Evidence of meeting #38 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.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yvan Baker
Colleagues, we will now resume our meeting—this time in public—and I welcome you all once again.
Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(f) and the motion adopted on April 21, we are meeting today to study the draft regulations on the use of French in federally regulated private businesses.
I would now like to welcome the witnesses. We are joined by Stéphanie Chouinard, associate professor, who is appearing as an individual. Ms. Chouinard, you have your daughter Romane with you, is that right?
Stéphanie Chouinard Associate Professor, As an Individual
That's correct. Let's hope this goes smoothly, but it could be a bit more chaotic than usual on my end.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yvan Baker
Fine. Welcome, Romane. As chair, I should mention that this is how I feel sometimes about our meetings: They can be more chaotic than we anticipate.
From the Société de la francophonie manitobaine, we are joined by Derrek Bentley, president, and Jean-Michel Beaudry, chief executive officer. Both are attending via video conference, and I would like to welcome them.
Each witness or organization will have five minutes to deliver an opening statement. We will then proceed to a question-and-answer period with members.
Ms. Chouinard, if you are ready, you have the floor for five minutes.
Associate Professor, As an Individual
Mr. Chair, vice-chairs, and members of the committee, thank you for inviting me to testify as part of this study.
My remarks today will focus on the impact of the proposed regulations on the francophone community outside Quebec. More specifically, I will focus on part 2 of the draft regulations—that is, on regions with a strong francophone presence and on the obligations for businesses towards their consumers in those regions.
On the one hand, the draft regulations rely on data from the 2021 census to identify regions with a strong francophone presence. I have reservations about basing a legal framework on the results of a single census. Official language minority communities are dynamic, and they are often those most underestimated by censuses, particularly those with newcomers and bilingual or multilingual households. The selected criteria prioritize population density at the expense of community vitality, which will have consequences for the very communities this legislation is meant to protect.
Furthermore, it is unfortunate that the draft regulations did not draw on the mechanism found in the official languages regulations relating to part IV of the Official Languages Act to determine where there is significant demand. It stands to reason: if there is significant demand for French-language services in a region, it is most likely because there is a strong francophone presence. However, at present, for essentially the same objective, the draft regulations under consideration are based on a new definition of the regions where federally regulated private businesses will have language obligations. This creates a complex system in which citizens may be unaware that they are in a region designated under the draft regulations, especially when it involves a list of census tracts, as is the case with our friends in Manitoba. For the average person, this is a rather obscure geographical determination. To potentially address this situation, section 15 of the draft regulations stipulate the following:
A federally regulated private business that carries on business in a region with a strong francophone presence must clearly indicate to consumers in that region […] that they may communicate with and obtain services from the business in French.
In my opinion, this language is far too weak. We should require these businesses to make an active offer of service.
In fact, I must admit I was a little surprised not to find any mention of “active offer” anywhere in the draft regulations, even though it is a well-established principle. Numerous research studies and reports have been written on this principle. I will not cite them all, but we can still identify a few best active offer practices. I'll list them quickly.
First, services—whether in person, by phone, in writing, online or on social media—must always be offered in both languages, starting from the very first contact and continuing thereafter.
Second, we must ensure that services are of equal quality in either language. The choice of language must not affect the quality of the service received, nor should it result in any additional delay in obtaining the service.
Third, people must feel comfortable specifying their preferred language when the service is offered. This means, among other things, that service should be culturally appropriate.
In short, the purpose of the active offer of services is to ensure that people can actually use the official language of their choice. Numerous studies have shown that in minority contexts, if institutions have the freedom to choose without being required to actively offer services in the minority language in addition to the majority language, the resulting social dynamic favours the majority language. This is all the more true in the present case, where we are seeking to change the status quo. We must ensure that users feel no hesitation or embarrassment about requesting services in the official language of their choice.
Finally, in Quebec, the proposed regulations call for applying the law to businesses with at least 25 employees; however, outside Quebec, in regions with a strong francophone presence, it calls for applying it only to businesses with at least 100 employees within those regions, or 500 employees nationwide. This asymmetry is significant. Small federally regulated businesses—with which francophones outside Quebec most frequently interact—may well fall below this threshold. A consumer in northern Ontario or on the Acadian Peninsula might find that the businesses serving them on a daily basis are entirely exempt from these requirements. I therefore invite the committee to examine how these thresholds were set, and whether they are based on evidence or are arbitrary.
Thank you and I look forward to continuing the discussion.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yvan Baker
Thank you very much, Ms. Chouinard.
I will now give the floor to Mr. Bentley for five minutes.
Derrek Bentley President, Société de la francophonie manitobaine
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Good morning, members of the committee.
Thank you for inviting us to appear before you today to share our perspective as a francophone minority community.
As has been mentioned, my name is Derrek Bentley, and I am the president of the Société de la francophonie manitobaine. Our organization represents Manitoba's francophone community.
Our testimony supports the briefs submitted by the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada, or FCFA, and the Fédération des associations de juristes d'expression française de common law, or FAJEF.
Let's be clear: We are very encouraged by the idea of moving forward with these proposed regulations under the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act, or UFPBA. It is a major step forward. The UFPBA marks a decisive turning point in moving from a mere aspiration to an enforceable obligation, and in leading us toward true equality between our two official languages. Above all, these draft regulations will have a real and direct impact on French-speaking citizens in Manitoba who wish to live their lives in French, every day, within their communities.
In Manitoba, we are fortunate to live in a unique context. Generally speaking, we find that the designation criteria proposed in the draft regulations are consistent with our province's laws, regulations, and policies—which, unfortunately, is not the case everywhere, particularly in Ontario. As the FCFA points out, we recognize the importance—as is also the case in the official languages regulations—of ensuring that the designation criteria take into account historical and community factors, as well as provincial legislation.
In addition to issues concerning the designation criteria, we must also take a broader view and ensure that there are no loopholes when situations become complicated. Let me explain. We know very well in Manitoba, as the FAJEF points out in its brief, that francophone citizens living in the regions designated by the proposed regulations face real challenges in accessing certain services. During significant and stressful life events—be it whether real estate or business transactions, bankruptcy proceedings, estate matters, or divorce—they struggle to receive end-to-end services in their preferred language.
We have been made aware of very specific examples where francophones run into a wall of difficulties when dealing with more complex cases involving banks or telecommunications companies. That is why we believe it is absolutely essential that the regulations specify the obligation for these companies to conduct proceedings in French and to use French in court.
Furthermore, if we want these regulations to remain relevant, they must not become outdated. That is why we strongly recommend a mandatory review of the regulations every five years to reflect the evolution of our communities.
This brings me to a fundamental point: “reviewing” must never mean “rolling back”. That is why we support another key recommendation from the FCFA: the inclusion of the ratchet principle, or the no-rollback principle. In practical terms, once French-language services are offered by a company in a region, they must be maintained even in the event of population decline. We cannot take away an acquired right on the pretext that percentages fluctuate; that would accelerate assimilation rather than combat it in the interest of true equality.
Furthermore, for the UFPBA to have the intended impact, transparency is essential. We would like to echo the recent comments made by the Commissioner of Official Languages: a directory of businesses subject to the UFPBA must be created, and it must be accessible and public. Both Canada's Commissioner of Official Languages and the French-speaking citizens of our province must be able to know clearly and unambiguously which businesses are required to serve them in French.
In this regard, if citizens are granted new rights, we must ensure that those rights are respected. We therefore believe it is crucial that the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages have access to the necessary resources not only to handle complaints properly, but also to proactively ensure the rigorous enforcement of the regulations on the ground.
In conclusion, a regulation is not a technical detail. It is the instrument that turns Parliament's will into reality for our communities. We have the opportunity to make a real difference in the lives of francophones in Manitoba and across the country.
Thank you very much for the opportunity to testify today. Mr. Beaudry and I will be happy to answer your questions.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yvan Baker
Thank you very much, Mr. Bentley.
We will now move on to questions from members. Before we start, I just want to welcome two colleagues joining us today who do not normally sit on the committee with us: Élisabeth Brière and Tamara Kronis. I thank them for being here with us today.
Mr. Godin, you have the floor.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
First, I would like to thank the witnesses and welcome Romane, a new witness here today. She did a great job, and as a mother, Ms. Chouinard, I'm sure you find that reassuring.
You mentioned that the draft regulations had been developed and that the team of public servants had used a single database—namely, the 2021 census. Could you elaborate a bit? What additional data should have been used to make the process even more effective?
Associate Professor, As an Individual
In the counter-example I used—with respect to the official languages regulations pertaining to part IV of the Official Languages Act—regions with high demand are identified on a more case-by-case basis: either based on a percentage of the local population or using a real number. There are different thresholds that vary depending on the types of services and communications, but either a percentage or a specific number—a target—is used, which ensures that if the situation on the ground changes, any adjustments needed can be made.
Obviously, I had to keep my remarks brief, given that I only had five minutes, but it is clearly possible to review the designated regions every five years, as specified in the draft regulations. However, I am still concerned we might designate certain regions while losing sight of others—even those with a certain degree of vitality—where census data does not necessarily allow us to understand what is happening on the ground. Despite Statistics Canada's good will—and I am aware of the various questions, even short ones, that have been added to the census to gain a better understanding of where official language minority communities are located—people who could make use of these services are still not being captured. That was my comment.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Thank you, Ms. Chouinard.
Witnesses told us that perhaps organizations on the ground could be asked to take part in the process of designating regions with a strong francophone presence. We understand there are data and assessment criteria, but beyond that, do you think this could be an option?
Associate Professor, As an Individual
Are we talking about consulting organizations on the ground on the designation of regions?
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
It includes consultations, but it's more than that. You know that consulting is a broad concept. Unfortunately, I'm not sure the data collected is often taken into account when consultations are conducted.
Could these organizations be more involved in the process so they can better define the small regions with a strong francophone presence that, unfortunately, do not meet the assessment criteria established by the Department of Canadian Heritage?
Associate Professor, As an Individual
I think giving serious consideration to the knowledge of people on the ground could indeed be a step in the right direction. Under the modernized Official Languages Act, the consultation process should involve greater accountability. This would therefore be consistent with federal language rights.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Yes, but I'm not sure the two acts we dealt with at the same time are coherent.
You didn't talk about it in your opening remarks, but I'd like to hear your thoughts on another matter. You said you were going to make your presentation on the use of French by businesses outside Quebec, but I'd like to know what you think about the situation in Quebec.
When we studied the Official Languages Act modernization bill, it was suggested that Quebec be isolated and subject to the Charter of the French Language, since it has a special status in North America, being the only province where the common language is French. After last-minute negotiations, Quebec's minister of the French language, Mr. François Roberge, bowed to pressure, probably from the Liberals in power in Ottawa at the time, and gave Quebec businesses the opportunity to choose the regime to which they'd be subjected to.
Wouldn't that be a loophole for organizations? I think entrepreneurs would normally and justifiably choose the least restrictive regime. Isn't the impact dangerous in Quebec, among other places?
Associate Professor, As an Individual
It'll depend on how things evolve on the ground. That said, it is indeed normal to expect that businesses will choose the least restrictive regime. It also creates a certain inconsistency for Quebec taxpayers and causes some chaos on the ground, because Quebec is the only province where the choice of regime is offered.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Do you think Canadian Heritage should at least give the management mandate to federally chartered businesses in Quebec?
There's no real rigour or obligation in that regard in the act. There are no consequences for businesses that don't comply. I think the Office québécois de la langue française is better equipped at this stage.
Couldn't that be a possibility in a transition period? I'm just asking. I'm exploring that option.
Associate Professor, As an Individual
That's an interesting question. Honestly, I don't have a clear answer for you, because I haven't had time to think about it.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Thank you, Ms. Chouinard. Please pass on my greetings to Romane.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yvan Baker
Thank you, Mr. Godin.
I'll now give the floor to Mr. Deschênes‑Thériault for six minutes.
Liberal
Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Before turning to the witnesses from Manitoba, I'd like to come to you, Ms. Chouinard.
You said the proposed regulations don't include the concept of active offer. If I understand correctly, you're suggesting it should be explicitly mentioned. I'd like to hear your thoughts on how we're going to define it. You gave various criteria that allow us to define what we mean by active offer. I'd like to hear your suggestions on how we should amend the proposed regulations to better incorporate this concept.
Associate Professor, As an Individual
I would explicitly mention, in clause 15 of the proposed regulations, which talks about clear indications to consumers, the obligation of these businesses to make an active offer and list where active offers must be determined, whether in person, in signage, orally, in written communications, on the telephone, on the Internet and so on.
In 2016, back when François Boileau was there, the Office of the French Language Services Commissioner of Ontario published a nice report that really explains all the characteristics specific to best practices in active offer. That report is 10 years old, but the important points are still valid. I would refer you more explicitly to that document.
Liberal
Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
Thank you. I've previously cited this document in work I've done before becoming an MP.
You're suggesting we define the concept, that we not only mention it, but also explain what it means.
Associate Professor, As an Individual
Yes, absolutely.
The federal public service already knows what an active offer is. The Commissioner of Official Languages at the time prepared a special report on active offer. The federal public service already knows what an active offer looks like when it's done right.
Liberal
Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
The defined zones immediately refer to the first official language spoken. That's how we define the strong presence of a francophone population.
If I understand correctly, you're suggesting we use the potential demand for services in the minority language variable instead. This variable came out after the census. It's not about defining the population, nor is it an identity dimension. It's really to be able to estimate the number of people who might want to use federal services in the minority language.
If I understand what you're saying, instead of referring to the first official language spoken, or FOLS, as it's commonly known, you're suggesting we use the potential demand variable instead.