Official Languages Committee on May 26th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Mr. Beaulieu, your time is up.

I now give the floor to Mr. Bélanger for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses.

I see that Sudbury is defined as an eligible region. Do you know if that includes only the city of Sudbury or if it includes the Greater Sudbury area?

[Alain Dupuis]

Since I am originally from Hanmer, I know the area well.

Yes, this designated region includes a large part of Greater Sudbury, but it does not include the neighbouring riding of Sault Ste. Marie—Algoma. Towns like Elliot Lake, Blind River, and Sault Ste. Marie, where there is still a significant francophone population, are not covered by the measure. However, if we were to change the unit of measurement to use the dissemination area instead, Sault Ste. Marie—Algoma would be included in the definition of a region with a strong francophone presence.

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

In this context, I'm trying to see how many private businesses would be subject to this measure. Apart from banks or businesses with more than 100 employees, I can't think of many situations where the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act would apply.

Do you think these regulations will tangibly improve access to services in French in rural communities, where the majority of businesses do not meet this criterion?

[Alain Dupuis]

That's an excellent question.

Actually, this is why we would also like the number of 25 employees, which is used for Quebec, to also apply to designated regions with a strong francophone presence outside Quebec. A greater number of businesses in your riding would be included in a definition like that.

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

I'm getting to the topic of assimilation.

It's all well and good to have laws with a little more teeth, but you still have to be able to enforce them.

I've found, based on my personal experience with banks, that it doesn't work. Even though they may advertise that services are available in French, when I arrive at the counter and speak in French, I'm asked if I can come back in five minutes because then there will be someone who can serve me in French, or something like that.

If you want to promote French, live in French, or work in French, you need to have the opportunity to do so. In situations like this, it's easier for me to speak to the bank employee in English because I don't have time to wait to be served in French. This situation doesn't happen only at the bank. This act and these regulations will also impact other cases.

What do you think about this situation? How can we remedy that?

[Alain Dupuis]

In my opinion, the fact that these regulations will apply to the private sector already represents a significant step forward. It sends the message that French is important and that it's used not only within the family or at school but also in public. However, this needs to be accompanied by other strategies, such as continuing to increase francophone immigration outside Quebec and strengthening access to French-language schools and post-secondary institutions, among other things.

As you know, in your region, many French programs have been cut at Laurentian University in recent years. French programs need to be reinstated so that regions like ours can continue to have more francophones and be able to offer these services in the medium and long term.

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

Thank you.

If I have a little speaking time left, I'll give it to Mr. Godin.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

You have one minute and 15 seconds left.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Bélanger

I'll restate in my own words what you said earlier: It's quite unrealistic to apply these regulations and achieve results, because they don't include any reporting requirements, any form of accountability or any control mechanisms. A lot of goodwill is being shown, but once again, it's just smoke and mirrors, and people think that with a wave of a magic wand, everyone will fall in line.

Can you guide us and provide more details on what we should include in the regulations?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

You have 35 seconds left.

[Liane Roy]

I think that what is also important is precisely to ensure that there is accountability, as you mentioned.

It'll be very important, first of all, to obtain the list of businesses covered by the UFPBA if we want to be able to do work in advance of any complaints.

As you'll see in our brief, it'll also be very important to establish more designation criteria. As we said, the dissemination area in particular would have to be used.

The UFPBA must also truly be designed to promote French as the language of service and the language of work. The French language must not be relegated to a lesser rank once again. We really need to aim for fairness here. It's a bit—

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Ms. Roy, I'm sorry to interrupt you, but the time we had is up. I've already given you extra time. Thank you very much.

I now give the floor to the last member to speak, Mr. Villeneuve, for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Hello, Ms. Roy and Mr. Dupuis.

You touched on the subject earlier, but could you explain in more detail the reasons behind your proposal calling for a five-year review of the regulation?

[Alain Dupuis]

Yes, absolutely.

The good thing is that we're beginning to see the effects of the increases in francophone immigration targets adopted in recent years in the demographics. As I told you, we are at 30,000 people per year. A few years ago, it was around 5,000 or 6,000. Immigration is already revitalizing our communities.

If current thresholds are maintained, there will be 300,000 more people in the Canadian francophonie within 10 years. With that in mind, do we have to wait 10 years to see these demographic changes? A census enables us to assess demographic changes every five years. In that case, why not update the regulations every five years in light of the most recent census data? This way, we could add neighbourhoods and dissemination areas much more continuously and demonstrate a serious commitment to developing services and workspaces in French outside Quebec.

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

You also propose strengthening accountability mechanisms, particularly by requiring that the Commissioner of Official Languages be provided with the list of federally regulated private businesses subject to the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act.

Can you provide me with a bit more explanation about that? What motivates a proposal like that? Above all, what would be the potential repercussions?

[Alain Dupuis]

I believe this committee has already discussed it in recent weeks. The fact that there's no list makes it impossible to reach out to the targeted businesses or support them through the significant transition they will need to go through.

If the department produces a list naming hundreds or thousands of organizations across the country, it will need to be made public and forwarded to the Commissioner of Official Languages, who will then be able to carry out not only her investigative duties once a complaint is filed, but also her promotional duties.

Communities also have a role to play. We could also approach the businesses. When they recruit staff, for example, we could distribute information so that there are bilingual applications. We could promote the newly offered services in French.

It has to be done in unison. It's not something that can be done in silos or in secret. Yes, there is the compliance aspect, which the commissioner will need to enforce, but there will also be a lot of promotional work to do with the communities.

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

Thank you. Your answer is quite clear.

What mechanisms should be put in place to ensure that francophone consumers can actually receive services in French?

How should potential disputes between a francophone consumer and a telecommunications business or a bank, for example, be handled?

[Alain Dupuis]

Well, there's a lot of work to do there, as well. Currently, francophones do not expect to receive service in French in public spaces and private businesses. This means that first, there'll need to be a display that promotes these services and promotion campaigns to let the public know. It will also be necessary to create the habit and reflex among francophones to request services in French.

Furthermore, francophones who work in a place where they had not, until recently, been allowed to work in their language will need some encouragement and someone to tell them that they can start adopting behaviours that push the boundaries a little. For example, they can request that their language be respected in the workplace.

Definitely, work will need to be done in terms of promotion among both employees and the public.

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

In conclusion, is there anything else we should consider in reviewing the draft regulations?

You have about 45 seconds left to respond.

[Alain Dupuis]

I'd say that we have pretty much gone over our main recommendations.

It's certain that, on reading the current wording of the regulations, we thought that compliance would largely be based on complaints.

For comparison, with the federal government, there's the Commissioner of Official Languages. Once the problem has already occurred, an investigation is launched, and then corrections are made. Furthermore, Treasury Board and Canadian Heritage are doing a great job with promotion. Treasury Board requires federal institutions to provide triennial reports. There are no equivalent mechanisms in these regulations; there is no obligation for businesses to submit reports. The Department of Canadian Heritage also does not conduct audits upstream to avoid problems before they arise.

This is a big concern and a big gap. We don't have this dual mechanism for the private sector. It'll then be entirely up to francophone activists who will decide to demand their rights. We find it unfortunate that the proposed regulations aren't stronger and don't include preventive mechanisms for citizens.

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

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve.

On behalf of the committee, I'd like to thank you, Ms. Roy and Mr. Dupuis, for being with us, for the work you do every day at the FCFA, and for your testimony.

Colleagues, I will suspend the meeting for a few minutes to allow the next group of witnesses to settle in. I would ask that we proceed quickly to maximize the time we spend with the witnesses.

Thanks again.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

I'd like to welcome everyone again to the committee meeting.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(f) and the motion adopted on April 21, 2026, we are meeting today to study the draft regulations on the use of French in federally regulated private businesses.

I'd now like to welcome the witnesses.

From the Assemblée de la francophonie de l'Ontario, we welcome Peter Hominuk, executive director, and Sonia Behilil, director of policy and government relations.

From the Canadian Bankers Association, we welcome Eric Prud'homme, director, Quebec and Atlantic government relations, and Christian Petit-Frère, senior legal counsel.

I thank all the witnesses for being here.

Each organization will have five minutes for its opening statement. We will then move on to the questions from the members.

Mr. Hominuk, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Peter Hominuk, Executive Director, Assemblée de la francophonie de l'Ontario]

Mr. Chair, members of the committee, thank you for having us here today.

I'm accompanied by Sonia Behilil, director of policy and government relations, as well as Noura Abdi Farah, policy analyst.

The Assemblée de la francophonie de l'Ontario has been the organization representing Franco-Ontarians since 1910. We represent 795,760 francophones in Ontario, the largest francophone community outside Quebec.

At the Assemblée de la francophonie de l'Ontario, we welcome the federal government's intention to bring the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act into force. These regulations are important: They give concrete effect to new language rights in sectors that are part of the daily life of francophones. However, outside Quebec, these rights will depend on a key element: the designation of regions with a strong francophone presence. This is precisely where the main challenge lies for French Ontario. The definition of regions becomes the gateway to rights.

The Assemblée de la francophonie de l'Ontario recognizes that the draft regulations already propose an initial list of Ontario regions. This one covers several major hubs of French Ontario, notably in the east and in the north of the province. However, this list should be understood as the minimum standard of protection, not the maximum. It must not be reduced, weakened or interpreted in a restrictive manner.

The Assemblée de la francophonie de l'Ontario does not question the use of demographic criteria or census divisions as an administrative basis. These tools are necessary and allow for a predictable and applicable method, but they cannot be the only reference points.

In Ontario, the francophonie does not exist solely in statistical percentages. It also exists in institutions; it exists in service hubs; it exists in employment pools; and it exists in schools, colleges, universities, health centres, community centres, economic networks and transportation corridors.

In some regions, the francophone presence is strong in terms of proportion. In others, it's important in terms of absolute numbers or it provides structure in institutional, economic or administrative terms. This is also what we hear during the États généraux de l'Ontario français. Many historic communities remind us that they exist and contribute to the vitality of French Ontario, but they too often feel invisible within federal frameworks.

An overly strict quantitative interpretation runs the risk of overlooking actual francophone concentrations. It may also underestimate the role of certain areas that act as regional hubs for much larger communities. In this regard, the Assemblée de la francophonie de l'Ontario supports the position proposed by the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada, particularly when it recommends a more nuanced understanding of the regions and better consideration of provincial regimes, francophone institutions, historical communities and the realities specific to minority settings.

For Ontario, this means that the regulations should avoid introducing a regional designation that would be perceived as disconnected from existing frameworks. This approach does not replace the proposed method; it complements it. It helps ensure better compliance with the spirit of the act, which is not only intended to count francophones but also to protect their actual ability to live, work and access services in French.

We also request that the final regulations or the accompanying tools clearly specify the regions that will be designated. Communities need to know if they are covered. Businesses must understand their obligations. Furthermore, workers and consumers need to know where their rights apply.

If there is confusion between census divisions, territorial designations and public codes, it could directly harm how rights are exercised. A right that is poorly understood becomes a right that is difficult to exercise, and a designation system that is poorly understood is likely to produce the opposite effect of what is intended. Rather than strengthening access to French, it could create areas of uncertainty, frustration and inequality between communities.

Finally, we want to draw the committee's attention to implementation. The system should not rely solely on a person's ability to file complaints. In a minority context, many francophones switch to English out of habit, fatigue, discomfort or because they still do not know that they can ask to receive service in French. If implementation relies solely on individual complaints, it will not fully capture the obstacles experienced on the ground. Proactive, clear and consistent implementation with the recommendations we make in our report will therefore be necessary.

The Assemblée de la francophonie de l'Ontario supports these regulations coming into force. We believe they can become an important way to strengthen French in services, workplaces and the daily lives of people in francophone minority communities. However, for this system to truly achieve its objective, the definition of regions with a strong francophone presence must accurately reflect the Franco-Ontarian reality. It is achieved when a francophone person can receive a service, work, be informed and fully participate in the economic life of their region in French, because the system recognizes the reality of their community. It is this consistency, clarity and recognition that these regulations must enable.