Official Languages Committee on June 9th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Dear colleagues, welcome to meeting number 39 of the Standing Committee on Official Languages.

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.

Given that there was a vote in the House, our meeting started half an hour late. Today, we have two panels of witnesses. Therefore, I am planning to shorten the time allocated to each group. That means that we'll have about 45 minutes with each group instead of one hour.

I apologize to the witnesses but, unfortunately, that's sometimes just the way things work when there's a vote.

Does everyone agree with the plan? Since it seems that everyone agrees, I will now welcome the witnesses.

From the Association canadienne-française de l'Alberta, we have Nathalie Lachance, president, and Isabelle Laurin, executive director. They are both participating in the meeting by video conference.

I would like to welcome you both.

You'll have five minutes for your opening statement and then we're going to take questions from the members.

Ms. Lachance, the floor is yours.

[Nathalie Lachance, President, Association canadienne-française de l'Alberta]

Mr. Chair and members of the committee, good afternoon.

My name is Nathalie Lachance. I'm president of the Association canadienne-française de l'Alberta, or ACFA, the voice of Alberta's francophone community.

With me today is our executive director, Isabelle Lorrain. I'd like to thank you very much for inviting us to testify before you in the context of your important study on the draft regulations on the use of French in federally regulated private businesses.

ACFA is celebrating its 100th anniversary this year, in 2026. Since 1926, our organization has been working to advocate for the rights, achievements and vitality of Alberta's francophone community. One hundred years later, Alberta's francophone community is still very much alive.

Today, over 260,000 Albertans are able to hold a conversation in French. Alberta's francophone community is present in all regions of the province. It is both a historical community and a rapidly growing community, primarily thanks to francophone immigration.

Generally speaking, ACFA supports the recommendations made by the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada, or the FCFA. However, we wish to draw your attention to certain realities that are unique to Alberta that should be considered when identifying regions with a strong francophone presence.

First, we welcome the recognition of part of Edmonton as a region with a strong francophone presence. This recognition is important, since the city of Edmonton is the main francophone institutional hub of our province. This region includes Campus Saint‑Jean, La Cité francophone, ACFA's provincial headquarters and a vast network of organizations that serve francophones from across Alberta.

However, Edmonton's francophone community now extends well beyond the boundaries of the historical francophone neighbourhood. Francophones live all across the city. French-language schools can be found in several of the city's neighbourhoods. These institutions and organizations serve a much larger population base than what is covered by the proposed designation.

As a result, we believe that Edmonton's designation should be expanded to better reflect the role of Alberta's capital city as the main institutional, administrative, economic and community hub of the province's francophone community.

We also believe that Calgary should be recognized as a region with a significant francophone presence. It's hard to understand why it is not. The Calgary metropolitan area has as many, or almost as many, residents whose first official language that they speak is French as the Edmonton metropolitan region. Nearly a third of Alberta's francophone population lives in the municipality of Calgary. Calgary also welcomes many francophone newcomers every year. It has nine French-language schools, one francophone community centre, an ACFA regional office and a vibrant network of community organizations. The Government of Canada has also recognized this reality by designating Calgary a welcoming francophone community.

In our view, Calgary certainly meets the objectives in the regulations and should be recognized as a region with a strong francophone presence.

Lastly, we would like to emphasize the importance of recognizing historical francophone communities. Alberta's francophone community is not limited to Edmonton and Calgary. Communities like St. Albert, St. Paul, Plamondon, Lac La Biche, Falher, Donnelly, Peace River, Legal, Morinville and Beaumont have played a key role in the development of our province, and they are still contributing to the vitality of the French language even today.

We also believe it's essential to include a genuine principle of non-regression, so that acquired language rights cannot be called into question as a result of mere statistical fluctuations.

In conclusion, ACFA is making five key recommendations. Allow me to summarize them briefly: expanding Edmonton's designation; recognizing Calgary as a region with a significant francophone presence; recognizing historical francophone communities; including a principle of non-regression; and providing for regular reviews of the regulations.

We believe that these adjustments would better reflect the reality of Alberta's francophone communities and contribute to the sustainable development of francophone communities across Canada. We therefore urge the committee to recommend specific measures to this end.

Thank you for your attention. We are ready to answer your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you, Ms. Lachance, for your presentation and your suggestions. We'll now move on to the question period.

Mr. Dalton, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Thank you very much, Ms. Lachance and Ms. Laurin, for being with us today.

My family is from Alberta. I think that half of the people north of Edmonton are related to me. My mother is a Beaudoin and she comes from a family of 18 children.

How will this affect northern Alberta towns like Fahler, Girouxville and McLennan?

This region of the province has a rich francophone history. Can you tell us a bit about this region?

[Nathalie Lachance]

Yes, that's true. That's why we added the third element, which is to truly recognize Alberta's historical francophone communities that are not currently designated in the regulations.

We're thinking about Fahler, Plamondon, Lac La Biche, Peace River, Donnelly, St. Albert and St. Paul.

It's really a way to ensure that Alberta's northern francophone communities are properly served.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

That's great.

Do you think that the legislation, in its current form, will, in fact, bring about changes for Alberta's francophone community, once the rules are in effect and enforced?

[Nathalie Lachance]

I think that, if we could expand the designated communities that receive bilingual services, it would be a huge help for the francophone community.

It is true that francophones in Alberta “absorb” English rather than learn it, but the fact remains that it is crucial for us to have access to services in French. The larger the area of activity, the better it is for the community's vitality. That also makes it possible to ensure that services that are important to everyone are available in both official languages.

Indeed, for banking services, for example, a good command of the language is needed in order to be able to use that terminology in both official languages. It's important for us.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

You talked a bit about the importance of not going backwards.

Can you talk a bit more about the importance of not removing a designation that's already there?

[Nathalie Lachance]

The proposal in ACFA's brief will ensure that there is some continuity. If there is a drastic change in the percentage between two censuses, residents of a designated region must not lose access to the services they need.

We think it's extremely important to make sure to include this non-regression clause, which would ensure the sustainability of services. It's extremely important for us.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

I'm not entirely clear about the designation.

Are we talking about the area around Bonnie Doon and Campus Saint‑Jean? Is that region designated as a francophone community?

Can you tell us a bit more about that and the expansion to the entire capital city?

[Nathalie Lachance]

The Bonnie Doon area is very [Technical difficulty—Editor]. There's no doubt that there's a concentration of francophones around Bonnie Doon, but there are francophones throughout the city of Edmonton and schools in all neighbourhoods—

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Ms. Lachance, I'm sorry, but I have to interrupt you. We can't hear you very well on our end. I've stopped the clock for now. We're going to take a break to check. I'd ask you to please wait one minute.

The clerk has asked me to suspend the meeting. I will suspend the meeting until our technical team has resolved the issue. Ms. Lachance, I'm sorry. We'll resume our conversation soon, I hope.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

We're resuming the meeting.

Mr. Dalton, you have two minutes and 40 seconds left.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Lachance, we heard from representatives of the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique and other organizations. They're not very happy with the regulations, because it doesn't seem that it applies to francophone communities in their region. I'm a member from British Columbia, but we've heard the same thing from people in Nova Scotia and other regions.

You seem to be more positive. It may be because there is a small region where it will apply.

Is that the case?

[Nathalie Lachance]

No. It's because I see the potential in what might become of this. Currently, the designation means that, in Alberta, only the francophone neighbourhood would be designated as an area that would be entitled to services in French. That's not acceptable for Alberta's francophone community.

It's far too small an area and far too limited. It's also problematic. In that neighbourhood, there is currently a place where we have a few services. For those who are familiar with Edmonton, I'm talking about the area around the Bonnie Doon shopping centre, but that shopping centre is not in very good financial shape.

Would that become a barrier for some businesses, who might decide to leave? That's also a possibility. We have concerns about that, but we also see the potential of the regulations. What we're asking for is an expanded designation of the areas.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

In your opinion, will businesses in the region react positively or negatively to these changes?

What do you think?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

There are 55 seconds left.

[Nathalie Lachance]

I think that I'm a little naive.

I think that businesses stand to gain by conducting business in the language that people speak. I would hope that there is interest in hiring employees who speak the same language as people living in this neighbourhood. That includes banks and the telecommunications sector. I think that's important.

Is there an incentive to move immediately outside the neighbourhood? I would say yes, considering the way that the regulations are drafted.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Thank you for the work you are doing.

It's encouraging to hear that the francophonie is making progress in Alberta.

How many francophones and francophiles are there in Calgary and Edmonton?

The two are not exactly the same. The number of francophones in both cities is roughly the same in both cities, but these services won't be available in Calgary.

[Nathalie Lachance]

That's one of the challenges. That's why we are asking that Calgary be designated and added to the list.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Thank you, Ms. Lachance.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you, Mr. Dalton.

I'll now give the floor over to Mr. Deschênes‑Thériault for six minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Ms. Lachance, for your testimony. It's always a pleasure to hear about francophone Alberta.

You spoke about francophone minority communities, or historically francophone communities.

I would like you to tell us more about that.

Logistically, what's your view on designating these communities? What criteria would apply?

How could your suggestion concerning historical communities be implemented?

[Nathalie Lachance]

That's a great question.

I think that historical communities should work with the francophone community to ensure that they receive proper recognition.

For our part, we identified a few of these communities in our document, including St. Albert, St. Paul, Rivière‑la‑Paix, Donnelly, Falher, Legal and Morinville. Francophone communities existed in these regions in the past. In our opinion, Calgary is also historically francophone, if we consider Rouleauville. It's another growing community, and a very important urban metropolis for Alberta.

However, when we talk about historic communities, we really need to look and see where francophones once were, and where they still are today. We really have communities that need support to boost their vitality. We have aging populations. We need to ensure that services are available for them, but also that our region becomes a magnet for newcomers who look to the future and see hope and vitality in these communities.

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

What can we tell companies that might be concerned they won't find available, French-speaking workers?

We know that there are francophones in Alberta. The many people who went through immersion schools also come to mind. The figures are fairly high. For that matter, a large number of people who were educated in French immersion schools went on to study at the University of Alberta's Campus Saint-Jean. Others came through francophone immigration.

I'd like to hear what you have to say about the availability of a French-speaking workforce in Alberta.

[Nathalie Lachance]

Your question has two parts.

First of all, I'd like to talk about a study done a few years ago with University of Alberta students. The study showed that some francophones were leaving the province because it offered limited opportunities to work in French or in French and English. If the government, institutions and private companies could create bilingual job opportunities, I think everyone would win.

Secondly, Alberta's francophone population is growing fast, whether because of immigrants arriving in Alberta or arriving from elsewhere in Canada, or other immigrants arriving from abroad. Among Alberta's francophones, 32% were born outside the country.

The tremendous popularity of immersion programs in Alberta also plays a role. There are a large number of programs and a lot of students. Some of them are confident that they will go on to study at Campus Saint-Jean and pursue their post-secondary studies in French. I believe that continued support for the francophonie is important during all stages of life.

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

Your recommendations mention the non-regression principle.

Can you tell us a little more about that? Why are you recommending it?

[Nathalie Lachance]

I think that we absolutely must stabilize the services we offer. Obviously, census data every five years would help identify where needs exist.

The non-regression principle forces us to make a 10-year commitment, finally, before deciding to do the opposite. I also think it relates to the question of how regions are designated and how the number of francophones with access to services in French is recognized.

A few minutes ago, we were talking about the percentage question in Alberta. Sometimes, this percentage works against us, because the francophone population is spread out across the province. We really have to look at the number of francophones that we can serve and how we can best serve them. If we look at where francophone schools are being built, and where we can create a living environment that offers more opportunities to use both official languages, I think we will all come out winners.

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

You talked about expanding designated sectors with a strong francophone presence in Calgary.

Why would that be important? What consequences would follow from not doing it?

[Nathalie Lachance]

On looking over our population figures, we realize that the number of francophones living in Edmonton is roughly the same as the number of francophones living in Calgary. With so many people, it's hard to imagine not serving them in French.

I think that we really have to provide as many opportunities as possible to offer services in both official languages and recognize a community's needs. I understand the percentage question, but I almost want to turn back the clock to the time when I was a school counsellor, and we used the expression “where numbers warrant”.

I think we have to be careful. If we go by percentages only, we might sometimes disadvantage communities that have a significant number of francophones, but are growing, which could lower the percentage. This happened in Alberta, where we grew quickly, but our percentage didn't necessarily reflect that reality.

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

You also advised us to review the regulations on a regular basis.

Witnesses have suggested that we conduct a review every five years, with each census. Others tell us it should be every ten years. They say that we need to factor in a two-year adjustment period after the regulations are implemented, and that five years doesn't necessarily leave us enough time to assess all of the resulting repercussions and challenges.

What do you mean by “regular reviews”?

[Nathalie Lachance]

We mean a review done every five years, although we would really prefer that it cover at least ten years once a community is designated as a region with a strong francophone presence. That way, it would include two census cycles, precisely to allow enough time to transfer the information.

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

There's something I would like to add concerning Edmonton.

You have started enlarging sectors designated as sectors with a strong francophone presence in Edmonton, and you have already noted the consequences.

Do you have anything else to add on that?

[Nathalie Lachance]

I might point out that some neighbourhoods outside the francophone sector include a lot of newcomer communities. When receiving francophone immigrants, we need to do what it takes to maintain this francophonie and this capacity to speak French, not to facilitate their assimilation.

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

Thank you. It's always a pleasure to discuss things with you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you, Mr. Deschênes‑Thériault.

I'll hand the floor to Mr. Beaulieu for six minutes.

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

Thank you.

To begin with, Ms. Lachance, could you describe your situation for us at this time?

Are francophones where you live readily able to work in French and obtain service in French?

[Nathalie Lachance]

That is an excellent question.

I think it depends on your location, in Edmonton. It also depends on luck.

Do we hear French spoken more often now than when I arrived in 1999? Absolutely. The fact that we are now 260,000 francophones strong is a game changer. We feel it in daily life when we go looking for services.

Do we have access to the full range of services in French, even from private companies under federal jurisdiction? The answer is no.

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

That is going to be good.

Right?

[Nathalie Lachance]

Yes, it will be.

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

I think that francophone immigration helps. Studies show that francophone immigrants are integrating as quickly as francophones in general. I think the percentage was 42%.

Do you think that the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act, or UFPBA, is going to fight assimilation and retain francophone immigrants?

[Nathalie Lachance]

I think we need to fight assimilation for everyone. Efforts by all of the stakeholders are going to help us fight assimilation, whether for people born in Alberta, born elsewhere in Canada or born abroad. These people made a choice to live in Alberta. Assimilation is a daily risk. We see it in the education system. When the only services available are services in English, the incentive not to speak French is obvious.

So I think that all of the services we can offer to generate more opportunities to provide service in French will help us fight assimilation and enhance the importance of French as an official language of Canada.

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

Thank you.

UFPBA includes provisions requiring companies to generalize the use of French.

Do you think that would be good for federal institutions as well?

[Nathalie Lachance]

I think that every opportunity we have to speak French is good for the francophone community. We live in a minority context.

I have the privilege of working with the ACFA and having worked in francophone organizations. It really is a privilege. It gives me the opportunity to speak French. It's not necessarily something that we can all do by walking around our neighbourhoods.

The more opportunities we have to live in French and express ourselves in French, the better we preserve our language and successfully pass it on. We don't just pass on our language, but also our culture and our identity.

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

I think that the brief submitted by the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada mentions the need to have an active offer of services in French. Since people are used to being served in English, they won't automatically ask to be served in French.

I think signage should also be in French. I don't know if it will be like that outside Quebec, but in Quebec, French will predominate.

What other means could be used to determine which businesses will be subject to the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act and to encourage people to ask to be served in French?

[Nathalie Lachance]

You make a good point about signage. This isn't related to the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act, but in Edmonton, police officers now wear a patch on their uniform that indicates which languages they speak. That would be another avenue.

I took a flight last week, and I saw that airport security staff are now wearing lovely blue jackets so that we immediately know who speaks both official languages. We always have to find ways to make sure that people are clearly identifiable.

I completely agree with you that an active offer is essential.

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

Do you think the government will accept your recommendation to expand the regions to be designated as having a strong francophone presence?

[Nathalie Lachance]

I believe that, to be compatible with the Official Languages Act, which states that we should return to the 1971 demographic weight of French speakers, the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act needs to be extended to the populations and communities we are proposing.

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

I think increasing the proportion of francophones through francophone immigration is quite easy to do temporarily. However, it will be much more challenging to ensure that people integrate into francophone communities. This is where the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act may be beneficial.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

You have 35 seconds left, Mr. Beaulieu.

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

Do you want to add anything, Ms. Lachance?

[Nathalie Lachance]

I would add that, here in Alberta, a lot of work is being done on inclusion. I want to acknowledge the remarkable work of francophone community organizations. As I always say, our schoolchildren are the ones showing us the way.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu.

Before moving on to the second round of questions, I need to turn to Ms. Lachance. The technicians are asking you to unplug your headset and plug it back in. They think that might solve the problem.

We can now continue.

Colleagues, we're moving on to the second round of questions, but I'm going to have to reduce everyone's speaking time.

Mr. Godin, you have the floor for four minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Lachance and Ms. Laurin, thank you for being with us. I'm glad to see you taking part in our process.

First, I would like to ask a general question. The Association canadienne-française de l'Alberta has been around for 100 years. Can you summarize the situation of French in Alberta over the past 100 years?

Can you tell us whether it has improved or not? What is the current situation?

[Nathalie Lachance]

There have been high points and not-so-high points. It must be acknowledged that, a little over 100 years ago, when Alberta became a province of Canada in 1905, French was the most spoken European language in Edmonton and the province. However, French was then prohibited as a language of instruction in schools for years.

There was the Piquette affair in 1987. A provincial MLA was asked to speak only English in the Legislative Assembly.

The provincial government has designated 2026 as the Year of the Francophonie in Alberta. Today, around 40 MLAs are able to speak French. We can hear French in the Legislative Assembly of Alberta. In addition, there are 49 francophone schools that serve 10,000 students, and there are 75,000 rights holders.

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

Ms. Lachance, earlier you told my colleague that you no longer heard French spoken.

My question is very simple: Is French currently in decline in Alberta?

[Nathalie Lachance]

I would say that it's expanding nicely, since we're hearing more and more French. What improves the situation is that 260,000 Albertans are able to express themselves in French. This is a pool of people who can express themselves in French.

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

Thank you.

The purpose of the act is to stop the decline of French and to protect and promote both official languages.

In your opinion, do the draft regulations proposed here in the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act achieve these objectives?

[Nathalie Lachance]

I think the draft regulations can help us, but more communities need to be designated as communities where services are offered in French and English.

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

I gather that you're suggesting that we increase the number of regions with a strong francophone presence.

Is that correct?

[Nathalie Lachance]

That's correct.

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

Who do you think is best placed to know the reality on the ground to establish and confirm regions with a strong francophone presence?

[Nathalie Lachance]

I think that the work must be done in tandem and that advocacy organizations must be included. The federal government and advocacy organizations must work together to ensure that services are actually received.

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

You were never consulted.

Is that correct?

[Nathalie Lachance]

I don't think so.

Ms. Laurin, what do you think?

[Isabelle Laurin, Executive Director, Association canadienne-française de l'Alberta]

I believe there were general consultations, but not targeted ones with each province and territory.

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

ACFA was not consulted.

Wouldn't you be the best people to recognize those regions?

You talk about participation, but beyond that, the Governor in Council or Canadian Heritage officials decided that only one part of Edmonton should be designated.

That means that no legislation will be enforced elsewhere to require federally regulated businesses to serve their customers in French.

Does that make sense to you?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

There are only 10 seconds left. Please answer very briefly, Ms. Lachance.

[Nathalie Lachance]

Yes, I agree with you. We need a lot more designated places.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Colleagues, I'm going to be very strict about time.

I will give the floor to Mr. D'Entremont for four minutes.

[Chris d'Entremont, Liberal, Acadie—Annapolis, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome to the witnesses.

In majority anglophone regions, there are small francophone communities, particularly in Nova Scotia. I see it's the same in Alberta.

What are the priorities?

What services are now available in French in the regions, in Calgary and in Edmonton for the francophone population, from either the provincial or federal government, or in businesses under federal jurisdiction?

[Nathalie Lachance]

Apart from the services provided by francophone organizations, I think the rest is much more ad hoc. We can benefit from employees who are bilingual, but they don't guarantee that services are offered in both languages consistently or even regularly.

[Chris d'Entremont, Liberal, Acadie—Annapolis, NS]

Is this in more urban or rural areas?

[Nathalie Lachance]

Either. It's totally ad hoc. It really depends on whether people speak French or not. It's not related to ensuring that people are bilingual.

If we're lucky enough to have bilingual employees, services are offered, but it's really an ad hoc approach.

[Chris d'Entremont, Liberal, Acadie—Annapolis, NS]

What kind of services would you like to have in your regions?

[Nathalie Lachance]

The UFPBA is really about federally regulated businesses. I think that's really important.

I'm thinking of the Canadian banking system and how complex it is. The Canadian population needs to be more financially literate. It is becoming extremely important to have access to this type of information in the language of one's choice.

I'm thinking of the transportation sector, which is very important, and the airlines and railways. I think it's essential for us to ensure that we can be served in French in all federally regulated private businesses.

[Chris d'Entremont, Liberal, Acadie—Annapolis, NS]

We had representatives from the banking system here a few days ago, or rather a few weeks ago. Time flies. They told us that they offer bilingual services online, on cellphones.

Do you think that's enough?

[Nathalie Lachance]

It's absolutely not enough. It's true that many of us use our phones to conduct our daily transactions. However, the fact remains that, when it comes time to invest money or take out a mortgage or car loan, you should be able to meet an employee at a branch. People have to be able to be served in the language of their choice.

[Chris d'Entremont, Liberal, Acadie—Annapolis, NS]

I think I have a minute left.

When the time comes to designate regions with a strong francophone presence, the challenge I often see is that there aren't francophones all over Edmonton and Calgary.

In the large regions, could we think about doing things a little differently when designating regions with a strong francophone presence to make them smaller?

[Nathalie Lachance]

I think that's the danger posed by the current draft regulations. There's absolutely nothing planned for Calgary, and that's very problematic. In Edmonton, there's only one neighbourhood, whereas we have schools in every neighbourhood. I think we need to look at where the francophone community lives and ensure that French-language services are provided in areas with a significant number of people who need them.

We need to adopt a much broader vision than the one currently outlined in the draft regulations and consider designating smaller regions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you very much, Mr. d'Entremont.

Mr. Beaulieu, you have the floor for two minutes.

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

Thank you.

I think the non-regression provision is very important. Otherwise, it's a bit like going back to the “where numbers warrant” criterion. The linguistic indicators have been adjusted to increase the proportion of people belonging to an official language minority community outside Quebec. This artificially inflates the figures, and the government thus considers it legitimate to do nothing or let things slide.

In my opinion, the non-regression provision should also apply to the Official Languages Act, even taking into account the remedial target for francophone immigration for certain historic communities.

What do you think?

[Nathalie Lachance]

I completely agree with you.

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

That's right.

If we look at the data on the main language spoken at home in Alberta, we see that it has dropped from 1.4% in 1971 to 0.7% in 2021. I think it will likely increase with the arrival of francophone immigrants. It might not be visible in the next census, but it will eventually show up. Furthermore, if we succeed in integrating these people, I think it will help you a great deal.

What do you think?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

There are 35 seconds remaining.

[Nathalie Lachance]

There is no doubt that immigration is a major driver of growth for Alberta's francophone community.

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

Furthermore, if we do not increase opportunities to live and work in French, the assimilation rate will continue to rise. I believe it is crucial to find ways to strengthen the ability to live in French—that is, to have more regions designated under the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you very much, Mr. Beaulieu. Your speaking time has expired.

I now give the floor to Mr. Godin for four minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Lachance, you used the phrase “where numbers warrant” earlier. You mentioned a criterion that has not been examined so far, namely the number of schools. I think you could make a recommendation to us—I suggest this—so that we can ask Canadian Heritage to go back to the drawing board to take into account the number of schools and organizations on the ground.

What do you think?

[Nathalie Lachance]

I think it's a good idea, because there's no doubt that schools are at the heart of our communities. We recognize that we transport a lot of students, but the fact remains that this allows us to create a more francophone environment around the schools.

The francophone neighbourhood has been able to take root thanks to the many francophone schools located there. People wanted to settle in this neighbourhood because there were schools nearby. Furthermore, this could provide better incentives to create more synergy around our schools.

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

We agree on that.

You mentioned reassessing the designation of regions with a strong francophone presence every 10 years—that is, after two censuses.

Regarding the non-regression provision, why must regions be placed under review from one census to the next?

Couldn't we instead adopt a provision or ask the department to establish a much more rigorous mechanism?

If we want to grow the francophone community in Canada, particularly in Alberta, we shouldn't put a region at risk from one census to the next, but—as you said—we should take historical communities into account and ensure that these communities grow. We want to grow the French-speaking community in Canada. So, we need to give ourselves the means to do so.

What do you think?

[Nathalie Lachance]

That's an excellent idea. We were very conservative in our request, and I really like yours.

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

I invite you to share your thoughts on this. Perhaps you can propose something more concrete based on what we've just discussed. There may be an opportunity here.

You mentioned historic communities. How can we exclude regions that have helped foster the French presence in Alberta and that enabled the Association canadienne-française de l'Alberta to celebrate its 100th anniversary this year?

I'm referring specifically to St. Albert and St. Paul. You've named others. There's an inconsistency here. On the one hand, we say we want to halt the decline of French; on the other, we're stifling these small regions. In my view, their inclusion is justified, even if their numbers aren't large.

How might we define the phrase “where numbers warrant”?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

You have one minute left.

[Nathalie Lachance]

It won't be easy in just one minute.

We really need to think more carefully about how we arrived at these figures. In my opinion, simply applying percentages doesn't make sense, because it doesn't take into account large population centres. We really need to examine how to create synergy that could be beneficial and ensure that it contributes to the community's vitality.

I don't have an easy answer. That said, I think we need to revisit the formula.

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

Thank you, Ms. Lachance.

Subsection 62(2.1) of the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act states the following:

In making a regulation that defines “region with a strong francophone presence” under paragraph (1)(b), the Governor in Council may take into account any factors that the Governor in Council considers appropriate, including: (a) the number of francophones in a region; (b) the number of francophones in a region as a proportion of the region's total population; and (c) the vitality and specificity of French linguistic minority communities.

In your opinion, what other criteria should be added to this?

What should we tell Canadian Heritage to get them to return to the negotiating table and improve this draft regulation?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Mr. Godin, I'm sorry. Your speaking time has expired. We do not have time for a response.

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

I thought so.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

However, Ms. Lachance may submit a written response to the committee. Unfortunately, I must move on to the next member.

Thank you, Mr. Godin.

I give the floor to Ms. Mingarelli for four minutes.

[Giovanna Mingarelli, Liberal, Prescott—Russell—Cumberland, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Lachance and Ms. Lorrain, thank you for joining us today.

What are the main obstacles that francophone Albertans have faced when they wanted to work or be served in French?

[Nathalie Lachance]

When it comes to services in French, I'm thinking about the lack of an active offer. Unless we recognize the accent of the person serving us, we won't ask for service in French. That's why we sometimes find ourselves in a situation where two francophones are speaking to each other in English.

This brings me to the issue of the possibility of working in French. The challenge we face is the lack of recognition of the value of being able to speak two languages—of seeing this as an added value. There is work to be done to ensure that we recognize the importance of offering services in both official languages.

[Giovanna Mingarelli, Liberal, Prescott—Russell—Cumberland, ON]

Thank you.

Do the criteria defining the term “region with a strong francophone presence” adequately reflect the geographic reality of Alberta?

[Nathalie Lachance]

You're returning to Mr. Godin's question.

When we examine the draft regulation, it's as if we had relied solely on the second point—that is, the percentage. We did not consider the issue of the number of people or the community aspect. I believe that all three of the act's criteria should be applied. In the document, it appears that an “or” was used and that the second option was simply chosen.

[Giovanna Mingarelli, Liberal, Prescott—Russell—Cumberland, ON]

Thank you.

Are some French-speaking communities in Alberta at risk of being left behind, despite their historical or cultural significance?

[Nathalie Lachance]

Absolutely.

If we fail to add regions with a strong francophone presence, we will end up with historic communities where all services are provided in English. That is the danger we face. That is why our brief really focuses on increasing the number of regions with a strong francophone presence.

It is about recognizing historic communities, truly recognizing the importance of the francophone community outside of Edmonton and Calgary. We must not limit it simply to a neighbourhood in the provincial capital.

[Giovanna Mingarelli, Liberal, Prescott—Russell—Cumberland, ON]

Thank you.

How much time do I have left, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

You have one and a half minutes left.

[Giovanna Mingarelli, Liberal, Prescott—Russell—Cumberland, ON]

All right.

How can the government better promote French as an economic asset in western Canada?

[Nathalie Lachance]

There are several things that can be done. One could be to recognize the importance of trade and the role that the international francophone community can play in this regard. Another could be to build on the diversity of the francophone community in Alberta.

For example, in Alberta, a company now offers its plumbing services in both official languages. I think there are businesses—and this isn't a federal matter—that recognize there is a francophone population. If these people are served in French and feel a connection to the language being used, they'll use their services more regularly.

[Giovanna Mingarelli, Liberal, Prescott—Russell—Cumberland, ON]

Thank you.

I will now ask my final question.

What improvements would you like to see to the act or its regulations to better meet the needs of francophones in Alberta?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

You have 25 seconds left.

[Nathalie Lachance]

I will focus on the regulations. The provision regarding regions with a significant francophone presence must be amended to reflect the needs of the francophone community in Alberta.

[Giovanna Mingarelli, Liberal, Prescott—Russell—Cumberland, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you, Ms. Mingarelli.

On behalf of the committee, I would like to thank you, Ms. Lachance and Ms. Laurin. I am very pleased to see you, and I know this feeling is shared by everyone. Every time I meet with you, whether in Alberta or here, I learn a great deal. I think it helps the committee a lot when you come to meet with us.

We thank you for the work you do and for your testimony today.

[Nathalie Lachance]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Colleagues, we're going to take a short break. Our next witnesses are attending in person. The meeting will resume in a few minutes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Colleagues, welcome back to meeting number 39 of the Standing Committee on Official Languages.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(f) and the motion adopted on April 12, 2026, we are continuing our study on the draft regulations on the use of French in federally regulated private businesses.

Before welcoming our witnesses, I have been remiss because I didn't do something earlier. I always welcome members who aren't permanent members and are substituting in on our committee, and I'd like to welcome Mr. Kram and Mr. Gourde to our committee for today's session. Thank you for being with us.

I'd now like to welcome our witnesses for today.

From Talking. Advocating. Living in Quebec, we have Eva Ludvig, president, and Marion Sandilands, lawyer.

Welcome. You'll have five minutes to give an opening statement, after which we'll go to questions from members of Parliament.

The floor is yours for five minutes.

[Eva Ludvig, President, TALQ]

Thank you.

I will just point out that the name of the organization is TALQ. It doesn't have an acronym. That's just a tag line. It's a play on the word “talk”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

That's wonderful.

You prefer TALQ, rather than “Talking. Advocating. Living in Quebec.”

[Eva Ludvig]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

TALQ, it is.

The floor is yours.

[Eva Ludvig]

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

Thank you for the opportunity to appear here on behalf of TALQ, which represents Canada's English linguistic minority community, the English-speaking community of Quebec. I am TALQ's president, Eva Ludvig, and with me is our counsel, Marion Sandilands.

Before turning to the regulations, I would note briefly that this committee plays an important role in examining Canada's official language framework, including the Official Languages Act and the issues affecting official language minority communities. We appreciate the opportunity to contribute to your work.

More than half of Canadians living in official language minority communities are English-speaking Quebeckers. Our community is a significant part of Canada's official languages landscape, and TALQ welcomes opportunities to bring its perspectives to your deliberations.

TALQ supports measures to protect and promote French in Canada. However, that is not the issue we are debating today. French deserves ongoing support, and the federal government has a legitimate role to play in this regard.

Our concern is the model established in the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act and the regulations before you. In our view, this framework marks a significant departure from Canada's traditional approach to linguistic duality in federal jurisdiction.

Historically, federal language policy has treated English and French together, grounded in linguistic duality and respect for both official language minority communities. The new regime instead creates detailed protection for French in federally regulated private businesses without corresponding protections for Quebec's English-speaking minority. That shift moves federal policy toward a more territorial approach within federal sectors.

The proposed regulations also introduce a substantial compliance regime: declarations, filings, committees, assessments and enforcement mechanisms. While large firms may manage this, smaller businesses and new entrants may face added costs and complexity. This is significant because federally regulated sectors like banking, telecommunications, transport and logistics depend on national integration and predictable rules. A Quebec-specific compliance layer will have real operational consequences.

One likely impact is on labour markets. The regime will increase incentives for French-first staffing and advancement. While this benefits bilingual workers, unilingual or weaker-French English-speaking Quebeckers, newcomers integrating through English and some older workers may face reduced access to opportunities in these sectors.

These industries have historically provided English-speaking Quebeckers with access to Canada-wide employment while remaining rooted in Quebec. Any narrowing of that access has implications for income, mobility and confidence in federal institutions.

There is also a service dimension. The act strengthens the right to receive service in French, but does not create an equivalent right in English in Quebec. In some markets, English service will continue, but in others it may become less consistent or more discretionary, particularly affecting vulnerable community members.

Citizens, business employees and minority communities are entitled to know how federal law will operate. There's also a part VII issue. The minister has obligations not only to promote French, but also to enhance the vitality of both official language minority communities, including Quebec's English-speaking community. We therefore believe implementation should have been accompanied by a clear part VII analysis, setting out consultations, evidence, impacts and mitigation measures. Without it, Parliament cannot assess whether the regime is fully consistent with the Official Languages Act.

This committee has an ongoing role under section 37 of the act to review implementation, including its effects on Quebec's English-speaking community. To support that role, the regulations should include robust monitoring and reporting mechanisms that enable Parliament and the public to assess real-world impacts.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Ms. Ludvig, I hate to interrupt you.

We're at about five and a half minutes now, so we're over time. Could I ask you to wrap up?

Then we'll go to questions from members. You'll have an opportunity in that question-and-answer period to add more content. I just want to respect the time.

[Eva Ludvig]

Canada can protect French without weakening linguistic duality, economic competitiveness or the confidence of 1.3 million English-speaking Quebeckers in Parliament's ability to uphold both languages.

As we have said from the outset, the question is not whether French should be protected—it must be. The real question is how to do this while respecting linguistic duality and both official language minority communities.

Our position is that it is possible, but only with transparency, monitoring, mitigation and a willingness to adjust course where necessary.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you very much, Ms. Ludvig.

We'll now go to questions from members. I'll start with Mr. Godin for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Ms. Ludvig and Ms. Sandilands, for joining us in person. It makes it much easier for us to do our job as members of Parliament.

I would like to ask an existential question.

Ms. Ludvig, you are familiar with the situation in North America. Quebec is the only province whose common language is French in a sea of anglophones.

That said, help us to help you. If you were a legislator, how would you implement legislation for private companies to halt the decline of French in Quebec?

[Eva Ludvig]

First of all, I've said this before and will repeat it: We understand—

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

Mr. Chair, I can't hear the witness very well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

We're going to pause the clock, Ms. Ludvig.

Mr. Godin, are you saying that you can't hear the interpretation very well?

Ms. Ludvig, I'm sorry about that. We had a technical problem. Please continue.

[Eva Ludvig]

All right.

I just want to point out that we agree with you.

French needs to be protected. We truly believe in linguistic duality and—

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

I'll interrupt you briefly.

I want to tell you that we have a duty to protect both official languages, in Quebec and in Canada. For us in the Conservative Party of Canada, both official languages are important. However, the situation in Quebec is unique.

[Eva Ludvig]

We understand that, because we live in Quebec.

We know the challenges, and we realize that there are challenges. However, the Official Languages Act was created to protect both minority language communities. We want to make sure federally regulated businesses will not harm the minority language community's access to employment and services.

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

I share your vision.

Now, I just want to tell you that the Official Languages Act and part 2—which is the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act—are there to protect both official languages. French and English should not be pitted against each other. There should be a concerted effort.

You say that unilingual anglophones may face discrimination in terms of access to jobs, but the same is true for francophones. The problem, Ms. Ludvig, is unilingualism. Why not work hand in hand to promote bilingualism?

[Eva Ludvig]

I agree with you completely.

The English-speaking community understands the importance of this in Quebec and has made tremendous strides in learning French and working in French. Ninety-four per cent of English-speaking Quebeckers are able to have a conversation in French.

However, as with a francophone outside Quebec who is bilingual, it's important that we still have the federal organization services we are entitled to, as a minority linguistic community, and the opportunity for careers in federal organizations. There are positions, internally, that do not require you to deal with the public in both languages. That is fine. You can work alone. It gives you an opportunity to work, as I mentioned, in these federal organizations, which are national. You can have a career, nationally, while you remain in the province you love and want to work in.

Certainly, I agree with you. We should be more and more bilingual. As English-speaking Quebeckers, we understand the importance of being able to speak French and work in French. We just want to be respected as English-speaking Quebeckers as well.

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

Absolutely. I understand what you're saying, but you also have to understand that the Official Languages Act is there to protect the two official languages as opposed to other languages.

I concede that the official language minority community in Quebec is that of anglophones. We are not working against them. However, we also need to give ourselves the means to stop the decline of French.

Are you willing to admit, Ms. Ludvig, that the most vulnerable language in Quebec is French?

[Eva Ludvig]

Absolutely. We are talking about English-speaking Quebeckers as a minority language community. We're not talking about the English language. I agree with you completely that the English language itself is not under threat, but the English-speaking community in Quebec needs support and is entitled to support under the Official Languages Act. It is recognized as a minority language community. I will not argue with you about English versus French as a language. I agree completely with you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Mr. Godin, you have 30 seconds left.

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

In concrete terms, how will the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act adversely affect anglophones in Quebec?

[Eva Ludvig]

What do you mean?

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

How will it adversely affect them? How will it weaken them? How will it lower the bar and discriminate against anglophones?

[Eva Ludvig]

There is noting in the federally regulated businesses act that protects service in English for the English-speaking community or protects employment for English-speaking community members. What we are saying is that it's very important that this be evaluated and monitored to see the impact on individual English-speaking Quebeckers as well as on the vitality of the English-speaking community at large.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Godin.

Mr. Villeneuve now has the floor for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon, ladies. Thank you both for being here.

As I told you earlier, when we met, I'm the member for Brome—Missisquoi, in the Eastern Townships. There is an anglophone community that makes up about 20% of the population of Brome—Missisquoi. I'm very happy about that, because the two communities work very well together, and they promote the entire region. They do a lot of events together in the region.

That said, I read your brief, which is quite comprehensive, to say the least.

In your opinion, does the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act strike an adequate balance between promoting French and respecting the rights of anglophone workers in Quebec?

[Eva Ludvig]

This is the concern we have, the importance of.... We understand that this particular act was created to support the French language. What we want to know is how this will have an impact as it moves on.

We were against this notion. The act is now done. That ship has sailed. We are saying that this needs to be evaluated and monitored carefully over time to see the impact on employment for English speakers but also on the access to services for the English-speaking community in the same way that services are provided by federal institutions to the English-speaking community under the Official Languages Act.

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

Do you feel that anglophone workers are being wronged?

If so, to what extent and why?

In your opinion, how can the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act help or not help their situation?

[Eva Ludvig]

There are people who are now working, for instance, at federal institutions who will not have the language skills now required. We worry about their career development. We worry about new hires, people whose French may not be good enough yet. There are different kinds of positions that do not require you to serve someone in their language. It can also be somebody who is there to help serve English-speaking Quebeckers. At the moment, there are positions that do not require it, and it does not mean that service cannot be made available to English speakers as well by these people.

Career opportunities will be disappearing for those who may not feel 100% comfortable in French yet. I can give myself as an example. I'm now retired, but I worked in the federal public service in Montreal. When I started, my French was okay. I managed to get level B, but by the time I left work, I felt that my French was much better, and I was able to be a much better part of Quebec society.

These are opportunities that will not be available in federally regulated businesses.

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

Thank you.

I'm having trouble hearing what the witness is saying, Mr. Chair. The volume keeps dropping every five seconds.

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

I had the same problem.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

The clerk has asked me to speak in English. We're testing right now. The clerk is testing the audio regarding the problem Monsieur Villeneuve is raising. I don't know if that's helpful.

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

I can hear her now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Okay.

Please let me know if it happens again. If we need to start over, we will.

I'm aware that we don't have a lot of time with the witnesses, and I want to get the most out of it.

Mr. Villeneuve, you have two more minutes.

You have two minutes remaining.

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

That's perfect. Thank you.

Ms. Ludvig, have you identified any provisions that raise particular concerns for anglophone Quebeckers?

[Eva Ludvig]

There are none. The English-speaking minority language community is not included in the act.

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

How can we distinguish a language protection measure from one that could be perceived as restrictive?

[Eva Ludvig]

Restrictive means that there are none. There's no protection. Where there is protection for one language group and not for the other, that is restriction.

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

What impact could the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act have on anglophone workers?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

You have 30 seconds.

[Eva Ludvig]

I said it earlier.

It affects career opportunities. It's the ability to serve the English-speaking community, because there's nothing to indicate that employees will have to be bilingual. What it says is that they will have to be able to speak French. What about an English-speaking client who goes into a bank and wants to be served? I'm sure Montreal will be a little bit different. It's a big region. I'm particularly concerned about, as our francophone colleagues are concerned, the smaller communities on the Gaspé peninsula and Magdalen Islands, where there are English-speaking communities, historical English-speaking communities.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Ms. Ludvig, I'm sorry.

It's very interesting what you're saying, but I have to respect the time to be fair to everyone. I apologize for that.

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve.

I now give the floor to Monsieur Beaulieu for six minutes.

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

Thank you.

So, basically, you are admitting that French is in decline in Quebec.

Is that correct?

[Eva Ludvig]

I didn't say that because I'm not a statistician. What I'm telling you is that French is vulnerable across Canada and North America. French is completely vulnerable, and it must be protected.

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

Do you agree that, compared to francophones outside Quebec, your situation is not at all the same?

Situations like that of a woman who can't be served in French at her bank are experienced by francophones outside Quebec every day. It's like this just about everywhere. There are almost no health care services in French elsewhere in Canada. It's not at all the same situation as that of anglophones in Quebec.

[Eva Ludvig]

I disagree with you on that, Monsieur Beaulieu.

I think what we are doing is comparing things that are not comparable. I'm talking about service from the Canadian government and from federally regulated businesses. I understand that federally regulated businesses were not obligated until now to provide services in both languages. Under this act, they are now obligated to provide services in French as well, and that's excellent. There's no problem with that. I have no objection. I think it's important. What I'm worried about is the possibility for English-speaking Quebeckers to continue to be able to go to the bank and get their service in English. That's what I'm worried about.

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

I wouldn't worry too much about that, because right now, the language used at work is predominantly English, while the use of French as the language of work is declining in Quebec. I know that you won't recognize this fact, but French is in decline.

[Eva Ludvig]

[Inaudible—Editor]

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

You should know this, since this is your field.

You're just looking at the data for English, and English is on the rise in Quebec. As for the rest of Canada, we're not even talking about it. Basically, the problem is that, outside of Quebec, English is the common language and the language of integration for immigrants. In Quebec, approximately 50% of newcomers choose English. The common language in Montreal is often English. To ensure the future of French, we would need to successfully integrate 90% of newcomers.

Do you agree that we have the right to expect this? In Quebec, we welcome immigrants, and we're happy to do so—

[Eva Ludvig]

I'm here to talk about services from the federal government, both federal institutions and, in this particular case, federally regulated businesses. I understand what you're saying, but I'm really not here to talk about the general service.

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

Basically, in your brief, you launch an attack against the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act. You said you were against this legislation.

You say you agree with the use of French, but every time the Government of Quebec proposes a measure to protect French, you oppose it. At one point—

[Eva Ludvig]

TALQ is on record, Monsieur Beaulieu, and part of its mission statement is that we support the French language. Our mandate is to represent the English-speaking community and its members in Quebec. It's normal for us as such an organization, which is recognized, to be concerned about our community. However—

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

Do you agree that French should be the common language in Quebec?

There can't be two common languages. Basically, the flaw in this reasoning, in my opinion, is the assumption that languages are in competition with one another. You can't deny it. The more French gains ground, the more English loses ground. If everyone were bilingual, the choice would always fall on the majority language. As long as we're in Canada and North America, the majority language is English.

It's normal for newcomers to gravitate toward English, since it's the language of the majority. Even in Quebec, that's how it's perceived. Federal institutions do operate primarily in English. We've heard all kinds of testimony on this. Federal institutions and public services are the places where people work the least in French.

[Eva Ludvig]

As I said to Mr. Godin, we accept the fact that the English language in Canada is not in danger.

We accept and agree that the French language in Canada needs to be protected and needs to be supported. I am here—

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

In Quebec—

[Eva Ludvig]

Of course. We're not against it—

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

If you agree that French needs to be supported in Quebec, then you agree that there is an imbalance between the act and federal services.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

There are 30 seconds left.

Please be brief.

[Eva Ludvig]

The two communities are not in conflict. We are not in conflict with the French language at all, and please don't misunderstand that. We are here to protect and to speak on behalf of the rights of the English-speaking community to be served, which is recognized by the Quebec government and by the Charte de la langue française, as well.

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

We have nothing against English, but we want French to be the common language.

[Eva Ludvig]

I'm talking about the English-speaking community, not the language, sir.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you very much. The time has elapsed.

Colleagues, given we have about 12 minutes left in the meeting, I'm going to have to shorten the second round. It's going to be two minutes each for the Conservatives and the Liberals and one minute for the Bloc Québécois.

Mr. Dalton, you have the floor for two minutes.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Thank you for joining us today and for sharing your thoughts.

TALQ recommends adding an explicit non-derogation statement confirming that nothing in the regulation reduces existing access to service in English where it's already provided.

Can you give more information regarding this recommendation? I know you've talked a bit about it already, but you're saying you don't want it taken away.

[Eva Ludvig]

No, we don't.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Can you elaborate?

[Eva Ludvig]

Right now, I can go into a bank and get service in English. I don't want that to disappear. English-speaking Quebeckers want to continue to have the right, at federally regulated businesses, to get our services and that what is there and what we can get now does not disappear.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Okay.

TALQ recommends that small and medium-sized enterprises under federal jurisdiction receive compliance support before any punitive measures are taken.

What do you mean by compliance support? What federal agencies could offer that program?

Finally, does the Government of Quebec offer such programs?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

You have about 45 seconds.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Choose whatever you want to answer.

[Eva Ludvig]

I will very quickly say that this is a sea change for federally regulated businesses. Small businesses will have to adjust, and they will need support from the Department of Canadian Heritage and from others as they transition to this new regime.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

From your perspective, you see a lot more regulations, regulatory burden and costs related to this.

[Eva Ludvig]

We see a lot. It's complex, with a lot of regulations, a lot of control and a lot of compliance. What we are saying is that this is going to be problematic for federally regulated businesses.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Please send in what we could do better on that from your perspective.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you, Mr. Dalton.

I pass the floor to Mr. El-Khoury for two minutes.

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Ludvig, I completely agree with my colleague Mr. Godin when he says that Quebec is surrounded by a sea of anglophones. You know very well that, for francophones in Quebec, language and culture are values, an identity and a heritage for these people. Every human being must protect these elements.

Do Canadians in other provinces take this unique characteristic into consideration? Do they understand Quebeckers' concerns about preserving their heritage and values?

What's your opinion on this matter?

[Eva Ludvig]

I'm sad to say I don't know about Canadians across the country, but I do feel that our colleagues—our confreres—in the the francophone community in the rest of Canada need the support of the Canadian government to ensure their existence, to ensure their continuity, to ensure their vitality and to ensure that they have access to French-language services.

We don't object to that. Not only do we not object, but we support that. We think it's important. Yes, you're right; it's important.

I'm proud of bilingualism in Canada. I'm proud of being able to speak in both languages, and I wish all Canadians were able to do that.

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

That's great, but we would like to see it done practically by other provinces.

Quickly—

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Mr. El‑Khoury, you have 20 seconds remaining.

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

As of now, would you see companies adopting the LUFEP or sticking with the French language charter, and why?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

I would ask for a quick answer, as there are 10 seconds left.

[Eva Ludvig]

I hope that the organizations will make their own decisions. I'm hoping that they will make the right decisions for themselves.

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

We will see.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you, Mr. El-Khoury.

I pass the floor now to Mr. Beaulieu.

Mr. Beaulieu, you have the floor for one minute.

Before we continue, to help our interpreters, I would ask that you try not to speak over each other.

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

Do you think it's fair that the federal government provides substantial funding to your organization and all your affiliated organizations, but gives nothing to groups that defend the French language?

[Eva Ludvig]

I think it's important that we be properly supported, but again, I'm not here to discuss that question at this point. I would be glad to discuss the federally regulated businesses.

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

You say that 94% of anglophones speak French, but Statistics Canada's data on bilingualism indicate that it's 69%. It's been that way for some time. It's gone up by 2% since 2001. However, francophones are increasingly becoming bilingual.

Do you agree that even anglophones should be able to speak French when interacting with Canadians who speak other languages?

[Eva Ludvig]

Absolutely. We send our children to immersion classes.

French immersion was created by the English-speaking community because we understand the importance of it, and we respect that. However, we also want to be respected as English-speaking Quebeckers, the other official language minority community in Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu.

Thank you, Ms. Ludvig.

I will now pass the floor to Monsieur Godin for two minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Before we go any further, I'd like to come back to adjourning debate on the motion I had moved. This adjournment was proposed on May 26. I'd like to reopen the debate on this motion.

I would remind you that, on March 5, 2021, Mélanie Joly, who was Minister of Official Languages at the time, simply issued a press release announcing the creation of an expert panel. The goal was to enable people to work effectively and to provide tools related to the preparation of the bill to modernize the Official Languages Act.

Mélanie Joly had prepared a white paper, but the roles of the ministers were reshuffled, and Ms. Joly unfortunately lost that portfolio. It was Ms. Petitpas Taylor who took over this responsibility. Actually, I may be mistaken about the timeline. It may have been Mr. Boissonnault, but that's not important to the story. What matters is the outcome.

We had a debate on the Standing Committee on Official Languages on May 26, and the Liberals voted against the motion I had moved. It simply asked that the committee receive the results of the expert panel's study. That would have enabled us to give Canadian Heritage the tools to be even more effective. We've never seen the results of this expert panel study.

I am going to read the motion from May 26, in which I requested—

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Mr. Godin, allow me to interrupt you. Your speaking time, which was two minutes, has expired. I let you speak for your full two minutes. If you want to reopen the debate, then you're moving a dilatory motion.

Do you wish to reopen the debate on the motion?

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

That was the request I made from the very beginning.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

In that case, I'll stop you there, and we'll go to a vote on the dilatory motion.

The question is this: Do we agree to reopen the debate?

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

Mr. Chair, before we vote, I'd like to speak to the clerk.

I understand that I'm losing my right to speak for now, but if I hadn't stopped speaking, would I have had the right to continue?

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

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

I'm aware that we have only one minute left in the meeting. We can raise points of order and have debates, and it's up to the committee members to decide how they want to do things.

That said, I didn't know if you wanted to reopen the debate. It wasn't clear to me. I understood that later in your presentation. When I understood that you were moving a dilatory motion, I should have interrupted you. I didn't, because I treated what you were saying as part of your two minutes of speaking time.

If I had cut you off after 30 or 45 seconds, we would have gone to a vote before coming back to the meeting.

Now, the meeting is almost over. I don't know if this is important, but what I propose is that we vote on the dilatory motion. If the motion is defeated, we will return to the meeting, which is almost over.

I would also remind you that you have practically used up your two minutes of speaking time.

Do you have a point of order, then?

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

No. I'm going to respond to what you just said, and it may preempt any points of order from other members. What you said in your explanation was that this might not be important, but, for me, it's very important to have this report.

With that, I open the debate. I wish to move the motion and reopen the debate on this matter. I therefore ask you to initiate the procedure.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

All right.

Are there any other points of order? If not, we will proceed to the vote.

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

When a motion is moved during a meeting like this, we have the right to present it. Normally, as far as I know, we can't be cut off before we've finished speaking. I've never seen that happen.

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

That's my take on the situation as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

I don't know if this changes anything, since the meeting is over, but as for your point of order—

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

I wasn't the one who raised the point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

You raised a point of order as well.

Isn't that right?

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

I asked to open the debate on a motion. Mr. Beaulieu raised a point of order. So you're answering me again, but you had already answered me. You can answer me again, I don't have a problem with that, but it was Mr. Beaulieu who asked you the question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

It wasn't clear to me. Technically, if you want to move a dilatory motion, you have to use specific language, and I didn't hear it. We can review the transcripts to see if I missed it. I didn't hear that language, which is why I let you speak for two minutes. Honestly, it was really to give you the freedom to express yourself, because I could see that you had something to say.

That is my response to you, Mr. Godin.

That is also my response to you, Mr. Beaulieu.

Therefore, I move that we vote on the dilatory motion.

Does it please the committee to adopt the motion?

(Motion negatived: nays 6; yeas 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Are you able to stay for two more minutes?

All right.

Ms. Chenette, did you want to speak for two minutes?

[Madeleine Chenette, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

May I?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Yes. You can do that.

If we still have a quorum, I'm going to give the floor to Ms. Chenette for two minutes.

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

There will no longer be a quorum, because we're leaving.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

It's up to you, but I'm giving her the floor. She has the right to speak. If there's no quorum, I…

[Madeleine Chenette, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Thank you, Ms. Ludvig and Ms. Sandilands.

My question, listening to you, is this. Clearly, when you're saying equal rules for the English-French duality, what we apply in the rest of Canada is to know where there are territories with a francophone capacity that we want to keep. Therefore, we're not saying the services are going to need to be delivered in French only. It needs to include French, knowing that the English is there. It's the bilingualism that we're looking for.

To clarify, do you want to have the same exercise done in Quebec to determine where there is a critical mass of anglophones and to deliver bilingualism there, which is more Quebec? I just want to clarify your ask.

[Eva Ludvig]

Our ask here was to make sure that there's monitoring and evaluation to make sure that we don't lose services and opportunities for employment. That's because the act does not include the English-speaking community of Quebec, and—

[Madeleine Chenette, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

I hear you, but I want to look at the practicality of it.

In order to do that, to monitor.... In the rest of Canada, we're going to be monitoring where the francophone community is. Therefore, in order to do that in Quebec, it would mean that we would monitor the anglophone community and see where they need to have access to English services from a federal—

[Eva Ludvig]

That falls under the Official Languages Act and the responsibilities of Canadian Heritage—

[Madeleine Chenette, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

So it's there.

[Eva Ludvig]

That's why we said it's very important that part VII, which is the protection of minority language communities.... It's important that it be amended to make sure that the English-speaking community's vitality is evaluated and monitored with this new act.

[Madeleine Chenette, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you, Ms. Ludvig.

Thank you, Madame Chenette.

Ms. Ludvig and Ms. Sandilands, thank you very much for being here. We appreciate your work and we appreciate your coming to our committee. I think we've learned a lot from your testimony.

Colleagues, we're adjourning.