Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Official Languages
Issue 9 - Appendix
APPENDIX
Dyane Adam
Commissioner of Official Languages
Notes for an Appearance before the
Senate Standing Committee on Official Languages
Ottawa, Ontario
November 21, 2005
Check against delivery
Mr. Chair:
Senators:
Let me begin by thanking you for giving me the opportunity to present to you the highlights of my sixth annual report, tabled on May 31.
This year's report stands out from the previous ones. Indeed, the 12-month period covered by the report marked two anniversaries: the 35th anniversary of the Official Languages Act in September 2004, and the 35th anniversary of the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages (OCOL) on April 1, 2005. To commemorate these events, we devoted Volume I of the report to a review of 35 years of progress toward linguistic duality, while Volume II is devoted to an assessment of the government of Canada's performance in 2004-2005 and highlights the activities related to OCOL's mandate.
In addition to providing an overview of the two volumes of the annual report, I would like to conclude by briefly describing the work that we have undertaken this year, which is already well under way.
Volume I: 35 Years of Official Languages in Canada —
Achievements and Challenges
In the wake of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism, the adoption of the Official Languages Act, in 1969, was one of the cornerstones of a vast social construction project, based on a long-term vision and built one brick at a time.
Thirty-five years later, we see that the principle of linguistic duality is now legally entrenched and also enshrined in the Constitution itself. This constitutional recognition has encouraged successive federal governments to promote the true equality of both linguistic groups and to contribute fully to advancing both official languages in Canadian society. What is more, this commitment has been taken up by a growing number of provincial and territorial governments.
To be sure, the history of linguistic duality in Canada has been marked by stops and starts, epic battles, spectacular breakthroughs and small steps forward, but the end result is one of real progress in all sectors. We could look at this situation as a glass that is still only half full. Reviewing 35 years of history, however, reminds us that, at the beginning, this glass was practically empty and that, over the years, it has been filling up slowly but surely.
So, where are we today? Significant progress has been made in several areas:
Twice as many young Canadian Anglophones are bilingual, their proportion increasing from 7% to 14%, as illustrated by the graph on page 24 of Volume I. What is truly remarkable is that the proportion of bilingual youth has increased significantly in every province and territory without exception. The level is now 25% nationally.
Canadians all across the country recognize the social value of bilingualism, which they support at a rate of nearly 80%. This attachment to official languages has also been confirmed by a study released earlier this week by the Centre for Research and Information on Canada, which indicated that 79% of Canadians would view the abandonment of the concept of two official languages as a negative development for the country.
Canadians can count on a more bilingual federal administration for services in their language, and the two linguistic groups are also now equitably represented within the federal public service.
A network of national institutions, including the CBC, the National Film Board and the Canada Council for the Arts, supports Canadian cultural expression in both official languages. This network enables us to project the Canadian personality nationally and internationally in both official languages.
More than ever before, Canadians can expect to be heard, understood and judged by the courts in the official language of their choice.
Official language minority communities now have access to education in their own language in schools that they manage, as well as to a developing network of post-secondary institutions, which allows them to take their place in the Canadian economy. While the educational level of the official language minorities was previously significantly below that of the majority, this gap has now been almost eliminated among the younger generation, as illustrated by the table on page 63 of the English version (page 65 of the French version).
Canadians have more opportunities to work in their own language.
More than ever before, the two linguistic communities are able to benefit from the economic and social advantages related to immigration, and these advantages should be felt as well outside the large urban centres.
Canada's linguistic duality has contributed significantly to the recognition of Canada as an international leader in respect for minorities and human rights.
Despite progress toward the true equality of the two linguistic communities, this collective project is not completed. Greater support is needed for second-language learning across Canada, the culture of the federal public service must truly embrace the daily use of both official languages, and more partnerships between governments and the official language minority communities must be created in the sectors that affect these communities' vitality.
For instance, in the minority language education sector, where a great deal has been accomplished, many communities are still working to acquire tools that are essential to their full development and vitality. Collaboration among the various levels of government is needed to expand access to post-secondary education and increase research opportunities. Steps must also be taken to allow the current system to accommodate a larger proportion of minority language education rights holders.
The development of official language minority cultural industries and media must be accelerated. These two sectors need greater support to enable them to move beyond their current precarious status. The ability to express themselves and to see their own lives reflected remains a key factor in the development of minority communities, regardless of their origin. Canadian society as a whole would benefit from providing its official language communities with more opportunities for creative expression.
As you can see, there are still a number of challenges ahead of us.
Volume II: The 2004-2005 Fiscal Year
In my previous reports, I noted that implementation of the official languages policy appears to have plateaued over the last decade, especially in terms of services to the public. Our Federal Institution Report Card, released for the very first time during the launch of the 2004-2005 annual report, confirms this finding. Where it is required, service is provided in both languages only three times out of four, a rate similar to that observed by various studies conducted by my Office and the Treasury Board over the last several years. It is no exaggeration to speak of stagnation. In addition, the active offer of bilingual service is still made by staff only one time out of four.
These national statistics conceal a very unequal reality: while the federal agencies generally succeed very well in offering quality service in both official languages in Quebec and in the National Capital Region, our data indicate that, in some regions, service is provided in both languages less than 50% of the time and the active offer of service is almost non-existent. The table on page 19 of Volume II is revealing with regard to this point. I am sure you will agree that the federal government is capable of doing much better, provided that it is willing to consider changes in the way services are currently provided.
To continue to monitor the situation, a second Report Card will be published as part of my last annual report. This will make it easier than before to identify the institutions where progress is being made, and those which are slow in improving their services in the minority official language.
One of the concerns of Canadians is of course the accountability and transparency of public institutions. In this context, the mid-term assessment of the Action Plan for Official Languages is, in my view, a very important exercise. I hope to have the opportunity to discuss it with you at a later date, once we have had the opportunity to complete the study.
I have also emphasized the importance of clarifying the scope of Part VII of the Act, as provided for in Bill S-3 tabled by your esteemed colleague, Jean-Robert Gauthier, before he retired. As you know, the House of Commons have adopted Bill S-3 during third reading last Thursday. I am confident that you will proceed rapidly with this Bill when it comes back to Senate so that it may be submitted for Royal Assent as soon as possible.
Moreover, I am happy to report that the government has responded quickly to most of the recommendations of my previous report, including the review of official languages policies by the Treasury Board. Of the 11 recommendations made in my previous annual report, more than two-thirds have been implemented at least partially or are in the process of being implemented.
I would like to highlight the efforts of the Public Service Human Resources Management Agency of Canada in the review of its official languages policies. Phase I, in force since April 1, 2004, has been successfully implemented. Phase II came into force on July 15, 2005, and gives priority to the issue of language of service. I hope that the leadership that the Agency has shown on the issue of imperative staffing will be reflected in the other components of its mandate with respect to official languages, particularly the issues related to language of work in the context of relocations outside regions designated bilingual and the audits required to ensure the application of the Regulations.
Finally, through Bill C-47, the government moved maintain Air Canada's language obligations. On Thursday, November 3, the House of Commons gave the bill its second reading and referred it to the Standing Committee on Transport, where I'll be discussing it tomorrow morning. Because of the high number of complaints we are receiving about Air Canada, I am monitoring this issue closely.
I am happy to note that this bill is receiving the support of all the political parties. As you know, Bill C-47 has the very specific objective of maintaining the language rights of the public and Air Canada employees. Even though it has been referred to the Standing Committee on Transport for study, I hope you will have the opportunity to discuss this bill.
Therefore, it is important that the amendments proposed by Bill C-47 clearly set out the language requirements of entities owned by ACE Aviation Holdings, in order to avoid as much as possible legal proceedings aimed at clarifying the scope of the legislative amendments and the application of the Official Languages Act. In other words, we must ensure that the amendments result in making Air Canada and all its former divisions, such as Ground Handling Services and Technical Services, subject to the Official Languages Act.
Conclusion: Drawing Lessons to Build the Future
In conclusion, when one reaches the ripe old age of 35, one looks back to draw lessons from the experience of the years gone by. For official languages, I see two main lessons.
First, political leadership from the highest level is essential. The experience of the past 35 years shows that major progress in official languages was achieved during times of strong political leadership at the federal level. Conversely, these gains are eroded when the government is less vigilant and less committed to promoting duality and to supporting the linguistic minorities in particular. Vigorous and sustained leadership is therefore necessary to achieve equality of treatment of both official language groups.
Second, collaboration among the various levels of government has produced remarkable results, especially when the minority official language communities are involved as partners. For example, the significant progress of health services in French was possible only thanks to the participation of several provincial governments on the Comité consultatif des communautés francophones en situation minoritaire, established jointly by Health Canada and the Francophone communities in 2000. One of the best ways to help these communities to progress is to provide them with adequate tools so that they can manage their own development, while also contributing fully to Canadian society. The institutions that the majority takes for granted, such as universities, health care institutions and child care services, are too often inadequate or lacking in the minority communities.
In order for a social project of this scope to continue to progress — in order for the glass to finally be full — linguistic duality as an original expression of Canadian diversity must remain a key aspect of Canada's image as a world leader in human rights and respect for minorities.
My hope on the occasion of the 35th anniversary of the Official Languages Act would be that we continue to build on this heritage to enable Canadians to benefit from a stable and prosperous society. This milestone represents an ideal opportunity for you to take a fresh look at the results of the official languages policy and to update the federal government's practices, in order to overcome the current stagnation and better meet the changing needs of our society.
It starts with taking into account, at the outset, the impact of governmental transformations on the delivery of services in both official languages. I am thinking in particular of Service Canada and the relocation of institutions to the regions. This new federal government approach can pose a risk for the official language communities, and more broadly for Canadian society. But it is also an opportunity to establish new service delivery models better able to meet the needs of Canadians, regardless of the official language that they use. I was interested to learn about Senator Claudette Tardif's initiative to review the issue of relocating institutions; perhaps you will choose to consult more widely on this issue in the coming months, if that is possible.
Like you, we are working to provide food for thought, and to stimulate further action in the area of official languages. This is why this fall we held three discussion forums on issues that are key to Canadian linguistic duality.
By consulting experts from academia, community development stakeholders and public servants whose work is related to official languages, we addressed issues dealing with the regulatory framework of official languages, joint governance mechanisms between governments and the communities, the various factors and mechanisms that foster the vitality and development of the official language communities, and the links between linguistic duality and Canadian diversity. These issues will be addressed in my last annual report, which I hope to have the opportunity to present to you next spring.
Thank you. I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.