Official Languages Committee on May 26th, 2026

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

In your opinion, does the province of Ontario make more effort than the federal government to promote the growth of the French language and culture?

[Alain Dupuis]

I don't know whether it's making more effort than the federal government. However, since two provinces, in this case Ontario and Manitoba, have French-language service laws that designate regions, the regions designated by the provinces should be taken into account to ensure that the regulations we are discussing cover those same regions.

In other provinces, unfortunately, only the services are designated, not the regions. That's why we talk about it less in our report. However, if there is in fact a law on French-language services and it designates regions as is the case in these two provinces, this should be taken into account in the definition of regions with a high proportion of francophones.

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

As I understand it, there are four provinces in Canada that have provincial-level tools to promote the growth of the French language: Quebec, New Brunswick, Ontario, and Manitoba. You are demonstrating to me that they are more active than the federal government, yet, the federal government is supposed to preserve bilingualism, English and French, throughout Canada, in all provinces and territories.

Isn't that an aberration?

[Alain Dupuis]

I think we need to make sure not to mix up government services. The federal government offers government services in both official languages in several regions across Canada. At the same time, we are trying to expand the possibility of living in French and accessing services in French in the private sector. That's the point here. That's the great innovation.

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

What I'm saying, Mr. Dupuis, is that tools exist in the four provinces to promote the French language, even within businesses. It's not just in government institutions.

[Alain Dupuis]

No, the laws on services in French apply only to government institutions.

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

Shouldn't we be inspired by this model? In my opinion, the federal government has a greater responsibility. There's a model. There's concentration. These four provinces have realized that French is very important for Quebec; it's the common language. In New Brunswick, it's supposedly equal. There are also the other two. However, the federal government has an additional responsibility to extend the French presence across the country. In fact, it is responsible for stopping the decline of French, promoting both official languages and protecting them.

Shouldn't we take inspiration from this to establish the criteria and broaden their scope?

Furthermore, I'll take this opportunity to remind you that there is an asymmetry. We can't just copy and paste everywhere. In some regions, it's more concentrated, but these are rural areas, which are more isolated and more closed off. I think they should be considered, and the dissemination area could be a tool.

Provide us with more concrete tools so that we can better define how to measure it and expand the French presence throughout Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Unfortunately, your time is up.

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

I was right to ask my questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

You might have the chance to get answers in a future round.

I now give the floor to Mr. Deschênes‑Thériault for five minutes.

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In one of the answers you just gave, you mentioned the non-reversal principle. Can you tell us more about it? What is the motivation behind this proposal? What would be the potential consequences of this principle?

[Liane Roy]

The non-reversal principle was implemented by our organization to resist assimilation. Once services are established in a region, we would like them to be maintained there, even if there is a demographic decline. We suggest that it be in place for at least two regulatory review periods, or over a period of about ten years, because we really want to try to counter the chances of assimilation.

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

As you mentioned briefly in your previous answers, you propose expanding the number of regions where the UFPBA applies, such as to cities like Whitehorse, Yellowknife, Toronto or Halifax.

Do you have any additional items to add? Why would this proposal be important for French speakers living in these regions? I'd like to understand this proposal a little better, so I'll give you the chance to say a bit more about it.

[Alain Dupuis]

Like Canadians in general, francophones are increasingly urbanizing. Unfortunately, it's a fact. Many of our francophone regions are also experiencing some decline. Francophones are in the cities. We are increasingly expanding the range of services and the number of francophone institutions in major cities.

If we look only at a large expanse of territory and apply the 20% criterion, that's where what Canadian Heritage proposes does not adequately capture urban realities. If we add the capitals and certain key communities, such as Halifax and Toronto, which are notably immigrant cities, it allows us to track demographic trends as well, which, whether we like it or not, are moving towards urbanization.

We use the same criteria, the threshold of 20%. We're not exaggerating, either. We're keeping the 20% threshold, but reducing the area still allows us to capture neighbourhoods, have a branch in the area, and perhaps also encourage francophones to settle in certain urban areas so that they can also help foster some vitality in the public space. This is a good thing that aligns with all the sociodemographic and linguistic studies that look at minority francophone areas.

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

As you know, francophone communities across the country are becoming more diverse. Moreover, in my riding, some areas are 95% French-speaking. Realities are not the same everywhere. There are regions where the percentage of francophones is lower.

What options does the government have to ensure that this act also has an impact in regions where the francophone presence may be more fragile? How can you ensure that you'll really have an impact in those areas? What lever can we use?

[Alain Dupuis]

We specifically mention criteria such as the presence of francophone schools. Moreover, in the regulations related to part IV of the Official Languages Act, a few years ago, the government added the presence of a francophone school as a criterion to designate those same federal offices that must offer services in French.

In our view, taking into account French-language schools, day care centres and organizations in these areas—which might not otherwise be designated—still allows us to identify a neighbourhood with a vibrant community, even if the proposed 20% threshold is not met.

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

There are several places in the country where provincial laws determine where government services are offered in English and French. However, the idea behind the UFPBA, which applies to federally regulated private businesses, was still quite innovative. It's a model that we did not necessarily have in Canada outside Quebec.

Could you remind us of the significance of this law—which served as the basis for the draft regulation we are currently reviewing and which was enacted several years ago?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

You have 45 seconds left.

[Liane Roy]

It will definitely help with the vitality of our communities. It's also very important to give people opportunities to work in their language and access services in their language.

Once you read the report, you'll see what we are proposing to you. I think that by doing things this way, we'll be able to reach several communities, including historical communities. As we said, these are communities that were previously very francophone, but increasingly they're becoming more anglophone, or perhaps have concentrations of other languages. What we're proposing will be very good for the vitality of the communities.

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you very much, Mr. Deschênes‑Thériault.

I now give the floor to Mr. Beaulieu for two and a half minutes.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I wanted to talk about the issue of schools, but I'm glad you already addressed it in your answers.

There's also another aspect that I wanted to raise. Implementation of the measure will be monitored through complaints filed with the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages. However, it will still require a considerable budget. It has often been said that this office did not have sufficient resources to follow up on the complaints it received.

Do you have any specific proposals to increase the budget of the Commissioner of Official Languages so that she can meet the demand?

[Alain Dupuis]

I think that's a given. If the commissioner has to conduct investigations and follow-ups concerning thousands of private businesses, it goes without saying that she will need to present a budget and request additional funding so that the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages has additional capacity to investigate the cases.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

I think it will also require an effort from you. For people to make complaints, there would actually need to be promotional campaigns. I believe that this responsibility falls to the minister. That said, it's necessary to tell people about the UFPBA and inform them that they can file complaints and that they have the right to services in French. It's also necessary, as you mentioned earlier, to have the list of companies subject to the UFPBA. That's a very good idea. I think it will generate costs, but the effects could be significant.

I would like to remind you that the UFPBA is based on the principle of territoriality, that is, territories with a strong francophone presence. This principle has been proposed for a long time. It follows the model of Bill 101 to some extent. We were often told that it would not be good for francophones outside Quebec. However, we can see that the model based on the territorial approach is actually not bad at all. On the contrary, it does help to counter assimilation in regions with a strong francophone presence and, above all, to integrate people from immigrant backgrounds there.

[Alain Dupuis]

I would say that there are nuances regarding the principle of territoriality. Territoriality as defined in these regulations does not benefit all francophone minority communities. The proposal we are making, which involves using the dissemination area, allows us to have a system that extends to all provinces and territories. In the current model, several of our francophone communities are unfortunately disadvantaged by the unit of measurement that is used.