Members of the committee, Madam Chair, thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak to you today.
I have with me today two individuals whom you've no doubt met before: Michelle d'Auray, the chief human resources officer at the Treasury Board Secretariat, and Marc O'Sullivan, the acting senior vice-president of the workforce and workplace renewal sector, office of the chief human resources officer.
As you know, our government is committed to official languages, and we have made many efforts to ensure Canadians fully benefit from linguistic duality and its advantages.
As the President of the Treasury Board, I am responsible, first, for ensuring that Treasury Board develops and coordinates federal principles and programs for the application of the parts of the Official Languages Act dealing with delivering services in both official languages at offices designated as bilingual, in accordance with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That's in part IV of the act.
Second, I am responsible for creating and maintaining work environments that are conducive to the effective use of both official languages in regions designated as bilingual for language of work purposes. That is in part V of the act.
Third, I am responsible for ensuring the equitable participation of members of both official language communities in federal workforces and equal employment and advancement opportunities for both communities in federal institutions. That is part VI of the act.
Complementary to the efforts of my colleague, the Hon. James Moore, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages, I also play a role in applying part VII of the act in institutions. Specifically, I ensure that initiatives that Treasury Board is asked to approve take into account the enhancement and development of official language minority communities.
In addition, at the end of each fiscal year I am responsible for tabling in Parliament a report on the official languages program in institutions that are subject to the act.
I know that the Commissioner of Official Languages has expressed concerns about the creation of the office of the chief human resources officer. I would like to clarify this issue for the committee members.
As you know, on February 6 the Prime Minister announced a new human resources governance structure that provides for the creation of the office of the chief human resources officer within the Treasury Board Secretariat. The new office was established on March 2, 2009, by combining the functions of the former Canada Public Service Agency and the sectors within Treasury Board Secretariat responsible for pension, benefits, labour relations, and compensation.
In terms of official languages, the mandate of the office of the chief human resources officer includes providing support for institutions subject to the act to help them achieve their official languages objectives. Let me be clear: the restructuring has not in any way changed my responsibilities, nor those of the Treasury Board. The office of the chief human resources officer has the same responsibilities with respect to official languages as the agency had.
I would also like to recognize 2009 as the 40th anniversary of the Official Languages Act. Let me mention a few key achievements.
First, slightly over 90% of official language minority communities have access to federal services in their language. If we think back to 40 years ago, when communities had to communicate with federal institutions in the language of the majority, this is incredible progress. In 40 years we have gone from a practically unilingual public service to a bilingual public service in which employees can generally use the official language of their choice at work, subject, of course, to obligations relating to services to the public, other employees, and the supervision of employees. The percentage of bilingual positions increased from 25% in 1978 to 40% in 2007.
Linguistic duality is a cornerstone of our national identity and a source of immeasurable economic, social, and political benefits for all Canadians. Our government is committed to strengthening this duality. Our road map for Canada's linguistic duality for 2008-2013 includes an unprecedented five-year commitment to provide $1.1 billion in funding in support of the road map and is a sign of this commitment.
As our Prime Minister said, and I quote, the road map:
...reiterates the commitment of the Government of Canada to linguistic duality and our two official languages. It lays out the path we intend to follow over the next five years to build on Canada's sturdy foundations. English- and French-speaking Canadians have come a long way together since the founding of Quebec City.
This Roadmap points the way to an even stronger future and a more unified Canada.
Additionally, our government has a centre of excellence for official languages within the Treasury Board Secretariat, which will continue to be a leader and closely monitor official languages developments in federal institutions. This centre of excellence is working on including official languages in each of the four priority areas for public service renewal: first, integrated human resource planning; second, recruitment; third, employee development; and fourth, enabling infrastructure.
I would also like to point out that one of the objectives for 2009 is to continue recognizing the place of Canada's two official languages in the workplace. Overall, the situation is positive. According to the 2005 public service employees survey, 86% of employees feel free to use the official language of their choice when they prepare written materials; 90% of employees feel free to use the official language of their choice when they communicate with their supervisors; 85% of employees feel free to use the official language of their choice during meetings in their work units; and 93% of employees say that the material and tools provided for work are available in the official language of their choice.
In closing, linguistic duality is a major asset for both the public service and Canadians. Canadians need a modern public service that provides services in both official languages and is representative of the various communities making up Canadian society.
So, Madam Chair, my officials and I are happy to take your questions. Thank you.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Good morning, Minister, Mrs. d'Auray, Mr. O'Sullivan.
As Mr. Rodriguez was pointing out, there is some discomfort in Canada with respect to official languages. There is the issue of the assimilation of minority linguistic groups, which we are all very familiar with. Francophones are being assimilated. Mr. Toews, you know something about this, since you come from Manitoba. People in that province have worked very hard, but the level of assimilation remains very high. I think the Canadian government should reconsider the following question, which is important. If the government wants to demonstrate a real desire to support linguistic duality in this country we call Canada, the leaders of the government should set an example. Hence, the Prime Minister and his ministers should have a good command of both French and English.
This is part of a dilemma which is obvious when we look at representatives of the Supreme Court and deputy ministers, who represent the Canadian state. You know my position on the subject and I know that you do not share it. You demonstrated this earlier. In my opinion, you should not feel insulted. As a francophone Quebecker, I find the position taken by the federal government very hard to swallow. That being said, I think that's Canada and it's unfortunate.
With respect with the Roadmap, I see that the government was going to invest $2.7 million in this plan to ensure, I believe, that future public service employees would already be bilingual when they were hired. Do you not think that this is a prerequisite? Do you agree with this principle?
:
Let me address some of your initial points. I don't know if you've ever been west of Ottawa, but I come from the province of Manitoba. We have a very proud tradition of French and English there, and we have done some excellent work. When I was in provincial politics, we commissioned an individual by the name of Judge Richard Chartier, and he produced a report called “Above All, Common Sense”, talking about how we can further the francophone language rights in the courts.
I represent a riding that is probably somewhere in the range of 15% to 18% francophone. My colleague from St. Boniface represents a riding with approximately the same number of francophones. There's some disagreement about who has more francophones in their riding, but I can indicate that we provide government services in Manitoba in a way that has developed francophone language rights. I'm very proud of our record.
I can point not only to the justice area, with the courts specifically, but to the policing. We have bilingual areas in my riding out of St-Pierre where the police officers are all bilingual and serve a huge area of my riding bilingually. I was very proud when I was the Minister of Justice, and continuing in my role as a regional minister, to make recommendations and to speak with the Minister of Justice about the appointment of francophone judges. For the first time in the history of Manitoba--under our government--we had three francophone judges on the court of appeal, so that any appeal could be heard in French without translation. Now, unfortunately one of those judges decided--no, no, you've indicated that we--
:
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
[English]
Welcome, Minister Toews, Madame d'Auray, and Monsieur O'Sullivan; bienvenue ici.
I want to thank you, Minister, for helping me to get to the place where I am now. I want to put on the record for members opposite that when I became a candidate, you were very helpful in addressing the Chartier report and making me aware of it. That helped me substantially to learn about official languages in our province of Manitoba, as well as about the official language situation across the country. I commend you for your efforts.
I also want to mention that I too, as you stated, believe in knowledge, competencies, qualifications, and experiences to make up part of what we want to see in our leaders. I commend you for all of that, and I welcome your responses to some of my questions here today in that light.
The first question I would put to you, Minister, is this. You've indicated that you have a role to play in ensuring that government institutions comply with the Official Languages Act. I'd like to know what the Treasury Board does to ensure that.
:
Thank you very much, Ms. Glover.
The responsibility of Treasury Board related to official languages is quite clear and it is in a supportive role. I should say that every institution is responsible for the application of the act within its own organization. Treasury Board, however, is responsible for overseeing the overall application of the act with regard to service to the public, language of work, and equitable participation. More specifically, it adopts policy instruments and oversees the status of the official languages programs and institutions, subject to parts IV, V, and VI of the act, as I've indicated in my preliminary comments, and particularly through the annual assessment that it asks those institutions to submit.
Of course, it also provides support, opinions, and advice to institutions through the office of the chief human resources officer. Perhaps she could add something to my comments.
:
Let me respond. Just have the decency to let me respond.
I came here in good faith, and the first thing that happens to me is I'm insulted. For some reason I'm less of a Canadian, I'm less entitled to hold public office, because I only speak one of the official languages. You know, for the past number of years, as a public official in Manitoba, I have worked very hard for French language rights in that province. I have stood for French language rights.
My own riding understands where I stand on the issue of French language rights. I have never hesitated to protect French language rights, and I am willing to protect minority language rights in every part of the country. I'm willing to respect those who speak French alone, unilingually. I respect those who speak English, and of course there are certain fortunate people who speak both official languages.
I'm very proud of my own daughter, who's bilingual, who went to an immersion school. I didn't have that opportunity, but I can tell you that I am as committed as anyone to the issue of bilingualism in this country, the recognition and the protection of both official languages, and for you to come here and insult me in that way is quite a disgrace. I thought we had gotten beyond that kind of situation. Unbelievable.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Minister, I don't think these are personal attacks, but rather serious and important questions on official languages.
I simply have a comment to make. As an employer, I would personally feel uncomfortable asking my staff to be bilingual without being so myself, quite simply. That is my own opinion.
Minister, you said in your presentation that employees can generally study the official language of their choice in the course of their duties. You also said that 86% of employees feel free to use the official language of their choice when drafting documents. You say, furthermore, that 90% of employees feel free to use the official language of their choice when communicating with a supervisor.
Minister, is that not a way to discourage individuals within the public service to become bilingual? I'm asking you the question because, although individuals may be able to use their mother tongue, would it not be a way to discourage them from being bilingual and from offering services themselves in both languages? Would this not essentially compel them to transfer requests for services to another individual who speaks the second official language?
It is worrisome to note, in light of your comments, that French, or the second official language, is not really important to you. I would like to hear your comments on this. I'm sincerely concerned.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
[English]
I'm very embarrassed about the way my opposition colleagues have been conducting themselves.
[Translation]
I would like to point out that there are two official languages in Canada. If I prefer to speak French, I can certainly do so.
[English]
If I want to speak English, I have a right to speak English. I can choose either one language or the other.
We're not here today to attack the minister. We're not here to set traps for the minister. Monsieur D'Amours, in his famous question, says “Ah, Minister, I changed one word in my question and you gave the wrong answer.” That's infantile.
We don't treat any other witnesses this way. We've had many witnesses in front of us from francophone and anglophone institutions and we have never grilled them on why they're speaking French today, on whether they speak French, on what their level of French is, or how they can call themselves this, that, and the other thing when they don't speak both official languages.
This is cheap politics, and it lowers the credibility of the colleagues—not you, Madam Chair, but of my colleagues—and it lowers the credibility of our committee. We're trying to do good work here, and instead it's being undermined by infantile, cheap political tactics. They're taking advantage of a situation.
We are actually here, Madam Chair, to talk about policy—
:
First of all, Chair, that's not a point of order.
Secondly, I'm not talking to the opposition colleagues. I am commenting on their conduct here in the meeting and how unacceptable it is and how it's an embarrassment for this committee that they have conducted themselves so.
That they would call that a point of order just gives evidence to what I'm saying.
[Translation]
So I am saying that if a unilingual francophone likes speaking French and only French here, he can do so, he is entitled to speak French. The same thing applies to anglophones. We have the choice of speaking either of the two official languages or both, it is our choice. It is the choice of each and every Canadian.
Minister, there are approximately 72,000 bilingual positions in the public service. Sixty-eight per cent to 70% are found in the National Capital Region. Twenty per cent are in Quebec. I would like to know what the government is doing to ensure that all Canadians have equal opportunities to secure employment and be promoted within the public service.
:
The departments are working on this issue in several ways. We are currently working with Canadian universities to again increase awareness of our recruiting needs and job opportunities in the federal public service.
We have university champions, deputy ministers who are responsible for interacting directly with the universities throughout the country. For example, the Public Service School set up a pilot project to work directly with certain universities and to strengthen the use of its tools to prepare graduates hoping to be hired in these positions.
Furthermore, as the minister stated, we are actively participating in job and career fairs held in Canadian universities. The organizations are also responsible for providing language training.
We, the federal institutions, have the reports produced by the organizations and which must also indicate the amounts of money spent on language training. So we can total the amounts spent, which is quite a lot of money. As far as the core public administration is concerned, I believe about 52 to $53 million is spent per year.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I have been involved in advocating for the rights of official languages in a minority situation for more than 40 years. I was there when the Official Languages Act was established. I have observed the work of this committee throughout all this time.
About 10 years ago, I was part of the staff who assisted the committee chair. I never witnessed the partisanship and fanaticism that I've seen here this morning.
I must tell you that 40 years ago, things were very difficult, because people objected to the very concept of official languages. They did this in a very disgraceful manner. Right now, we have reached a point where we need to get things back on track, and we can do this better using honey as opposed to vinegar.
As for the issue that concerns me this morning—
:
Thank you for your question.
Renewal of the public service is a priority. It is an integral part of the report recently tabled by the clerk. The clerk strongly recommended that this be done and provided clarifications as part of an action plan that every deputy minister had to produce for the fiscal year that has just ended and will have to produce for the current fiscal year.
The place of official languages is an essential component in recruiting, both to ensure service delivery and representation in the public service. If I may, I will quote an excerpt from the clerk's report:
There is also a need to make improvements in recognizing the place of Canada's two official languages in the workplace. This goes beyond representation of francophones and anglophones at all levels of the public service, where in fact we have been quite successful. Rather it means ensuring that we are operating a public service that uses and respects both official languages in the workplace and in services to the public.
So we are talking about the workplace, recruiting and representation. These aspects are an integral part of our recruiting measures in universities, in accordance with what we call talent management within the public service, namely, when we consider potential, development and career training for employees. Official languages are part of the essential criteria considered.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I represent the riding of Gatineau, where approximately 6,000 people work for the federal State. So the federal government is an important employer. We are told that francophone public servants—those for whom French is the language spoken at home, the mother tongue—can work in the language spoken at home in their departments. I do not want you to pay any heed to these words, because from one department to the other, from one agency to the other, from one Crown corporation to the other—I realize that the Treasury Board does not cover these groups—, things do not transpire the same way everywhere. We are in the federal capital region, and some people have problems working in their mother tongue. In some instances, they stop communicating in this language because their superiors make absolutely no effort to understand them or do not forward the memos or work notes prepared by these employees. These individuals, however, do live in what is said to be the most bilingual region in Canada.
We need to pay attention when we make such affirmations. You may be generalizing, but in some departments, this is not the case.
Ms. d'Auray, when an employee cannot work in his mother tongue and is dissatisfied, what recourse does he have with his employer, without being penalized?
:
The short answer to your question is yes, there are many discussions that are currently under way.
For example, we have a network of deputy ministers who have been assigned or named as champions. They work directly with universities to encourage them and to determine the best ways they can help encourage and continue to encourage the students currently in their programs in order to make sure they are proficient in both official languages.
As I think I mentioned, the Canada School of Public Service is going to be launching a pilot project with a number of universities to see how it can in fact spread the use of its own tools in order to increase the proficiency of graduating students in both official languages. We're all going to be watching the results of that, because it's a way of embedding into the curriculum or the process in which students are learning the use of existing tools and mechanisms either to enhance their capacity or to develop a capacity in the other official language.
It is an issue in which the Commissioner of Official Languages is also very interested. We have had a number of discussions with him on that to see if we can join efforts to work together and to speak to universities. In all instances, though, the government recognizes its responsibilities and does in fact provide learning and training in the other official language in order to make sure that employees have the ability to increase their career opportunities within the public service.
I think one element that is actually quite important to remember is that not all positions are bilingual. So we are dealing with a certain set of positions—I think about 40% of our positions—within the core public administration that are bilingual.
:
You are correct in pointing that out.
Last year we participated, as the minister indicated, in four career fairs, because we had not had a concerted presence, an organized presence. It made a huge difference. This year we will be continuing. We bring departments and agencies together, piggyback on the career fair days that are actually organized by universities, and establish a very visible federal presence to give a sense of the range of opportunities that exist within the public service.
For example, our slogan is “One Employer, A Thousand Opportunities”. We might actually want to say two thousand opportunities, but the thousand actually rings better, though the other is in fact the case. Students, as we go out and explain all of the opportunities that are available in the public service, are quite enthused, and we have seen, in that sense, quite an increase in the level of interest and application.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Once again, good morning.
I would like to have something clarified. I would like to find out the details of something. The Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer, which I believe reports to the Treasury Board, is responsible for ensuring the respect of official languages in federal sectors or agencies that do not come directly under the Treasury Board.
You know that dunce caps are given each year by the Commissioner of Official Languages to those who I would say make it a habit to flout the Official Languages Act. I am thinking of the Department of National Defence or Air Canada, for example, where the French fact is not respected and where there is the highest rate of complaints coming from Canadian citizens or, at least, of criticism from the Commissioner of Official Languages.
I would like you to explain to me how the Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer will be able to do what the Treasury Board has not been able to concerning National Defence or Air Canada, for example, or how it will be able to ensure that official languages are indeed respected. There are other examples as well.
:
A clarification: the Treasury Board is responsible for coordinating the program and ensuring that policies are implemented.
I will now come back to an essential element: the institutions are the ones that are responsible for complying with the act and for fulfilling their obligations.
It is true that we are responsible for working with them, encouraging them and giving them the required guidelines and direction. In this regard, we have also taken into account the observations made in the report of the Commissioner of Official Languages. We have been working and, indeed, continue to work with Air Canada very specifically on how this company can improve service delivery and language training for its employees.
We are also working with the Department of National Defence. The Canadian Forces have their own system and their own obligations under their legislation. We also hold discussions with several other agencies.
Our change of direction over the past few years has helped us focus on agencies that appear to have more difficulties honouring their commitments or that seemed to trigger the most complaints.
Instead of covering everyone, over the past two years, we began to focus specifically not only on central government organizations, but also those institutions that come under the Official Languages Act, to help them improve their performance.
:
I am aware of the role that you play in the machinery. You are not the decision-makers; you carry out the decisions that are made by the department or the minister.
However, it is disappointing to observe that we must always go back to the drawing board with the players I mentioned earlier, and that there is no greater reinforcement.
If your role is simply to pay lip service, then it is up to the minister to show some leadership and to change things. We have seen who the minister is, and that is all I will say.
Active offer is more than just a theme. It is a reality that should exist throughout the federal government apparatus, from sea to sea, to ensure that francophone citizens—because it is they who are mostly in the minority, if I may express myself thus—can obtain services in French. In addition, active offer means ensuring that, in person or on the phone, these francophone citizens can obtain services in French, from the outset.
The Commissioner of Official Languages once again showed in his latest report that there are shortcomings in this regard. How do you ensure, in a tangible manner, that an active offer of service exists in all departments?
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I want to make a comment as opposed to asking a question of the witnesses.
All ministers of the crown in the federal cabinet are responsible for upholding the Official Languages Act, but in the opinion of Liberal members of this committee, only bilingual citizens need apply. I think this is an insult to the millions of Canadians, many of whom are immigrants and recently arrived in this country, who are struggling to make a life here and who don't speak the other official language.
What Liberal members on this committee are saying is that these Canadians are not full citizens, that they need not apply or aspire to positions in the federal cabinet or to senior positions in federal institutions. I think the message being conveyed is that they are second-class citizens.
Therefore, Madam Chair, I would ask that you provide an opportunity for Liberal members on this committee to withdraw those remarks.