LANG – Standing Committee on Official Languages – December 6, 2022

Thursday, October 6, 2022, from 11:02 a.m. to 1:06 p.m.
Videoconference (hybrid and in-person and Zoom)

Report prepared by:

Mélodie Terracol, Parliamentary and Cabinet Affairs
Canadian Heritage
melodie.terracol@pch.gc.ca

Members in attendance

René Arseneault (LPC) Chair
Mario Beaulieu (BQ)
Joël Godin (CPC)
Niki Ashton (NDP)
Richard Lehoux (CPC)
Francis Drouin (LPC)
Jacques Gourde (CPC)
Angelo Iacono (LPC)
Arielle Kayabaga (LPC)
Patricia Lattanzio (LPC)
Alain Rayes (CPC)
Marc G. Serré (LPC)

Subject of the meeting

Bill C-13, An Act to amend the Official Languages Act, to enact the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act and to make related amendments to other Acts

Witnesses:

11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages

• Raymond Théberge, Commissioner of Official Languages
• Isabelle Gervais, Assistant Commissioner, Compliance Assurance Branch
• Pierre Leduc, Assistant Commissioner, Policy and Communications Branch
• Pascale Giguère, General Counsel, Legal Affairs Branch

12:00 to 1:00 p.m.

As an individual

• Houston Rifai, Public Policy and Public Administration Student, Youth Advisory Committee, Bishop’s Forum
• Guillaume Rousseau, Full Professor, Faculty of Law, Université de Sherbrooke
• Arielle Warten, Sociology Student, Youth Advisory Committee, Bishop’s Forum

Summary:

11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages: Raymond Théberge

• Presented an analysis of the measures proposed in C-13.
• C-13 does not include any measures to modernize the core components of the Act: communications with, services to the public, and language of work. They need to be better aligned for federal institutions.
  • The Act must ensure that the work tools in both official languages are available so workers can provide quality service to the public.
• C-13 should codify the obligation for federal institutions to draft all federal, provincial and territorial agreements in both official languages and incorporate enforceable language clauses.
• Measures to improve governance should be adjusted.
• TBS is in the best position to assume this responsibility.
• I recommend that the scope of the financial penalties be broadened to apply to all federal institutions with obligations in terms of language of work and services to the public. They should apply to federally regulated private sector businesses subject to the UFA.
• Additional financial and human resources are allocated to the Office. Resources must be adapted to our new reality.

Questions:

Joël Godin (CPC)

• Should modernization be done quickly or in a rigorous manner?
  • Théberge: I am proposing some amendments, but now is the time to act.
• You have said that the responsibility for governance should be assigned to an agency, the TBS. Is this an essential condition for the effectiveness of C-13?
  • Théberge: There must be an impact.
• Will the implementation of Bill C-13 with your improvements stop the decline of French in Quebec and Canada?
  • Théberge: C-13 as is or amended will certainly help reverse the decline.
• If a business cannot find French-speaking employees, should it be closed?
  • Théberge: Absolutely not. We need the necessary language infrastructure to ensure that we develop a bilingual workforce.
• Do we close? Should we include an exemption clause?
  • Théberge: A compliance agreement with the institution in question could be included and a timeline for compliance could be specified.
• There is currently no such thing as what you are mentioning in the legislation.
  • Théberge: No, we are only making recommendations at this time.
• How can language clauses be included in federal, provincial and territorial agreements without infringing on provincial jurisdiction?
  • Théberge: (no time)

Marc G. Serré (LPC)

• You have raised the importance of passing C-13 to enrich and support the Action Plan. Can you elaborate?
  • Théberge: In our brief, we mention the importance of having a government-wide plan, and that is the Action Plan. What is important is how this plan will be developed and who is responsible for its implementation. The best possible structure is needed to ensure proper implementation.
• Should C-13 pass in the next few days, months...?
  • Théberge: There has been much consultation on the bill, but now it’s time to act.
• Are you concerned that the provinces will pass laws that do not support the country’s Francophone minorities if C-13 is not adopted?
  • Théberge: Each province is free to develop its own policies, but this can create confusion for businesses and consumers by having two language regimes.
• What do you suggest as a target for immigration?
  • Théberge: The 4% is insufficient to maintain and increase the demographic weight. Specialists can determine the necessary target.
• Are you aware that Mr. Savoie supports C-13 as is?
  • Théberge: I appreciated his comments.

Mario Beaulieu (BQ)

• In Bill C-13, leaving aside the issue of federally regulated businesses, what will help counter the decline of French in Quebec?
  • Théberge: Part 7 and the positive measures will promote and recognize the Canadian Francophonie.
• In the positive measures, what will counter the decline of French?
  • Théberge: These are decisions that will be made by federal institutions to see how they will promote French in Quebec and outside Quebec. There is a mandate to act.
• In your opinion, what is a positive measure that defends French?
  • Théberge: The question of education is an important element. Federal institutions in Quebec and in regions designated bilingual must provide services in French.
• So we should fund both English and French institutions?
  • Théberge: We must be able to find mechanisms to promote and protect French. It is up to the government to determine the best course of action.
• The Quebec government has suggested a list of amendments, and none of them are included in the bill. How do you think Quebec will react if C-13 is adopted as is?
  • Théberge: C-13 as is could certainly support the protection and promotion of French.

Niki Ashton (NDP)

• You say that agreements without language clauses can have negative effects on OLMCs. Can you give us some examples?
  • Théberge: There will be a long-term impact. There are several examples in the past on the use of funds.
• Can you elaborate on the distinction between positive measures and enforceable language clauses, and why the measures do not go far enough to comply with the Court of Appeal decision?
  • Théberge: The criteria identified in the FFCB decision are much more onerous than in the legislation. Rules for the enforcement of positive measures must be specified in the regulation. Impact assessments must be done to develop positive measures that meet the needs of the communities.
• Can you explain the significance of your recommendation regarding TBS authorities?
  • Théberge: The right structure must be put in place to ensure good governance and implementation of the legislation. TBS can take a horizontal view of the entire federal administration. Many departments do not have the measures to monitor other departments.
• Francophone immigration question. Is it important to enshrine the goal of demographic catch-up in the legislation?
  • Théberge: Whether we use the word catch-up or not, it is clear that the long-term objective is to maintain the current demographic weight of Francophones, but also to increase it to what it was before.

Bernard Généreux (CPC)

• In relation to the provinces and the enforceable clauses. Can you talk about this?
  • Théberge: When there are no language clauses, it is easy to find oneself in a situation where OLMCs are forgotten in the implementation of an agreement.
• So we should make them mandatory?
  • Théberge: Absolutely.
• Do you anticipate that air carriers should be subject to the legislation? Air Canada is currently the floor. In what way?
  • Théberge: If C-13 is adopted, the UFA will apply to WestJet and the other carriers, but they will not have the same obligations in the UFA as in the OLA. Financial penalties should be expanded, especially in relation to federally regulated businesses.
• The Quebec government has proposed amendments to the bill. Have you had any discussions with that government?
  • Théberge: No.
• No communication? Do you think you’re having a conversation about their request?
  • Théberge: This discussion should take place at the political level.
• On the issue of giving the TBS executive power, everyone agrees, but there is a sense of reluctance on the part of the government—do you agree?
  • Théberge: We leave the decision to the government, but we support the TBS as “master of the ship.”

Arielle Kayabaga (LPC)

• Can we still move forward to stop the decline of French in Francophone communities and, at the same time, continue to enrich this law with the necessary amendments?
  • Théberge: There have been several consultations and many stakeholders have appeared before the committee. Your role is to take the information and see how to improve the bill before us. This is the time to act and then we can review the bill in 5 or 10 years. We will never achieve a perfect law.
• Expand penalties to federal institutions. With the measures in place for these institutions, what do you think is missing and should be added?
  • Théberge: There is certainly a good toolbox that will serve us well for the next few years.

Mario Beaulieu (BQ)

• The Radio-Canada study indicates that 68% of federal public service positions in Quebec require knowledge of English, while approximately 13% of positions outside Quebec require knowledge of French. Do you think that’s appropriate?
  • Théberge: We should make sure that the positions reflect the realities of the linguistic weight. Across the government, approximately 42% of positions are designated bilingual, 52% are designated English essential and 6% are French essential.
• In some government agencies that require bilingualism, many people will lose their jobs. What do you think about this?
  • Théberge: In designated bilingual regions, for language of work, people have the right to be supervised in the language of their choice and to work in the language of their choice. I’m not aware of what you said.
• Do you have enough resources to respond to all your complaints?
  • Théberge: We are facing a shortage of employees.

Niki Ashton (NDP)

• Do you think C-13 needs to be improved? Do you think that the decline of French language be halted with, for example, enforceable language clauses or with better-targeted objectives for immigration in the legislation?
  • Théberge: These are all elements that can have an impact on the decline of French. We must ensure that education systems in the minority language and French as a second language, from early childhood to post-secondary education, are put in place. Communities and their needs must be respected in the agreements.

Jacques Gourde (CPC)

• In the next iteration, what would be a successful and missed historic event?
  • Théberge: My worst nightmare is that no bill will be passed. A successful bill would be one where key elements are in place:
    • Governance that can provide horizontal governance across the federal government to implement the legislation.
    • A Part VII that is well developed and codified. It’s the one that most closely affects the communities.
    • The issue of language of work should be addressed in a rapidly changing world of work.
    • An effective bill would be a bill of a different calibre than C-13.
• Is a 5-year review of the legislation better than a 10-year review?
  • Théberge: I will leave it to MPs to decide. Implementation must be monitored. We could see the impact after a decade.
• Can you elaborate on TBS accountability and responsibilities?
  • Théberge: There must be a regulatory framework to demonstrate who is meeting their official languages obligations.
• Should we codify some of the elements of the Thibodeau decision and incorporate them into the legislation?
  • Théberge: Yes. The concept of the travelling public must be expanded.
• The list of bilingual regions should be updated on a cyclical basis. Do you agree?
  • Théberge: Yes. I think that the designated bilingual regions should be where the bilingual offices are.

Francis Drouin (LPC)

• How do you enforce the legislation when it comes to a bilingual position in a completely Anglophone environment?
  • Théberge: You have to have the tools, and we do not have them right now. The legislation could include this kind of thing in terms of tools, training, services received from the centre in the official language of choice.
• On the provision of services in French by the government: how are needs met when the French population is scattered across a region, knowing that this represents geographical challenges?
  • Théberge: There has to be a flow between the office that offers the services and where Francophones are located. The concept of equality is important to remember; the service offer must be expanded.
• Positive measures. Should they be further defined by C-13 or by a regulation that does not require a legislative process?
  • Théberge: We could codify certain elements of judgments in the bill, but it is clear that a regulation is needed for implementation.

*Richard Lehoux (CPC ) asked for unanimous consent to invite the Commissioner again to appear for an additional hour.

*The Chair dismissed MP Lehoux’s question as it was not a point of privilege.

Summary:

12:00 to 1:00 p.m.

Arielle Warten, Sociology Student, Youth Advisory Committee, Bishop’s Forum (as an individual)

• C-13 will have a profound effect on young Anglophones living in Quebec.
• As young English-speaking Quebecers, we feel abandoned by the federal government in this proposal.

Houston Rifai, Public Policy and Public Administration Student, Youth Advisory Committee, Bishop’s Forum (as an individual)

• French can be promoted and protected in a positive way, without having to suppress the use of other minority languages to achieve this objective.
• We ask that you consider protecting the rights of English-speaking Quebecers as a minority in their own context.
• We ask that the government take an action stance against the reduction of rights. We implore that you do not make reference to the Charter of the French language in C-13.

Guillaume Rousseau, Professor, Faculty of Law, Université de Sherbrooke (as an individual)

• The fundamental principle of territoriality. Only the territorial approach based on the idea of having one official language per territory can save a vulnerable language. The federal government should align itself with this Quebec policy.
• C-13 must do more to protect French in Quebec with the territoriality model and then the personality-based model in the other provinces.
• Asymmetry – We need to stop equating the situation of Francophones with that of Anglophones. C-13 should be more asymmetrical.
• 41.6(c). – The federal government continues to overfund English-language schools and research.
• The Use of French in Private Businesses Act offers less protection for French than the Charter of the French language.

Questions:

Joël Godin (CPC)

• What does the overfunding of English post-secondary education in Bill C-13 mean in Quebec?
  • Rousseau: Section 41.6(c). The problem is that the Anglophone minority in Quebec is placed on an equal footing with Francophone minorities in the other provinces, whereas clearly the federal government must do much more for Francophones in other provinces. It is a problem of symmetry.
• Do we solve the problem by reducing funding for Anglophones in Quebec or do we need to increase funding for Francophones outside Quebec?
  • Rousseau: We need to increase funding for research in French in Quebec. The territorial approach must be used for Quebec and the personality approach for the other provinces.
• What tools should we include to stop the decline of French in Canada in the wake of the passing of C-13?
  • Rousseau: It’s a question of Francophone immigration policy, especially in Quebec, Bill 101, which applies to private businesses.

Patricia Lattanzio (LPC)

• What are the challenges faced by the English-speaking community in Quebec?
  • Warten: English-speaking Quebecers live in the only province where the use of their language is restricted by provincial law. Unemployment and economic security are major concerns. We ask the government to provide programs that help English speakers, bilingual or not, find meaningful careers in Quebec. The vitality of our community is dwindling.
  • Rifai: Most students who are trained in English universities will leave the province afterwards because there’s a skills gap.
• There’s brain drain going on in Quebec?
  • Rifai: Yes.
• What changes or amendments would you like to see in C-13 to address this concern?
  • Rifai: There should be no connection to the French Language Act, it sends the wrong message and leaves the door open for future legislation that would limit our language rights here in Quebec.
• How do you feel about the enactment of Bill 96 vis-à-vis the language in C-13? What are the consequences do you think down the line as the youth in Quebec?
  • Warten: The language laws are diving the two official language communities.
• Would you be prevented in terms of the use of the non-withstanding clause to be able to address the courts who have always been there for the minority communities to bring forward these injustices?
  • Warten: We’ll include our answer in our brief.

Mario Beaulieu (BQ)

• Can we consider that the OLA, which is based on the assumption that Anglophones are a minority in Quebec, so that all the funding and intervention goes to strengthen English in Quebec? Doesn’t that go against international law?
  • Rousseau: Yes.
• I think that if, in regions outside Quebec where there is a critical mass of Francophones, we try to make French the common language, we could perhaps counter the assimilation rates.
  • Rousseau: Yes. The French language is doing well in Quebec, and it is spreading outside Quebec. The symmetrical approach must end.
• The Quebec government proposed changes to C-13 and none were accepted. There is pressure to pass the bill. What do you think about this?
  • Rousseau: The bill needs to be more forthright about asymmetry.
• Positive measures. How do you think it should be redesigned?
  • Rousseau: There should be much more funding for groups defending the French language in Quebec.

Niki Ashton (NDP)

• How effective do you think it is to adapt certain measures by regulation rather than by amendment to the legislation?
  • Rousseau: I am in favour of there being more elements in the legislation since it allows a wider democratic debate. There are some fundamental public policy issues that are left to regulation, but a little too much.
• Do you think that this vindicates the legislator’s desire to legislate a demographic recovery objective for Francophone minority communities through Francophone immigration?
  • Rousseau: The more things are included in the legislation, the clearer the requirements of the legislation and the better to achieve goals. Picture a bathtub, if we open the “tap” on Francophone immigration, there are more Francophones, but if we do not “plug” the anglicization of Francophones, we will not make much progress in French. The problem of visas for international students has a tremendous impact on universities. This is especially important for Quebec immigration.
• What are the advantages of defining certain priorities directly in the text of the law rather than being adopted by regulation?
  • Rousseau: It’s a question of democracy and transparency. Consultations are more limited with the regulation. Flexibility is lost when you put everything in the legislation rather than in the regulation. One way to reconcile this is to put more in the legislation, but provide for a quicker review of the legislation, say in 5 years.

Richard Lehoux (CPC)

• I would like to hear your views on linguistic specificity.
  • Rousseau: The C-13 regime is based on linguistic personality, so it cannot ensure the survival of a vulnerable language like French, whereas the Quebec regime is based on the principle of territoriality. We must leave room for the Quebec government in the legislation.
• Is the current immigration section (44.1) in C-13 sufficient? Or is it a cosmetic amendment? Quebec wants to strengthen it, what do you think?
  • Rousseau: We need to be more specific and demanding in terms of immigration policy. The judiciary has done some work for the other provinces, but the prudent jurist in Quebec tends to be less supportive of the protection of French.
• Is Quebec’s proposed amendment to section 3.1 a codification of a Supreme Court decision?
  • Rousseau: I do not have it in front of me.
• What do you think about the FCFA amendment regarding language clauses and consultations to address the issue of accountability in transfers to the provinces?
  • Rousseau: The asymmetrical approach is the right one. The federal government should let its language policy be implemented.
• Section 93.1. We don’t call it a revision.
  • Rousseau: No.

*Joël Godin (CPC) moved

– That, in the context of the study of Bill C-13, and given the issues raised in the Commissioner’s brief, that the Minister of Official Languages, the Minister of Canadian Heritage and the Secretary of the Treasury Board be invited to appear at the rate of two hours per department after October 18, 2022, for an appearance as soon as possible.

• Motion carried unanimously.

Francis Drouin (LPC)

• What’s the most important aspect of C-13 that you’d like to see?
  • Rifai: The lack of immigration in Quebec and the loss of language in the communities outside of Quebec are the reasons why the French language is in decline. The government should make sure Francophone communities outside of Quebec have access to resources and help to maintain their language, but it should not come to the cost of the language minorities in Quebec.
• Many Quebecers move to other provinces, but do not settle in Francophone communities. How do we apply the principle of territoriality and how do we strengthen C-13 to ensure that we serve our Francophone communities, which are scattered everywhere? How do we go about legislating and ensuring that there is Francophone content in an environment where there are no geographical barriers?
  • Rousseau: The territorial approach for Quebec and for regions with strong Francophone components, but in the other provinces, we can maintain an approach based on personality. It is important to include the Charter of the French language in the legislation.

Mario Beaulieu (BQ)

• If the government imposes a constitution that weakens Quebec’s language legislation, isn’t this a lack of respect for Quebec’s rights as a minority? Isn’t this also violating the right to self-determination of the Quebec people?
  • Rousseau: Having a Canadian constitution adopted without Quebec’s consent is an infringement of the principle of internal self-determination.

Niki Ashton (NDP)

• If the federal government did a better job of accepting study permit applications from French-speaking African students or even having consular services in Africa, would this help stop the decline of French in Quebec?
  • Rousseau: Yes, but you have to see Francophone immigration as part of the solution. The anglicization of Francophones is a problem.
• You said that Francophone immigration will not stop the decline, but the communities say the opposite. Why is this?
  • Rousseau: It may help slow the decline, but anglicization doesn’t help.

Next meeting:

The committee is expected to continue its study on Tuesday, October 18, 2022.