Official Languages committee  We're saying that steps have been made, and we acknowledge the progress. However, I would say to you that a lot of the progress that has been made—we said so, and it's in our document—thanks to employees and politicians, some of whom are around this table and who work very hard to ensure linguistic duality.

Official Languages committee  So, in my opinion, there are examples, but I must tell you that I know from having worked in the federal government myself, in official languages, there is a very great lack of administrative and political will. Employees like me could suggest tonnes of initiatives, and if they didn't come from above, and someone didn't say he or she was going to make sure it was done, it wasn't done.

Official Languages committee  No. We have been consulted sporadically, occasionally. We don't feel consulted. Sometimes we're consulted, but we're not listened to.

Official Languages committee  It was in camera.

Official Languages committee  At the time, a number of persons asked to be registered, but I didn't belong to a francophone network. I was absent for a year. No, I wasn't consulted. However, I was invited to send a letter and a document, which I did. According to the Lord Report, we were consulted. Mr. Lord made recommendations that were not considered.

Official Languages committee  No.

Official Languages committee  If a department or Crown corporation wants to improve Part VII of the act and has a duty to do so in order to promote the vitality of the linguistic communities, shouldn't that department or Crown corporation consult the main parties involved to determine what they need in order to grow and develop and ensure that they work with those minorities to find ways of doing things?

Official Languages committee  I'm trying to think of an example.

Official Languages committee  The meetings were held in camera. I asked to be heard at the time, but I wasn't invited to appear.

Official Languages committee  No, but I sent a letter.

Official Languages committee  No, we haven't received it.

Official Languages committee  It worked well at one point, 40 years ago. And we've been making the same observations over the past 40 years. With regard to governance, as you said, it's hard for the minister to tell his peers how to do things and to ask them to be accountable. A peer is talking to a peer. Whereas if that responsibility were handed over to a supreme authority—that's why we're suggesting the Privy Council Office—it would have the power to present what has to be done with regard to official languages, to establish objectives for each of the departments, Crown corporations and institutions, and to compel accountability in those areas at the end of the year.

Official Languages committee  As I said earlier, there has been some progress. The institutions are very poorly equipped. I'll give you a concrete example: now there's a program to promote the vitality of the communities. Money is granted to facilitate various initiatives. Last year, money was granted to an anglophone organization so that it could translate its website.

Official Languages committee  Absolutely, and that's what we're advocating. Since the three departments are named in the act, it is hard for them to be both judge and jury. That's why we're suggesting the Privy Council.

Official Languages committee  On that subject, I would say that the ministers themselves agree that it is hard for them now to tell someone else what to do. That's why we say there should be a supreme official languages authority. It would impose procedures and require organizations to be accountable. Organizations are currently responsible for the actions they take, but not responsible for the results of those actions.