now. The regulations need to encourage federal institutions to act. They need guidance, so that public servants can sit down and develop positive measures, because they finally understand what they are supposed to be doing under the Official Languages Act.
They have to accept that, in French-language research and other specific areas, a diversity of voices has to inform the development of measures. It's important to sit down with the people working at those institutions and to engage in the dialogue and consultations that will result in positive measures that make a real difference.
Currently, the tools in the regulations aren't adequate on that front.