Status of Women Committee on May 1st, 2008

[Dominique Lemieux, Director General, Compliance Assurance Branch, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages]

Let me find that out.

On the executive table, I think about 50% of our EX positions are held by women. I have more specific numbers somewhere here.

The representation of women in management groups is 54% in the Office of the Commissioner, while in the public service generally, the figure is 38%.

We have a 54% representation of women in our organization versus 38% in the public service.

More details in the administrative and services like AS, PM, PE, FI, and IS: we have 67% women. Within the public service that figure is 49%. And in administrative support 80% are women. In other words, there are a lot of women at OCOL.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

I think when we are talking about gender-based analysis, it would be in your distribution of your money. When we do gender-based analysis, it's how you distribute, but you are an equality employer so you give equal chances, and that's what it is.

We'll go to Ms. Minna.

We'll be shutting off at 10:30, so I guess I'll be able to finish the two rounds.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair. I have a few questions and a couple of comments.

I like the fact that you have an advocacy role, and I understand it would be difficult and it would be different in the case of the gender budgeting or gender analysis. The fact that there would be a profile and persona and a public awareness of an issue that affects all women in this country has, I think, a huge impact in and of itself, apart from what might happen. I think that, for me, would be a major step forward in this country in terms of shedding light on what's going on. So I like that.

Maybe you might comment on that a bit more broadly in terms of the impact you think that role might have had in your work.

I know you have an ombudsman, and I'm wondering if you could tell us how your complaints process works in that context and how one actually does it.

You perform an audit role in the area of official languages. Could you explain to us a bit how that differs from the Auditor General's role and from the audits the Auditor General might do?

It's just those three questions.

[Graham Fraser]

In terms of how we handle complaints, we receive complaints by letter, by e-mail, by phone. They are received through the compliance assurance branch. There is a process of assessment of whether or not a complaint is receivable under the act, and to be receivable a complaint has to relate to a specific incident, it has to be concerning a federal institution, and it has to relate to a specific part of the act. So for example, if somebody says the post office hates French Canadians, that is not a receivable complaint. If, on the other hand, they say they went to this post office, which is in an area where it is supposed to be able to deliver services in both languages, and they were unable to receive those services. It was on July 14 at two o'clock in the afternoon and they were not able to get service in the language of their choice. That's a receivable complaint. It has to be an institution, it has to be a specific event, and it has to be a part of the act.

That filtering happens, and sometimes people will complain about something that is not a receivable complaint, but it's a reasonable concern, and I'll just write a letter to the institution saying I recognize that they don't fall under the act, but they might want to take into consideration that they have.... Sometimes we will get complaints about provincial institutions, for example, that I don't have any formal responsibility for, and sometimes it is a provincial institution that has tried to do something in both languages on a website, but you go beyond the first step and you get nothing else.

We also will deal spontaneously with things that have been raised in the media--Vimy, for example, where information was done in very poor French and it was reported in the media, and we responded quite quickly and intervened and that got changed.

In terms of the different roles of my audits and the Auditor General's audits, obviously we are asking different questions. When the Auditor General's people came to our institution, they devoted 800 hours to looking at our institution's books. That involved many more hours on the part of our staff. Our audits are not as intrusive as that, but maybe, Dominique, you might want to talk a bit more about precisely how the audits function.

[Dominique Lemieux]

Audits are done in very specific cases having to do with certain parts of the act. For example, we recently undertook an audit with National Defence regarding the language in which members of the forces receive their training. The issue is the Canadian Forces' capacity to provide training in the language spoken by a tank mechanic, for example. These are very targeted situations having to do with various parts of the act. As regards service to the public, we check into the active offer of service. We check the telephone weather service provided by Environment Canada.

When other tools, such as the report cards, indicate that an institution has a particular weakness, we can do an audit to check into the very specific example of non-compliance with the act.

[Graham Fraser]

In terms of report cards, we tick 38 institutions and we do a certain number of.... We have a kind of grid whereby we send out our people and look at whether they got active offer, were they able to be served in the language of their choice, to what extent were our investigators able to assess the degree to which the institution is able to offer services in both languages, and we report the performance of those 38 institutions in our annual report.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

You have five minutes, Ms. Demers.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair. I am very surprised.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

I thought she didn't want to....

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

That is fine, Madam Chair. Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

If you don't have a question, I'll take it back

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

No, Madam Chair, I will come up with some questions. Thank you. It is quite rare for us to get a chance to question witnesses a second time.

Good morning, Commissioner, Ms. Lemieux and Ms. Scott. I know you have not been in your position very long, but you do have a great deal of experience in other areas. Do you think that the model of an independent commissioner—which is what you are at the moment—will allow the incumbent to meet the needs of the various departments to determine how well they are interpreting gender-based analysis of budgets and/or government programs? Do you think this model could easily be applied? Do you think that the departments might be reluctant and say that they want no such position because they want to decide how to assess policies, programs, and so on? Your job is somewhat different: you evaluate the programs that have already been implemented, whereas we are asking for an evaluation of programs and policies before they are implemented. It is a little different. I am wondering whether there is some potential for conflict with the various departments.

[Graham Fraser]

I hesitate in drawing a comparison. I am aware that an individual for whom I have the greatest respect, Georgina Steinskey-Schwartz, appeared before your committee and stated clearly in her report that this would be a direction worth exploring, if not taking.

On the other hand, I am aware that there are other analyses that conclude that there already are too many people monitoring the government's actions. Therefore it is not up to me to decide. All I can do is speak about my experience as official languages commissioner. I hope that I am contributing to a better understanding of the importance of linguistic duality in Canada. I have certain goals, such as reminding Canadians of the importance of linguistic duality and telling Canadians, from both majorities, to encourage linguistic minorities. I don't simply want to be responsible for making people toe the line. I also want to be responsible for encouraging those who, within government, are doing their best to ensure that the government is truly serving Canadians in both languages.

I am much more comfortable speaking about my work than giving the kind of advice you're asking for. I apologize.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Fine. I have another question.

We're trying to achieve equality between women and men. Overall, 54% of your office's staff is made up of women. I would like to start by congratulating you. Has it been proven that these women benefit from pay equity? Do they receive the same treatment as the men who work in your office? I would like to know this. Does this automatically happen in commissioners' offices, such as Ms. Fraser's, for example? Does pay equity exist within independent commissioners' offices?

[Graham Fraser]

Of course, but I will let my colleague speak to this because I cannot... Someone in a EX-2 position is paid an EX-2 salary, someone is in an IS-3 position receives an IS-3 salary. No distinction is made between men and women. However, I will allow my colleagues to speak to this.

[Dominique Lemieux]

I would just like to add that our employer is Treasury Board. Therefore, the Government of Canada's rules apply.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you, Ms. Demers.

Go ahead, Ms. Mathyssen, if you have a very quick question.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

It's partly a question and partly a comment.

We've heard a lot of discussion about how much your office costs and how many full-time employees there are. You mentioned a time in 1995 when the Office of the Commissioner pushed back because of budget cuts and that sort of undermining or possibly undermining of the position. So ultimately it would seem to me that we have to have a balance, and certainly we can't have runaway institutions, but on the other hand, we also have to make absolutely sure we have this oversight, this vigilance in terms of ensuring the effectiveness of our democracy.

Would it be safe to say that Parliament must always be vigilant to make sure you have that independence that you need, that we have this oversight, and that while we may talk about the cost of doing things, there's a cost of not doing them?

[Graham Fraser]

Absolutely. I couldn't agree more. What I would also underline is something I said earlier: the greater the independence, the greater the responsibility. And it's a responsibility to be transparent, it's a responsibility to be rigorous in the handling of the money that we have been accorded to meet our responsibilities, and it's a responsibility to ensure that we meet all the standards of responsible financial management.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

I'd like to thank you for being here and giving us an insight into how the office of official languages operates.

You were established by legislation, so this committee has sent in a report asking the government to legislate gender budgeting and to appoint a commissioner. But we are trying to come to grips with how it will function. It's not a one-size-fits-all solution, so we will have to grapple with what we want, how we want it, whether we want regional offices. That's going to be a moot point--whether it has to be situated in B.C. or elsewhere.

We'd like to thank you for being here and giving us your insight into how you operate. You mentioned that you had a report prepared by the previous Clerk of the House, William Corbett.

[Graham Fraser]

Yes, he has done a report for the agents of Parliament, assessing the first stage of how the parliamentary panel has functioned. He interviewed all of us and interviewed people in Treasury Board and interviewed people in the parliamentary panel to do an interim assessment of how successful this process has been.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Could we have a copy of that report?

I guess Madam Fraser had identified 200 pieces of legislation that might need to be changed, but you've brought it down to 25. Is it possible for us to have a look at it to see how perhaps we might move forward?

[Graham Fraser]

I will speak to Sheila Fraser to see if that can be made available. They're basically her documents rather than mine, but I will be speaking to her later today.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

What about your 25?

[Graham Fraser]

Those are similarly her documents rather than mine, so I will speak to her.