Committee on Official Languages

Fortin-Duplessis

The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it (December 15, 2011)

Posted on 2011-12-15

The use of the Internet, new media and social media and the respect for Canadians’ language rights

Transcript (Evidence) of Proceedings (36K)

The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it (November 21, 2011)

Posted on 2011-11-21

The use of the Internet, new media and social media and the respect for Canadians’ language rights

and

Air Canada’s obligations under the Official Languages Act

Transcript (Evidence) of Proceedings – November 21, 2011 (73K)

The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it (November 28, 2011)

Posted on

The use of the Internet, new media and social media and the respect for Canadians’ language rights

and

Air Canada’s obligations under the Official Languages Act

Transcript (Evidence) of Proceedings – November 28, 2011 (95K)

The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it (November 17, 2011)

Posted on 2011-11-17

Questions asked by Senator Suzanne Fortin-Duplessis on November 17, 2011.

The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it (November 17, 2011)

Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages

First Session, Forty-first Parliament, 2011

Chair: The Honourable MARIA CHAPUT

Monday, October 31, 2011
Monday, November 14, 2011
Thursday, November 17, 2011

Issue No. 3

Sixth and seventh meetings on:
The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it

and
Third, fourth and fifth meetings on:
The use of the Internet, new media and social media and the respect for Canadians’ language rights

and
First and second meetings on:
Air Canada’s obligations under the Official Languages Act

APPEARING

Thursday, November 17, 2011

The Honourable James Moore, P.C., M.P., Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages

WITNESSES

Monday, October 31, 2011

Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat:

Corinne Charette, Chief Information Officer of the Government of Canada;

Sue Lajoie, Senior Director, Community and Collaboration;

Ryan Androsoff, Senior Policy Advisor, Web 2.0, Community and Collaboration;

Marc Tremblay, Executive Director, Official Languages Centre of Excellence, Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer.

Monday, November 14, 2011

Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne (FCFA) du Canada:

Diane Côté, Director of Government and Community Relations;

Serge Quinty, Director of Communications.

Quebec Community Groups Network (QCGN):

Sylvia Martin-Laforge, Director General;

Stephen D. Thompson, Director of Policy, Research and Public Affairs.

Thursday, November 17, 2011

Canadian Heritage:

Hubert Lussier, Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, Citizenship and Heritage;

Amanda Cliff, Director General, Broadcasting and Digital Communications Branch.

MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

The Honourable Maria Chaput, Chair

The Honourable Andrée Champagne, P.C., Deputy Chair

and

The Honourable Senators:

*Cowan (or Tardif), De Bané, P.C., Fortin-Duplessis, *LeBreton, P.C. (or Carignan), Losier-Cool, Mockler, Poirier, Segal, Tardif

*Ex officio members

(Quorum 4)

Changes in membership of the committee:

Pursuant to rule 85(4), membership of the committee was amended as follows:

The Honourable Senator Poirier replaced the Honourable Senator Raine (November 1, 2011).

The Honourable Senator Raine replaced the Honourable Senator Poirier (October 31, 2011).

The Honourable Senator De Bané, P.C. replaced the Honourable Senator Dawson (October 27, 2011).

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Welcome, Mr. Minister, and Ms. Cliff and Mr. Lussier as well.

My question follows on a question I also asked the President of the Treasury Board. Twelve years ago, the companies got permission from the government, from the Department of Industry, to be able to make people in cities that chose high-speed Internet pay more, in order to be able to install their system in remote communities, and in fact to provide for a broadband system so that everyone in Canada would have the same benefits.

Those companies have ignored that, and there are places more or less everywhere in Canada where some people do not have access to high-speed Internet. Are you going to back your colleague or take steps so that these companies finally have to do what they undertook to do: install all the necessary infrastructure so that all Canadians can have access to a truly efficient system?

Mr. Moore: As you know, Mr. Clement has already unveiled our broadband program for communities that need it. I am sure that Mr. Paradis will be pursuing that approach to make sure that those communities receive a service that is increasingly becoming essential.

But we also have to work with the market and not against it. From time to time, government involvement makes things a little more difficult, rather than easier, for establishing this type of service and for Internet service suppliers to be able to deliver these services outside urban areas in Canada. If Mr. Paradis, the new Minister of Industry, appears before your committee, he will certainly be able to point to those needs. As you know, he has constituents in his riding who very much need this type of approach and this type of policy. So it is something dear to his heart.

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Given that yours is an important department for Canada, for francophones and anglophones, you also carry considerable weight. The weight carried by Mr. Paradis is not the only thing that can have an impact on the companies. You say you are going to leave the free market to operate, but I think that if you insist and you do something as the minister to really make sure this is equitable across Canada, that would be very important.

Mr. Moore: But it has to be completely equitable for the entire country, with the diversity there is on the ground, with the diverse markets in Canada and the diverse demands, and the Internet suppliers and what things cost. There are also the demands from the CRTC and the demands from organizations for Internet suppliers. It is not easy just to demand it or force them. I am not saying that is the role of the free market, but on the other hand it is a little more complex and it is expensive.

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: But we, here, do know there is a problem.

In the Senate, we now have the chance to have the little gem of an iPad that I was so anxious to get, something I was very interested in because I had seen one of our fellow senators who was able to read whatever books he wanted while he was travelling. I tried myself to download books in French and I could not find any. You mentioned, at page 3 of your presentation, that francophone organizations have received support from the Canada Book Fund and have published approximately 500 digital titles. Have you verified that? Is that figure of 500 accurate? I could not find them, in any event.

Mr. Moore: Yes, there are some.

I will let Ms. Cliff speak to some of the elements of the book fund that we have put in place.

Keep in mind the iPad has existed for a year, maybe a year and a half total; that is iPad 1 and 2. There are iterations of these things coming forward.

The goal of the government is not to drive funding. The goal of our government should be trying to set up funding and maybe to lead the old order of things to change things, to recognize what is happening in the marketplace, but to leave things flexible. Then those who are aspiring to meet the marketplace, where the marketplace is moving, are not shut off from funds because funds are locked up in funding old media. That is the goal of things.

I have not published a book. Maybe Senator Segal can tell us about how he is planning to shift all his books into a digital environment so you can enjoy them on your iPad. The goal of the government with the book fund is to change the program so that funding is available so those who are seeking new audiences will not find out that our government has not modified our programs to make those funds accessible.

I would point out that in some of the investment cases that we have looked at as a government, where entrants have sought access — for example I think about the online bookstore — that we have also forced limits. This is one of the conditions that we imposed on Amazon as well, that they have an online content, that they highlight Canadian content and Canada’s French content. You are familiar with amazon.com, and amazon.ca is the Canadian online store. Up until the intervention of our government there was not an express commitment to promote Canadian and French books on the amazon.ca website. We forced that commitment as part of the agreement for entrance into the Canadian marketplace. We have this in mind when we look at investment cases, not just our own spending as a government.

Amanda Cliff, Director General, Broadcasting and Digital Communications Branch, Canadian Heritage: That is comprehensive, minister. I do not have anything to add, other than that the basics of the book fund is to ensure there is a range of funding for publishers and the industry to increase their presence on line, to promote digital books and to digitize content. That, as the minister has said, represents a significant investment in the sector.

In terms of online content, I think when the Internet was first up, generally content was in English more often than any other language. We are now seeing greater use of the Internet by francophone Canadians because content in French is reaching a parallel with the English content.

Mr. Moore: An important point to make is that we are also in early days with regard to this technology. There is the Kobo, the Kindle, the iPad, the PlayBook and other technologies out there, all of which use different application stores and formats. Where you are purchasing your books on line, for example with the iPad, their online store may not be as evolved with regard to French content as other online bookstores. In time it will catch up.

We are in the first year with this technology, for the most part, particularly with regard to books. It is coming along. As more people buy the device and realize the market is there, things will shift.

The point that I think needs to be made is that given the shifting of the digital media, the shifting of the content and the way that creators and publishers are trying to create something to engage in the marketplace, it is essential for book publishers and consumers to have effective copyright legislation that allows this kind of digital content to be protected. That is also what we are trying to do with Bill C-11 that we put before the House of Commons. Copyright and intellectual property law needs to be updated. It has been not since I was a very young boy, and it needs to be. We have put that legislation forward, and I hope the official opposition — none of whom are here, which is great — will see and understand the need to do exactly what you described, to bring forward books that represent the diversity of Canada’s creative communities.

Transcript (Evidence) of Proceedings – November 17, 2011 (59K)

The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it (November 14, 2011)

Posted on 2011-11-14

Questions asked by Senator Suzanne Fortin-Duplessis on November, 14, 2011)

The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it (November 14, 2011)

Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages

First Session, Forty-first Parliament, 2011

Chair: The Honourable MARIA CHAPUT

Monday, October 31, 2011
Monday, November 14, 2011
Thursday, November 17, 2011

Issue No. 3

Sixth and seventh meetings on:
The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it

and
Third, fourth and fifth meetings on:
The use of the Internet, new media and social media and the respect for Canadians’ language rights

and
First and second meetings on:
Air Canada’s obligations under the Official Languages Act

APPEARING

Thursday, November 17, 2011

The Honourable James Moore, P.C., M.P., Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages

WITNESSES

Monday, October 31, 2011

Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat:

Corinne Charette, Chief Information Officer of the Government of Canada;

Sue Lajoie, Senior Director, Community and Collaboration;

Ryan Androsoff, Senior Policy Advisor, Web 2.0, Community and Collaboration;

Marc Tremblay, Executive Director, Official Languages Centre of Excellence, Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer.

Monday, November 14, 2011

Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne (FCFA) du Canada:

Diane Côté, Director of Government and Community Relations;

Serge Quinty, Director of Communications.

Quebec Community Groups Network (QCGN):

Sylvia Martin-Laforge, Director General;

Stephen D. Thompson, Director of Policy, Research and Public Affairs.

Thursday, November 17, 2011

Canadian Heritage:

Hubert Lussier, Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, Citizenship and Heritage;

Amanda Cliff, Director General, Broadcasting and Digital Communications Branch.

MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

The Honourable Maria Chaput, Chair

The Honourable Andrée Champagne, P.C., Deputy Chair

and

The Honourable Senators:

*Cowan (or Tardif), De Bané, P.C., Fortin-Duplessis, *LeBreton, P.C. (or Carignan), Losier-Cool, Mockler, Poirier, Segal, Tardif

*Ex officio members

(Quorum 4)

Changes in membership of the committee:

Pursuant to rule 85(4), membership of the committee was amended as follows:

The Honourable Senator Poirier replaced the Honourable Senator Raine (November 1, 2011).

The Honourable Senator Raine replaced the Honourable Senator Poirier (October 31, 2011).

The Honourable Senator De Bané, P.C. replaced the Honourable Senator Dawson (October 27, 2011).

The Chair: Thank you, Ms. Côté. Senator Fortin-Duplessis will ask the first question.

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Thank you both for appearing before our committee and giving us your point of view. I listened carefully to your opening statement. This reflects the testimonies we have already heard. We can say that we are well aware that not all the minority communities have access to high-speed Internet. Acadians still cannot use the new media and social media in French because they live in remote areas. This comes back to what you were saying.

Do you think the social media and new media that the government is using are adequate?

Serge Quinty, Director of Communications, Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne (FCFA) du Canada: It is important to say that, so far, social media are still something new that the communities are investing in, both from the point of view of community organizations and of the citizens themselves. To some extent, the issue is making members of the community and the organizations aware that federal institutions, for example, are using social media and that services and information about services are available.

I am not sure to what extent people are aware that federal institutions are present and active in both official languages.

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Would you say that, no matter where people are, in New Brunswick, in Acadia, they can go and find information about the various federal government departments if they knew they could?

Mr. Quinty: There are a number of institutions that are currently present on the Internet that do this in both official languages in many cases. But this is not something we have explored, meaning that we have not necessarily done a survey of social media to see who is there, what services are being offered to our communities and what visibility these institutions have with the members of our communities. But it is certainly something that we could look at more closely and return at a later date with more information. We would be pleased to.

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: That is very interesting. Harvard University is not kind toward the Internet service offered in Canada. Based on a study by the university in 2009, Canada has one of the poorest systems in the developed world. According to Harvard, Canada is not an example to be followed when it comes to the policies concerning high-speed Internet and wireless access. The university also says that Canada ranks 22nd out of 30 countries by the survey of the Howard H. Baker Centre for Internet and society. Canada ranks 16th in terms of adopting high-speed, 20th in terms of speed and capacity, and 25th in terms of price.

Several years ago, about 12 years ago, the telephone and Internet companies were authorized to charge a little bit more to implement services in cities so that services could be installed in rural areas and so that proper service could be provided there. But we know that never happened.

Do you think that the governments should have been stricter and ensured that the companies offered high-speed Internet to the regions of New Brunswick?

Mr. Quinty: To answer your question, I would go even further than New Brunswick; I would go as far as the entire country. The CRTC did a study two years ago on the broadcasting services available to the communities. When we, the FCFA, as well as other organizations in our network, appeared, we were asked: when it came to community reflection and to the access of communities to television content in French, for example, whether the Internet could be a solution. We had presented that problem to them at the time and, in its report published on March 31, 2009, the CRTC strongly recommended that the government take action in that area to extend broadband access to official language communities across the country. In light of that, was government action necessary and is it still? The FCFA’s answer remains a very clear “yes.”

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Thank you very much.

Transcript (Evidence) of Proceedings – November 14, 2011 (79K)

The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it (November 21, 2011) )

Posted on 2011-11-10

Questions asked by Senator Suzanne Fortin-Duplessis on November 21, 2011.

Sixth and seventh meetings on:

The use of the Internet, new media and social media and the respect for Canadians’ language rights

and

Third meeting on:

Air Canada’s obligations under the Official Languages Act

Transcript (Evidence) of Proceedings – November 21, 2011 (73K)

The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it (October 31, 2011)

Posted on 2011-10-31

Questions asked by Senator Suzanne Fortin-Duplessis on October 31, 2011

The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it (October 31, 2011)

Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages

First Session, Forty-first Parliament, 2011

Chair: The Honourable MARIA CHAPUT

Monday, October 31, 2011
Monday, November 14, 2011
Thursday, November 17, 2011

Issue No. 3

Sixth and seventh meetings on:
The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it

and
Third, fourth and fifth meetings on:
The use of the Internet, new media and social media and the respect for Canadians’ language rights

and
First and second meetings on:
Air Canada’s obligations under the Official Languages Act

APPEARING

Thursday, November 17, 2011

The Honourable James Moore, P.C., M.P., Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages

WITNESSES

Monday, October 31, 2011

Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat:

Corinne Charette, Chief Information Officer of the Government of Canada;

Sue Lajoie, Senior Director, Community and Collaboration;

Ryan Androsoff, Senior Policy Advisor, Web 2.0, Community and Collaboration;

Marc Tremblay, Executive Director, Official Languages Centre of Excellence, Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer.

Monday, November 14, 2011

Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne (FCFA) du Canada:

Diane Côté, Director of Government and Community Relations;

Serge Quinty, Director of Communications.

Quebec Community Groups Network (QCGN):

Sylvia Martin-Laforge, Director General;

Stephen D. Thompson, Director of Policy, Research and Public Affairs.

Thursday, November 17, 2011

Canadian Heritage:

Hubert Lussier, Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, Citizenship and Heritage;

Amanda Cliff, Director General, Broadcasting and Digital Communications Branch.

MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

The Honourable Maria Chaput, Chair

The Honourable Andrée Champagne, P.C., Deputy Chair

and

The Honourable Senators:

*Cowan (or Tardif), De Bané, P.C., Fortin-Duplessis, *LeBreton, P.C. (or Carignan), Losier-Cool, Mockler, Poirier, Segal, Tardif

*Ex officio members

(Quorum 4)

Changes in membership of the committee:

Pursuant to rule 85(4), membership of the committee was amended as follows:

The Honourable Senator Poirier replaced the Honourable Senator Raine (November 1, 2011).

The Honourable Senator Raine replaced the Honourable Senator Poirier (October 31, 2011).

The Honourable Senator De Bané, P.C. replaced the Honourable Senator Dawson (October 27, 2011).

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: First of all, welcome. In light of the brief you just presented, I feel that you have made great strides in the use of new media, especially your Web 2.0. I feel it is very important that you be able to communicate with all government employees using these media, regardless of the department.

I am very concerned about your clientele, which is made up of Canadians across the country. We know that in the cities, there is no problem; people can communicate easily. But I am especially concerned about the people in remote areas, who may not always have the services they need in their own language.

Do you believe it would be possible for all the francophones in Canada to be able to use the Internet, new media and social media in French, no matter what their circumstances or where they live?

Ms. Charette: There are two aspects to your question. You talked about using the Internet “no matter what their circumstances or where they live.” I will start with Internet use and place of residence.

Last week, the minister talked about the availability of high bandwidth in the regions. What I would add is that the Internet and new media such as Twitter do not require much bandwidth. When it comes to Twitter in particular, we are talking about micromessages, and many people can now receive them on their regular or digital telephone. That is already a step forward.

And regarding the Internet, it is true that that there is content that requires a lot of bandwidth, but there is also a lot of text content that is accessible even if people do not have the latest, highest-speed devices.

I therefore think that we are pretty lucky in Canada to have broad, ever-growing coverage. I think that Canadians can access the Internet fairly easily.

Now, as to your question about francophones’ circumstances, I assume you are talking about disabilities?

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: No, I am talking about people in extremely remote areas, who have difficulty getting high- speed Internet access and accessing French-language sites. I know these people can get information in English, but what about someone who lives in a very francophone environment and needs information from the government?

Ms. Charette: Thank you for the clarification. The policy is very clear on this. Government websites must be bilingual and the content must be accessible in both official languages and of equal quality and quantity. No matter what the department or agency, all websites must be bilingual. The policy on official languages also applies to departments’ accounts on new media or social media such as Facebook and Twitter. In these cases, the departments must also communicate in both official languages.

Certainly, access to broader bandwidth means that people can access information more quickly. However, it is possible to consult all the websites, even with less bandwidth. Information on all our programs is available on these websites. We therefore do not see any major problems.

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Harvard University is not very complimentary about Internet service in Canada. According to a study released by the institution in 2009, Canada has one of the worst systems in the developed world. According to Harvard, Canada is also an example of what not to do when it comes to policies on high-speed Internet and wireless access. This is a 232-page study. It is disturbing that Canada ranked 22nd out of 30 countries studied.

Could the government have required companies to offer high-speed Internet in the regions?

Ms. Charette: That is a question for Industry Canada. TBS has no responsibility for the telecommunications industry and the speed at which they develop their bandwidth capacity.

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Madam Chair, perhaps we could invite them to come and talk to us about that.

The Chair: Yes, senator.

…

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: My question is somewhat related to what the chair was saying earlier. Do you have a way of measuring the equality and quality of communications and services provided in both official languages in this new electronic world?

Ms. Charette: The Treasury Board Secretariat measures policy compliance in general — whether it be policies on official languages, computer use or information management — through a process called the Management Accountability Framework or the MAF. The MAF is the annual process by which the Treasury Board Secretariat, through a series of performance indicators, measures departments’ compliance with various policies and measures. I know that we use the MAF to measure compliance with official language obligations by department area on a rotating basis, and that we also assess departmental websites.

Clearly, compliance is based on sampling and on the departmental reports, in which departments are required to answer a series of questions.

The number of government websites, for all departments and agencies, is considerable, as is the amount of information published in both official languages. It would be almost impossible to continually measure or validate it. The number of sites and pages is huge. We therefore rely on an annual process involving sampling and the answers that departments provide to questions related to their performance criteria.

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: So, you are not in a position to know which institutions are not fulfilling their obligations? And, if you had to take measures, what would they be? If, for instance, you knew that there was a problem in a certain department, would you be able to do something about it?

Ms. Charette: Senator, with regard to the websites, from what I can see, the departments are all working hard and they are meeting the policy requirements. Clearly, there may be cases here and there where the quality in one language or the other is not perfect but, to date, we have observed that the departments and agencies are doing everything they can to always publish content in both languages.

I think that it is now the norm and part of the basic culture to publish content and offer citizens service in both official languages. Obviously, we conduct an annual review, but we do not have any concerns about official languages.

Transcript (Evidence) of Proceedings – October 31, 2011 (63K)

The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it (October 27, 2011)

Posted on 2011-10-27

Questions asked by Senator Suzanne Fortin-Duplessis on October 27, 2011

Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages

First Session, Forty-first Parliament, 2011

Chair: The Honourable MARIA CHAPUT

Monday, October 17, 2011 (in camera)
Monday, October 24, 2011
Thursday, October 27, 2011

Issue No. 2

Third, fourth and fifth meetings on:

The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it

and

First and second meetings on:

The use of the Internet, new media and social media and the respect for Canadians’ language rights

APPEARING:

The Honourable Tony Clement, P.C., M.P., President of the Treasury Board

WITNESSES:

Monday, October 24, 2011

Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages:

Graham Fraser, Commissioner of Official Languages;

Ghislaine Charlebois, Assistant Commissioner, Compliance Assurance Branch;

Lise Cloutier, Assistant Commissioner, Corporate Management;

Johane Tremblay, General Counsel, Legal Affairs Branch;

Robin Cantin, Director, Strategic Communications and Production.

Thursday, October 27, 2011

Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat:

Corinne Charette, Chief Information Officer of the Government of Canada;

Mimi Lepage, Executive Director, Information and Privacy Policy;

Daphne Meredith, Chief Human Resources Officer;

Marc Tremblay, Executive Director, Official Languages Centre of Excellence, Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer.

MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

The Honourable Maria Chaput, Chair

The Honourable Andrée Champagne, P.C., Deputy Chair

and

The Honourable Senators:

*Cowan (or Tardif), Dawson, Fortin-Duplessis, *LeBreton, P.C. (or Carignan), Losier-Cool, Mockler, Poirier, Segal, Tardif

*Ex officio members

(Quorum 4)

Changes in membership of the committee:

Pursuant to rule 85(4), membership of the committee was amended as follows:

The Honourable Senator Dawson replaced the Honourable Senator De Bané, P.C. (October 26, 2011).

The Honourable Senator Segal replaced the Honourable Senator Eaton (October 17, 2011).

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Welcome and thank you for accepting the committee’s invitation, Mr. Minister.

Just now, on page 5 of your presentation, you talked about the use of social media. This fall, our committee will examine the use of the Internet, new media and social media, and the respect for Canadians’ language rights. But it would seem that this Internet culture is not really available to francophones living in a minority community.

Yet we know that a minority culture is very different from a majority culture, and it needs to be expressed in terms that are familiar to the people belonging to the minority.

Before asking ourselves who is responsible for promoting this culture, is it not more appropriate to try and get to know the culture first and become involved?

In your opinion, can all francophones across Canada use the Internet, new media and social media, regardless of their status or place of residence?

Mr. Clement: Thank you, senator. I agree that it is important to develop tools that are compatible with social media. As I said before, the Treasury Board Secretariat has developed draft guidelines for the external use of Web 2.0, in order to better define the obligations related to communications with and services to the public.

There will certainly be an appendix on official languages to provide additional guidance to federal institutions, to recommend best practices and to give advice on how to comply with official languages requirements when using the Internet and social media, such as blogs, wikis, YouTube, Facebook, and so on. Those are obviously new practices, but I can tell you that there is an obligation to have guidelines for the current situation.

I am welcoming the deliberations of the Senate as well. If you have some suggestions or thoughts on these matters, I am very interested that you are taking this committee to examine these issues as well. It is new for all of us, and I think it is something that we have to turn our minds to.

Just by way of anecdote, I was doing a Parks Canada event in my riding, and I was very impressed that Parks Canada was tweeting as I was doing the park opening, in both official languages. My tweets were coming in both languages from Parks Canada, and I thought it was an excellent signal for their audience that they are prepared to do that.

I think these things are happening, but I think some guidelines would be helpful.

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: In your opinion, do the social and new media that the federal government is currently using meet the linguistic needs of francophones in a minority situation?

Mr. Clement: What I can say is that the official languages need not prevent Canadians from using the Internet, new media and social media. We have to have some tools, of course. But we are faced with a challenge and it is important to find solutions.

All I can say is that we are working on it. Let me state again that there should not be barriers to use of the Internet, new media or social media as a result of these requirements. At the same time, there are opportunities.

Communicating promptly and directly with employees and with Canadians is a challenge, but it is also a great opportunity to promote democracy, to promote communication between the public and the Canadian government. It is very important for the future.

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Mr. Minister, I think there is a hitch, because remote communities do not have exactly the same services as those living in or around cities.

Twelve years ago, telephone and Internet companies were authorized to charge a bit more for their Internet services in big cities in order to be in a better position to set up Internet services in the regions. And we know for a fact that it never happened. People in remote regions have a hard time accessing the Internet. And those who do have access do not have access to high-speed Internet.

Do you think that governments at that time should have required companies to provide high-speed Internet in the regions and should have done a follow-up afterwards to make sure that the companies did their job?

Mr. Clement: Since I was the minister of industry and I had some of those responsibilities, I can say that it is the responsibility of both sides: the private sector and the government. It is important to have regulations and directives for the private sector in order to increase their broadband coverage. At the same time, we created a program under the economic action plan for other underserved regions. The program targets the private sector, and it includes a funding plan for broadband.

We put in $225 million, particularly for the outlying areas. We know that the private sector providers are expanding and doing it faster in the cities, but our concern was more outlying areas, Northern Canada and northern parts of Ontario, Quebec, Manitoba — you name it. As we are helping to build in those areas and the private sector builds, perhaps, in the southern parts moving up, there would be a continuity of service.

That process is well under way. I know the contracts have been given out mostly, and they are building the infrastructure.

But the objective of the program is to be able to say, at the end of 2012, that more than 98 per cent of Canadians have access to broadband. I feel it is a feasible objective.

It is realizable, and it will be very helpful to these issues that you raise.

…

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: As you know, the Commissioner of Official Languages released an audit report on the delivery of bilingual services to Air Canada passengers in September 2011.

I was very surprised to read in the report that, year after year, Air Canada has been in the top three institutions with the most complaints about the service in French.

I will quickly go over something that happened to me. I was recently at the Vancouver airport and I was short of time, so I had to go through customs quickly. But I had to get my boarding pass first. I had already waited for 20 minutes. At the counter, there were only two unilingual anglophones. They offered to get an officer who spoke French. But if I had insisted on having service in French, I would have missed my plane to come here to Ottawa, since I only had 10 minutes.

What do you do to assess Air Canada’s performance in terms of implementing the Official Languages Act? And Mr. Clement, what concrete measures do you think should be taken so that the Air Canada situation finally improves? Because the system of fetching a francophone officer when needed does not work.

I have francophone friends in Quebec who are not really satisfied. I am not sure what you can do about it, but it is a big problem for Canadians who speak French only.

Mr. Clement: The Canadian government clearly supports linguistic duality. It is important to clarify Air Canada’s linguistic obligations. Air Canada continues to be subject to the Official Languages Act. It has an obligation to provide bilingual services to the public at large.

I know that they have been subject to about a dozen recommendations that address Air Canada. I can tell you that we have these under review and certainly we are committed to points of service that continue to be bilingual. That is all I can say at this time because, obviously, we are reviewing these recommendations and we will be responding at the appropriate time.

The Chair: Thank you. I had another question but, as time is running out, I will ask it on Monday, since your officials are coming back before the committee. We will then talk about page 2 of the report, the positions designated as bilingual, positions that are English essential or French essential.

Once again, thank you and good luck. I am sure that you will not forget the comments and recommendations shared by the honourable senators with you.

On that note, honourable senators, I adjourn the meeting.

(The committee adjourned.)

Transcript (Evidence) of Proceedings – October 27, 2011 (45K)

The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it (October 24, 2011)

Posted on 2011-10-24

Questions asked by Senator Suzanne Fortin-Duplessis on October 24, 2011

Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages

First Session, Forty-first Parliament, 2011

Chair: The Honourable MARIA CHAPUT

Monday, October 17, 2011 (in camera)
Monday, October 24, 2011
Thursday, October 27, 2011

Issue No. 2

Third, fourth and fifth meetings on:

The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it

and

First and second meetings on:

The use of the Internet, new media and social media and the respect for Canadians’ language rights

APPEARING:

The Honourable Tony Clement, P.C., M.P., President of the Treasury Board

WITNESSES:

Monday, October 24, 2011

Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages:

Graham Fraser, Commissioner of Official Languages;

Ghislaine Charlebois, Assistant Commissioner, Compliance Assurance Branch;

Lise Cloutier, Assistant Commissioner, Corporate Management;

Johane Tremblay, General Counsel, Legal Affairs Branch;

Robin Cantin, Director, Strategic Communications and Production.

Thursday, October 27, 2011

Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat:

Corinne Charette, Chief Information Officer of the Government of Canada;

Mimi Lepage, Executive Director, Information and Privacy Policy;

Daphne Meredith, Chief Human Resources Officer;

Marc Tremblay, Executive Director, Official Languages Centre of Excellence, Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer.

MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

The Honourable Maria Chaput, Chair

The Honourable Andrée Champagne, P.C., Deputy Chair

and

The Honourable Senators:

*Cowan (or Tardif), Dawson, Fortin-Duplessis, *LeBreton, P.C. (or Carignan), Losier-Cool, Mockler, Poirier, Segal, Tardif

*Ex officio members

(Quorum 4)

Changes in membership of the committee:

Pursuant to rule 85(4), membership of the committee was amended as follows:

The Honourable Senator Dawson replaced the Honourable Senator De Bané, P.C. (October 26, 2011).

The Honourable Senator Segal replaced the Honourable Senator Eaton (October 17, 2011).

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: I am always pleased and it is always a pleasure to meet with you and the people around you.

My first question will relate to Air Canada, and in the second round it will be about the new media.

With respect to Air Canada, you assessed the services offered by Air Canada, and as well you made 12 recommendations. Also, I am quoting you because in an interview with the Canadian Press, you said that a very clear protocol was needed so that employees would know that, even if they are not bilingual, there was a bilingual colleague next to them, that there was a way to do things if someone wanted service in French.

I would like to tell you about something that happened to me. I was coming back to Canada through Vancouver; I had a Vancouver to Ottawa connection. So we have to take our luggage, go through security, wait, line up to go to a counter and ask for our boarding pass. There were only two people at the counter and there were a lot of us. There was also no one there for business class. When the woman realized that I was francophone, she offered to get a francophone for me, but I would have missed the plane. I only had 10 minutes. It was impossible to wait to get services in French. So I spoke in English, but not in perfect English like yours.

How is it that you did not include a recommendation that all Air Canada employees had to be not perfectly bilingual, but understand the second official language adequately?

Mr. Fraser: It was from recognizing the difficulty there is in hiring even in the federal government. It is hard to demand it for the public service or other institutions subject to the act.

I have often been asked whether it should not have been mandatory for anyone employed by the federal government to be bilingual. I have always answered that as long as there is access to good, equitable language training across Canada, the federal government will have a duty to provide its employees with language training.

The same thing applies for Air Canada. Air Canada was required to take over the responsibilities as employer of 4,000 employees of the Canadian airline based in the West. That meant that they absorbed 4,000 unilingual employees who were essentially hired by force, given the nature of the merger. That meant that it was even harder for Air Canada to make sure that there are enough bilingual employees.

In our audit we discovered that the capacity exists. Fifty per cent of employees on designated bilingual flights are in fact bilingual. If half the personnel on a flight are bilingual, it is very easy to say: Do you want to wait a minute? I am going to get one of my colleagues. And make sure that passengers are served in the language of their choice. It is harder in percentage terms for ground services. I think it is 25 per cent of ground employees. So given the need to hire employees in regions of the country where the bilingualism rate is fairly low, it would not have been realistic on my part, given the conflicts I have had in the past with Air Canada about things I consider to be completely doable, to imagine that they would have been able to accept that kind of regulations.

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: For the ones who are in contact with the public, the front line, the ones who are on the ground, the ones who deal with people, you could perhaps ask them to go from 25 to 50 per cent for bilingual personnel.

Mr. Fraser: You know, the rule has always been that the institution should be able to provide the service and not that all employees are required to be bilingual. Sometimes there are situations like the one you experienced in Vancouver, where you had to make a choice between a service and you flight. I understand the decision you made very well. It is unfortunate. It made me think a little of an answer that members of an organization in a minority community got from a department in the region, which was: “Do you want to speak to someone bilingual or do you want to speak to someone who is familiar with the case?” People should not have to choose between the service and bilingualism. You should not have to make a choice between catching your flight and getting a service in both languages.

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: I have one final question about Air Canada. You may not be obliged to answer, but I would like you to explain to us why, year after year, Air Canada is one of the three institutions against which the most complaints are made to your office.

Mr. Fraser: I always ask myself the same question, given that we have fairly regular contact. I think the experience of this audit was very useful for us, and, I hope, for management as well. When I presented the preliminary results of the audit, we saw that the management was genuinely surprised by the results we had found on the ground. Just to give you an example, Air Canada put a lot of effort and resources into ensuring that travellers going to the Olympic Games in Vancouver were served in the language of their choice. It was a great success.

Personally, I hoped this would be a step forward and would bear fruit in future. But what we learned from the 150 interviews we conducted in the course of the audit is that the employees thought it was solely for the Olympic Games, and afterward they went back to their old habits. They thought that active offer, for example, was just for the Olympic Games. You will understand that senior management was also somewhat surprised by this information, and they said, “We never said that, that was never a message sent to employees”; but that was the employees’ understanding.

I observed that there were several aspects of communication on which employees were not aware of the actual nature of the duties. So I think the audit process was very useful. I think it opened our eyes and I also think it was useful for Air Canada management.

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Thank you. I will have more questions in the second round.

…

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Why did the Franco-communauté virtuelle program end in March 2008?

Mr. Fraser: I have no answer.

Robin Cantin, Director, Strategic Communications and Production, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages: The Franco-communauté virtuelle program ended in 2008 by a decision of Canadian Heritage that followed an evaluation of the program objectives.

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: That means they had not achieved their objectives, is that it? They did not succeed in that regard?

Mr. Cantin: That would be an excellent question for Canadian Heritage. Obviously, we cannot speak for them.

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Do you intend to study the question of the use of the official languages on the Internet again?

Mr. Fraser: The question of the new media is one of the questions we will be putting considerable thought into how to study. We have been involved in some discussions. We organized a discussion day, but again, I am going to ask Mr. Cantin to talk in more detail about what we have done and what we are contemplating.

Mr. Cantin: The studies we did in 1999, 2002 and 2005 were relatively ambitious. Like the study you are preparing to undertake. In fact, your powers are very impressive and very broad.

At that time, we had addressed various aspects of official languages on the Internet, but we had tried to stick to the impact of the federal government, the federal public service, on the English-French balance on the Internet. That is still relatively our focus, essentially the 15 million pages in French and 15 million pages in English that the federal government makes available to the Canadian and international public, and its communications with the public by the Internet continue. Our efforts are still relatively focused on the relationship between the Internet and the federal government.

Something that attracted our attention a great deal in recent years is the guidelines for social media that Treasury Board has already published for the internal use of social media, internal to the federal public service, wikis and that sort of thing, and we hope, will soon be published for external use of social media, that is, how the federal public service communicates with Canadian citizens.

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: A moment ago, my colleague asked you whether there was a danger of assimilation. You talked about how important it is now because teachers can work over the Internet and there are connections being made. You said that young people may often find themselves on anglophone sites. The assimilation of young people is of considerable concern to me. We would not want to see that. We would want them to retain French very well, even if they are able to speak English.

I would like to hear your opinion on that a little, even though you answered my colleague. There is a real danger.

Mr. Fraser: In terms of assimilation, I think we have to look at the question from a different angle and ask how the community is doing in terms of vitality. What are the cultural and linguistic resources needed so the linguistic community can develop? What pressures are there on the community? What are its institutions? What linguistic space is there for this community? Is French a public language or just a language used in the home or in certain more private institutions? If we look at the evolution of French in Quebec, there has been a very impressive trajectory since the 50 or 60 years ago when French became the public language of Quebec.

That is not necessarily the case for some official language minority communities. Francophone communities outside Quebec, where the institutions are weaker, space is more limited, and we have to remember that French schools were abolished in some provinces for almost a century and were restored only since the Charter in 1982. We have seen the impact of these schools on the quality of the French spoken in communities in the West.

I have never believed that people can decide all of a sudden, overnight, to abandon their language and culture. It is a longer and sometimes tragic process. I think that when we think about assimilation, we have to look at the factors in a community’s vitality.

Transcript (Evidence) of Proceedings – October 24, 2011 (74K)

The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it (October 3, 2011)

Posted on 2011-10-03

Questions asked by Senator Suzanne Fortin-Duplessis on October 3, 2011

Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages

First Session, Forty-first Parliament, 2011

Chair: The Honourable MARIA CHAPUT

Monday, June 20, 2011
Monday, September 26, 2011 (in camera)
Monday, October 3, 2011

Issue No. 1

Organizational meeting
and
First and second meetings on:

The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it

INCLUDING:
THE FIRST REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE
(Rule 104 ? expenses incurred by the committee during the Third Session of the Fortieth Parliament)
THE SECOND REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE
(The Vitality of Quebec’s English-speaking Communities: From Myth to Reality)

WITNESSES:

Monday, October 3, 2011

Service Canada:

Cheryl Fisher, Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, Citizen Service Branch;

Julie Lalonde-Goldenberg, Director General, Interdepartmental Partnerships and Service Offerings, Citizen Service Branch.

Human Resources and Skills Development Canada:

Anne Duguay, Director General, Workplace Effectiveness and Communities, Human Resources Services Branch.

MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

The Honourable Maria Chaput, Chair

The Honourable Andrée Champagne, P.C., Deputy Chair

and

The Honourable Senators:

*Cowan (or Tardif), De Bané, P.C., Eaton, Fortin-Duplessis, *LeBreton, P.C. (or Carignan), Losier-Cool, Mockler, Poirier, Tardif

*Ex officio members

(Quorum 4)

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: My question relates to Senator Champagne’s.

I read about a rather bizarre case in Nova Scotia. Employees were prohibited from speaking French to clients who were requesting help in that language.

CBC reporters talked to Dean Snelling, an anglophone who lived in Switzerland for 15 years. Since returning to Canada five years ago, he has been running a seniors home in Nova Scotia. He had received pension documents from Switzerland in French. He went to the Service Canada office in Kentville. He did not expect to be served in French, but to his surprise, when he got there a francophone employee told him that she could not help him. I will quote the woman, whose French was very good:

Sorry, this is an English only office and I am not allowed to speak French with you. It’s the rule.

Mr. Snelling complained to Service Canada, who did not want to follow up with him because it was protecting the employee and not disclosing her name.

I would like to know whether you have a policy in place whereby in a certain region the office absolutely must be unilingual English and francophones have to use the phone? I find this a bit odd. I do not think this is a sign of progress. I think it is a step backward.

I would like your opinion on this and then I have another quick question for you after that.

Ms. Fisher: I wish to reiterate that Service Canada is committed to implementing the Official Languages Act and respecting its obligations. In the case of unilingual offices, we feel that we are going above and beyond our obligations.

Currently, in a unilingual Service Canada centre, if a person comes in requesting service in French, in the minority language, we have reiterated with all of our employees —

But when one of our employees feels comfortable using the second language, a francophone in your example. . .

We encourage them to serve the client in the other official language — in French in this case. We do let the citizen know that it is a unilingual office, but if the employee is comfortable serving in the other language, we absolutely permit and encourage that.

That is a directive, a service directive to all of our employees across the country. It applies in all unilingual offices.

If a client encounters an employee who does not speak the second or minority language, we have clear procedures that allow them to engage a telephone interpretation. It is an instant telephone interpretation service now available also in all of our unilingual offices.

There are two avenues to serve that citizen. Both of them would give language of choice to the citizen. That service has been implemented across the country and is being followed.

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Thank you.

Service Canada is planning to close or reorganize some of its community offices. Has an impact study of the official language communities been done and, if so, was it done before the announcement of the closures?

Also, have you consulted the official language communities affected by the announced office closures?

Ms. Fisher: When we look at our service delivery network, it is very dynamic, changing all the time. We make every effort to ensure we engage with all of the stakeholders in communities when we are updating, modernizing our network and making changes.

You asked about the impact study. There was no impact study done in terms of the transition to a scheduled outreach for these communities. Right now we are at the stage where we are consulting the official language minority communities and the stakeholders, the community groups that are engaged in the service, and we are getting their views. We are ensuring that we have the best suitable options and suitable solutions to meet the needs of the communities. That is our focus, is engaging in a coordinated and structured way so that they have input into the service that is available and the best options for them.

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: You have not done an impact study, as such? You are holding consultations with people who are to be served in both official languages, but no impact study has been done.

Ms. Fisher: No, not yet. No.

Transcript (Evidence) of Proceedings – October 3, 2011 (48K)

Minority language education (March 21, 2011)

Posted on 2011-03-21

Questions asked by Senator Suzanne Fortin-Duplessis on March 21, 2011

Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages

Third Session, Fortieth Parliament, 2010-11

Chair: The Honourable MARIA CHAPUT

Monday, March 21, 2011

Issue No. 18

Thirty-first meeting on:

The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it
(Minority language education)

University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law, Common Law Section:

Eric LeBlanc, Student;

Darlène Lozis, Student;

Joseph Morin, Student;

Albert Nolette, Student;

André Poulin-Denis, Student;

Daniel Wirz, Student.

STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON OFFICIAL LANGUAGES

The Honourable Maria Chaput, Chair

The Honourable Andrée Champagne, P.C., Deputy Chair

and

The Honourable Senators:

Boisvenu, *Cowan (or Tardif), Fortin-Duplessis *LeBreton, P.C. (or Comeau), Losier-Cool, Mockler, Poulin, Rivard, Robichaud, P.C., Smith (Saurel)

* Ex officio members

(Quorum 4)

Changes in membership of the committee:

Pursuant to rule 85(4), membership of the committee was amended as follows:

The Honourable Senator Poulin replaced the Honourable Senator De Bané, P.C. (March 21, 2011).

The Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C., replaced the Honourable Senator Tardif (March 18, 2011).

The Honourable Senator Mockler replaced the Honourable Senator Champagne, P.C. (March 18, 2011).

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Let me begin by apologizing for being late, but a lot of committees are sitting today at the same time, and I was at the Foreign Affairs Committee.

I would also like to commend you on the work you have done. I have not had time to read it, but I did skim through it. This committee went to Quebec City to look at the situation for anglophones there, and their situation is really not an easy one.

During the hearings, I asked the Minister of Canadian Heritage how much was allocated to transfers for education. He answered the question easily, but when we got to Quebec City and invited a number of deputy ministers to come and testify, we were never able to find out how the funds were administered.

Only one person showed up out of all the invitations we sent out. Can someone tell me how many deputy ministers were invited and from which departments?

The Chair: I do not remember, but only one person accepted our invitation.

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: We invited several. A few declined, so we only got one person, who incidentally was excellent. But we never managed to find out how the funds are administered.

Only in the agreements on economic development was it possible to get that information, as you also mentioned in your report, in fact. In terms of community economic development, even though the area is in provincial jurisdiction, there are some transfers of funds from the federal government to those organizations.

In your recommendations, you suggest that people be accountable and that when the agreements come up for renewal, the government should perhaps look twice. That is hard, because, as soon as you get into areas of provincial jurisdiction — as is the case with minority communities — it is always the same problem. It is hard to know what is going on, because if Minister Moore insists, insists and insists, others are going to think that he is trying to meddle in an area of provincial jurisdiction.

That was not necessarily a question I had to ask you, but I think you did a good job preparing the brief you just presented. And as Senator Marie Poulin said earlier, I hope you will send your report to Minister Moore. It is important. The work you have done must not be left lying on a shelf. You have to do some follow-up with your report, which contains some excellent recommendations.

It is clear that you explored the matter in depth and that you did very good work. I think your report deserves to go to the minister’s office and that the minister should be aware of it. You have raised very important questions, and once again I commend you.

The Chair: I have a question that follows on from Senator Fortin-Duplessis’s comments. Because we have to look at the situation from both sides, I will play devil’s advocate a bit. Do you think your recommendations reflect the division of powers between the federal government and the provinces?

Mr. Wirz: Yes, we do, for a number of reasons. First of all, Canadian Heritage transfers funds in accordance with its spending authority and with Part VII. There is also the very specific situation of school boards and minority-language education.

We know that section 23 grants school governance authority; and it is interesting that, back in 1990, the Supreme Court held that, and I quote:

. . . the minority language representatives should have exclusive authority to make decisions relating to the minority language instruction and facilities, including . . .

Then there are five items, the last of which is:

. . . the making of agreements for education and services for minority language pupils.

We believe our recommendations respect the division of powers. In addition, education legislation in several provinces and territories specifically allows school boards to enter into agreements with the federal government. For example, in Saskatchewan, the Education Act, 1995, states that school boards can sign agreements for any purpose deemed necessary and beneficial to the quality and effectiveness of education services in the francophone education area, in particular with the Government of Canada or its agencies. All of these passages are quoted on page 21 of our report.

The Chair: That was an excellent answer. Thank you.

Transcript (Evidence) of Proceedings (53K)

The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it (Study on Part VII and other issues) (December 13, 2010)

Posted on 2010-12-13

Questions asked by Senator Suzanne Fortin-Duplessis on December 13, 2010

Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages

Third Session, Fortieth Parliament, 2010

Chair: The Honourable MARIA CHAPUT

Monday, December 13, 2010

Issue No. 16

Twenty-sixth meeting on:

The application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it (English- speaking communities in Quebec and other issues)

APPEARING:

The Honourable Stockwell Day, P.C., M.P., President of the Treasury Board

MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

The Honourable Maria Chaput, Chair

The Honourable Andrée Champagne, P.C., Deputy Chair

and

The Honourable Senators:

Boisvenu, *Cowan (or Tardif), De Bané, P.C., Fortin-Duplessis, *LeBreton, P.C. (or Comeau), Losier-Cool, Rivard, Seidman, Tardif

* Ex officio members

(Quorum 4)

Changes in membership of the committee:

Pursuant to rule 85(4), membership of the committee was amended as follows:

The Honourable Senator Rivard replaced the Honourable Senator Wallace (December 9, 2010).

The Honourable Senator Wallace replaced the Honourable Senator Rivard (December 7, 2010).

The Honourable Senator Losier-Cool replaced the Honourable Senator Munson (December 7, 2010).

The Honourable Senator De Bané, P.C., replaced the Honourable Senator Fraser (December 7, 2010).

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: In September, the committee held hearings in Quebec and welcomed here to Ottawa several anglophone groups that presented briefs. We heard about the problems English-speaking communities were having and about the major challenges they were facing.

I for one always thought that Quebec’s anglophones were wealthy individuals and that everything was going well for them. However, I discovered during the hearings that this was not the case. We heard about the incredibly high dropout rate and about many other kinds of problems.

You quoted some percentages, but your figures do not quite correspond to mine. Quebec anglophones are under- represented at various level of government. According to my figures, representation at the federal level is 11.7 per cent. At the provincial level, the proportion is an astonishing 2.8 per cent. Finally, if we combine municipal, regional and local representation, we come up with a figure of 7 per cent.

The participation of anglophones in government is lower than that of francophones across all regions of Quebec. In your opinion, what steps could be taken to improve access to employment in the public sector?

Mr. Day: These are very interesting statistics, especially since they differ from the ones I have. It is important for the people in charge of program management to continue encouraging people to follow programs to improve access to employment in the public sector.

I find your figures and percentages quite interesting because if English-speaking Canadians are under-represented, then this is a challenge for us. That is why it important to continue our efforts. We have programs in place and responsible individuals working to achieve acceptable levels of representation. As minister, in terms of the bills that I am responsible for, I will continue this work. I want to see a change in these statistics.

Senator Fortin-Duplessis: I can let you know where these figures were taken from. As President of the Treasury Board, have you identified areas where improvements could be made?

I listened closely to your opening statement. You must have some idea of where improvements could be made to official languages, either to French in those provinces in which francophones are in the minority, or to English in Quebec. What have you observed and where in your opinion could improvements be made?

Mr. Day: As I see it, one of the most important things we can do is continue the consultation process, as you pointed out. I truly believe that we have made some progress.

In the last report of the Commissioner of Official Languages, his exact words were “surprised.” He said he could not have imagined 40 years ago — four decades ago — that we would have achieved the levels that we have now. Obviously, he had other things to say, too, but broadly speaking, it is important that we communicate with respect to all the progress to show that there has been progress over a period of time. It is not even from the point of view of which party was governing because, over the 40 years, it was not always the same party. There has been progress, and there is more to do.

Reaching the people themselves who are served or who feel they are not well served is how I find democracies run best, namely, by hearing from the people we serve and then trying to match that information with the reality.

Over the next five years, as we have $1.1 billion committed to the pathway itself, we have the opportunity to direct resources where we are hearing and seeing the greatest pressures, and we need to continue to do that.

We know what the challenges are. People have told us that there are problems and they have asked us to work on finding solutions and on improving these percentages.

Transcript (Evidence) of Proceedings (25K)

Next Page >>