Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Official Languages
Issue 8 - Evidence - Morning meeting
VANCOUVER, Wednesday, November 15, 2006
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages is meeting today at 9:00 a.m. to study, and report from time to time, on the application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directive made under it, within those institutions subject to the Act, as well as to study the draft of a report.
Senator Maria Chaput (Chairman) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chairman: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to this meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages. I am Maria Chaput, Committee Chairman, and I come from Manitoba.
Our committee's mandate is to study the application of the Official Languages Act, and, during our stay here in Vancouver, we are mainly considering two issues. The first is the effect of the decentralization of federal agency head offices on the application of the Official Languages Act. The second is consideration of the official languages in the organization of the 2010 Olympic Games.
Allow me to introduce to you the members of the committee here today.
To my right, we have Senator Fernand Robichaud from New Brunswick, Senator Tardif from Alberta, and Senator Losier-Cool from New Brunswick; on my left, Senator Comeau from Nova Scotia and Senator Murray from Ontario.
Our first witnesses this morning represent the Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures.
We will be hearing from Mr. Marc Arnal, President of the Fondation, and Mr. Jean Watters, representing British Columbia to the Fondation.
Jean Watters, Board Member, Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures: Madam Chairman, I do not represent British Columbia. None of the members of the Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures represents the province. I am a member of the board of directors.
The Chairman: Very well, thank you for that clarification. You have roughly 10 minutes to make your presentation, and the senators will then have a lot of questions to ask you.
Marc Arnal, President, Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures: Honourable senators, my name is Marc Arnal. I am the President of the Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures, Dean of the Faculté St-Jean and, like Madam Chairman, originally from Manitoba. I am here today with Jean Watters, Executive Director of the Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie-Britannique, and previously Rector of Laurentian University and President of Collège Boréal in Sudbury. Thank you for the time you have put at our disposal.
The Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures grew out of an initiative by the FCFA. In 2000, the FCFA sponsored a task force that did a cross-Canada tour to start a dialogue between francophone and Acadian communities, on the one hand, and the other groups making up Canadian society, that is to say anglophones, Quebec francophones, Aboriginal peoples and the ethnocultural communities, on the other. In its report, the task force recommended that a foundation be established whose role it would be to continue the work begun by that tour.
The Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures was thus established. Its board of directors consists of Canadians from various regions and various linguistic and cultural groups. Under the patronage of Her Excellency the Governor General, our honorary president, the Fondation has as its mission to promote and support dialogue among the various components of Canadian society; to instruct and inform the public in order to bring the diverse communities closer together and to promote thought and research. For example, we are very much involved in Les Rendez-vous de la Francophonie, with which you are no doubt familiar and which is the annual celebration of the French language in connection with the Journée internationale de la Francophonie in March.
In the context of the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games in Vancouver, the Fondation is pooling its efforts with the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique, whom you heard yesterday, to contribute to the success of the Games by expanding the influence of the entire francophone community of Canada. The Fondation's participation grew out of a retreat held in the spring of 2005 involving representatives from the Department of Canadian Heritage, the Vancouver 2010 organizing committee, VANOC, and community leaders and officers of the francophone associations of Canada and British Columbia.
The purpose of that meeting was to encourage Canada's francophone communities to determine how they wanted to be involved in the 2010 Olympic Games and to identify mechanisms for cooperation among the various stakeholders in order to support VANOC in its mission; in other words, how to ensure that the country's francophones would view the Vancouver Games as their games as well. Participants identified the Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures as an organization qualified and able to identify mechanisms and a cooperation framework. That was approved by the FCFA du Canada, among others. The Fondation accepted that responsibility.
In subsequent months, we followed up with francophone organizations and associations, met with VANOC, the FCCB and the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games Federal Secretariat in Vancouver. We view our role, not as that of project manager, but rather as a catalyst for the efforts of the Canadian francophone community.
There is thus no contradiction, for example, between our role and the agreements that VANOC has since signed with the Province of Quebec and other provinces. The talks led to the signing of a tripartite agreement among the Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures, the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique and VANOC. That agreement sets out the responsibilities and obligations of each of the parties in carrying out this major Canadian project.
In March 2006, we submitted our strategic plan, a copy of which I have here and which I could leave you if you wish, which is entitled: Together, seizing the opportunity to contribute to the success of the 2010 Vancouver Games and to promote a stronger Francophonie in Canada. This strategic plan provides the backdrop for action by the Canada francophone community.
Its primary purpose is to optimize, over the next four years, the collective actions of those who seize this opportunity that is afforded us. Its success will depend on the will, openness, and motivation of individuals and organizations to cooperate on this project. We are now implementing this vision. We have established a national committee and four subcommittees to define possible actions in various fields: tourism, business, education, youth, culture, sports and recreation. This action plan should be submitted by the end of January 2007.
We believe that Olympic values such as strengthening the ties among peoples and promoting an end to conflict are consistent with the values of the Fondation. That is why the Fondation will exercise leadership that is inclusive and respectful of the expertise of each party, and its role will essentially be to facilitate the broadest participation and involvement by the francophone community across the country.
The Games are a locomotive to which we can attach the French fact. It affords us the opportunity to promote the French language, an official language at the Olympic Games and to make Canada's francophone community known within and outside the country. The Games are an opportunity for us to show our know-how and to showcase artists, creators, entrepreneurs and many other francophone talents, to bring the country's francophone communities together and to involve youth and encourage it to join in Canada's francophone community.
The francophone community will take action in three spheres: first, it will provide direct services to VANOC by identifying resources, talents and products and respond to express, specific requests. Second, it will contribute to the related activities of the Games, through, for example, public facilitation, welcoming tourists and promoting the activity; and, lastly, by promoting public participation across the country, by introducing activities and products inspired by the Games, both before and after the event.
In addition, the federal government has informed us that it wants to ensure that the two official languages are fully incorporated into the planning, organization and conduct of the 2010 Winter Games. The government also wants to ensure that the members of the francophone communities across Canada seize and take part in the opportunities that arise as a result of the Games. It will therefore have to set aside in its next budget resources that will enable us all to achieve the feat of making the Games a success and supporting the development of the francophone community in Canada. The Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures is aware of the weight of its responsibility and intends to meet its obligations.
Senator Comeau: Thank you very much and welcome to the committee. Thank you for giving us an overview of the Fondation. From my questions, you will understand that I do not really know the Fondation. That is why I may ask questions to which perhaps I should know the answers.
First, how do you become a member of the Fondation; either a member of the executive or a member in charge?
Mr. Arnal: According to the Constitution or letters patent of the Fondation, members replace people who withdraw. Essentially, there is no electoral process. It is a process of appointment based on a certain number of internal criteria.
Senator Comeau: If someone leaves, the Fondation finds someone else?
Mr. Arnal: We do have some small routine agreements. The president of the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne is always a member of the Fondation, but it is understood that, when that person ceases to be president or resigns, he or she is replaced by his or her successor. That is the closest example of institutional representation we have on our board.
Some of our members took part in the old coordination organization, Les Rendez-vous de la Francophonie; like Suzanne Laverdière, who is now in Paris and is programming director for the seven TV5 networks, but whose substantive position is that of Vice-President at Radio-Canada. She is a member and was a member of the organization responsible for Les Rendez-vous de la Francophonie. So when we included Les Rendez-vous de la Francophonie, she came along with it. We always have someone from the ethnocultural communities and always someone from the Aboriginal communities. We also try to ensure geographical representation to the extent that is possible, and we also try to ensure equal representation of men and women.
Senator Comeau: Your main purpose is dialogue among Canadian cultures, not necessarily to be a group representing the linguistic or francophone minorities of Canada?
Mr. Arnal: We have never made that claim.
Senator Comeau: I understand that. Do you have any representation from Quebec?
Mr. Arnal: Yes. In addition to Suzanne Laverdière, whom I just named, there is Joan Netten, in Montreal, who is the former President of Canadian Parents for French. We have Luc Laîné from the Wendake nation, near Quebec City, and Bernard Voyer, who is a well-known explorer from the Montreal region.
Senator Comeau: But you are not a foundation with representatives other than from the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada?
Mr. Arnal: No. Even though, officially, the FCFA is not an ex officio member. It is simply as the result of an arrangement made with the FCFA; when George Arès stopped being president, he resigned and Jean-Guy Rioux replaced him.
Senator Comeau: Does your mandate include some provision whereby you try to have geographical representation?
Mr. Arnal: Yes.
Senator Comeau: Simply based on population?
Mr. Arnal: No.
Senator Comeau: That is not in your charter?
Mr. Arnal: Yes, I think I could check, but we set geographical representation objectives. We are a national foundation, so we have to have representation from various parts of the country.
Senator Comeau: Is there something in your charter stating that there will be at least so many persons from New Brunswick?
Mr. Arnal: No, I do not think that is the case. But I think that is understood.
Senator Comeau: But you try to achieve that objective?
Mr. Watters: I am from British Columbia, but I do not represent British Columbia.
Senator Comeau: I understand that.
Mr. Watters: The people around the table represent various groups. Aboriginal people and Acadians are represented and, together, we form a whole, but we do not necessarily represent a specific province.
Mr. Arnal: There is no specific objective.
Senator Comeau: Your foundation was chosen because you are people involved in society, and you are trying to do what you can to promote dialogue?
Mr. Watters: Yes.
Senator Comeau: Where does the Fondation's funding come from?
Mr. Arnal: Ultimately, the funding is the basis of the projects. We receive some funding for participation, the organization of Les Rendez-vous de la Francophonie and Canada's participation in Les Rendez-vous de la Francophonie. Perhaps you have read our newspaper, which has a circulation of 2.3 million and is distributed across Canada.
Among other things, we have special programs with Radio-Canada and activities across the country sponsored by the Fondation.
Senator Comeau: But do you have core funding?
Mr. Arnal: No.
Senator Comeau: How many full-time employees do you have?
Mr. Arnal: We have one part-time employee, Guy Matte, who is our executive director. Perhaps you know him.
Senator Comeau: Yes.
Mr. Arnal: In addition to Mr. Matte, contract employees are hired to work on the various projects. For example, we have a team for Les Rendez-vous de la Francophonie, who are the same people who previously organized the Hot Air Balloon Festival in the National Capital Region. So we essentially negotiate contracts with service suppliers.
Senator Comeau: I do not want to monopolize all the time, but I still have a few questions to ask. Yesterday, we heard from the Fédération des communautés francophones de la Colombie-Britannique, who said that they had little funding to contribute to the conduct of the Games. I believe they have a $40,000 fund, which will be exhausted in two or three months. They told us they were not expecting more funding. Have you obtained funding to perform the task that has been given you for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games in Vancouver?
Mr. Arnal: No. I am not convinced — In any case, I do not know who told them there would not be any more funding for the Fédération des communautés francophones de la Colombie-Britannique, but that is not the impression I have.
We have a certain amount of money for our funding. In all, we have currently received about $100,000 for the first year, but we have submitted an action plan, and the host community will also be submitting an action plan. Those actions plans will be reviewed by the Government of Canada and by the Government of British Columbia and grants will be awarded. That is quite obvious.
Senator Comeau: The comment that was made to us yesterday was that the minister had previously had discretionary authority to dip into a given budget, but that he apparently no longer had that discretion, that there therefore was not any program in which funding would be available to help them and that their funding would shortly elapse.
Mr. Arnal: They are no doubt more aware of the internal workings of the Government of Canada than I am, even though I worked for them for 20 years. That was a while ago, it is true. I must say that I find that comment surprising.
Senator Comeau: Okay. I have one final question. We heard from the Canadian Heritage representatives in Ottawa. They came to talk to us about the gains and the fact that you had been the group chosen for Canadians. A comment was made that you were our mouthpiece. I questioned that a bit because I wondered how you could be my mouthpiece. They are talking about the mouthpiece of the francophone and Acadian communities of Canada.
Mr. Arnal: I read the document in question.
Senator Comeau: If someone speaks for me, I want to have my say. So you are not our mouthpiece?
Mr. Arnal: We never claimed that we were anyone's mouthpiece. We are the mouthpiece for a mission, and our mission is to ensure dialogue among cultures. There was a meeting with a series of representatives; the representatives looked at the horizon of the organizations and agreed that we seem to be the best able to meet coordination needs.
Our role is essentially to facilitate and coordinate. We represent no one, except in the way that one could probably say that the Governor General confers a certain legitimacy by acting as honorary chair. But we do not claim to represent anyone.
Senator Losier-Cool: Good morning, I am always pleased to see you again. In response to Senator Comeau's concerns, we were told about a number of agreements yesterday. We are trying to agree on the agreements and on your role. There is VANOC, which represents the governments, and you, you mainly say you are promoting the development of Canada's francophone community.
Looking at the list of VANOC members and knowing a number of people who are members of the board of directors and knowing that they have proven themselves over the years gives me confidence.
Then there is the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique. Where do they stand? More with VANOC? More with you? Do you meet, the three groups together?
Mr. Arnal: Yes. Through our executive director and staff. Yes, we meet regularly.
Senator Losier-Cool: Each has its own specific task, and for you, it is to ensure that the francophone community is very present at the 2010 Vancouver Olympic Games?
Mr. Arnal: The Canadian francophone community.
Senator Losier-Cool: Yes, absolutely. Yesterday, we heard from the Chairman of the Vancouver Chamber of Commerce. He hopes the committee can examine — and I would like to have your advice on this — the impact of the Olympic Games for the francophone community, especially in western Canada. Do you see your role continuing? How do you view that impact?
Mr. Arnal: I am going to give Mr. Watters a chance to speak, since he is in the field and works with an organization that is very active in the Olympic Games file. He can tell you about the impact. Then I will try to sort out for you clearly what the FFCB's role is, what the Fondation's role is and what VANOC's role is.
Mr. Watters: The francophone community of British Columbia has two representatives at the table; that is the President of the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique and the President of the Société de développement économique de la Colombie-Britannique at the Fondation's table.
Senator Losier-Cool: That is Mr. Cyr?
Mr. Watters: No, that is his boss, because Mr. Cyr is executive director. They play a very important role and that is how dialogue is maintained with the British Columbia group. As we mentioned earlier, no one has received any funding to date. In our presentation, we talk a lot about optimization and playing a catalyst role.
The projects will materialize over the next few years. I am going to give you a very simple example: 72 countries are represented on my board, and 58 languages are spoken. You can imagine the number of volunteers that will produce among youths and the francophone community.
What is interesting is that we are talking about a dialogue of cultures. This is very representative, to a certain extent, of Canada's changing role. Twenty years ago, we talked about the two founding peoples; now we talk about two languages, French and English, but that embrace a number of cultures. When we say culture, 78 countries are represented on our board and will reflect the change in Canada over the next 10 or 15 years. We have a role to play in this regard, and it is not just a leadership role. It is a role as facilitator in moving forward and experiencing these coming changes.
As regards funding, I will let my colleague talk about that at greater length. We are still in the early planning stages. The four subcommittees that Marc referred to in his presentation have just been formed, and these subcommittees are about to meet again. They have already met once, but the closer we get to the Olympic Games, the more projects we will see associated with the Fondation.
Mr. Arnal: If the Games were the British Columbia games, they would not need us. This is Canada's Olympic Games, which are being held in British Columbia. Obviously, the host community is British Columbia. Obviously, the British Columbia francophone community, as a result of a decision that was made by the community itself, is represented by the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique. That is clear and obvious.
But for the national aspect, however, we have been asked to ensure its coordination, not to represent, but to ensure that the Olympic Games are present across Canada, before, during and afterwards.
That means that we will be working with the Olympic Committee, the third key player. We will be working with the Olympic Committee first to respond to orders, second to suggest things to them and to propose various models for cooperation. They have just done a national tour in which we took part. Based on that tour, there will emerge activities that will be adopted through the four subcommittees and the steering committee and that will then result in an action plan, which we hope will be funded. Ultimately, that is how that works.
Senator Losier-Cool: Thank you for your clarification. You must have been a teacher because it was very well explained.
Would you have any suggestions or recommendations to make to us concerning your role with all those organizations, so that we can include them in our report on this visit?
Mr. Arnal: What comes to mind, and this is related to the representation question, is that, when you represent, you have a certain authority; you represent on the basis of an authority delegated by the members. We do not have that.
We very much need to rely on the various stakeholders' desire to cooperate. As you mentioned earlier, we think that, with the list of people sitting on our board of directors, we can attract that kind of cooperation. If I were to wish for something, it would be essentially that everyone would play fairly and that it all go very well. If everyone pulls at his corner of the blanket, it will be difficult. We do not have the ability to tell someone to get into line because that is not our role. Our role is a coordination and facilitation role.
Senator Jaffer: If I understand correctly, you are the coordinator between the community and VANOC? Is that correct?
Mr. Arnal: If, by ``community'', you mean the Canadian francophone community, including Quebec, yes.
Senator Jaffer: Only for the francophone community?
Mr. Arnal: Yes, in this file. Dialogue in this file, which we are talking about; obviously, we are going to talk about other files because we are in communication with Aboriginal people, but our main role is between francophones outside Quebec and French-speaking Quebec.
Senator Jaffer: Okay. Do you have a lot of roles to play for the Fondation, for francophones, for Aboriginal people and for other communities?
Mr. Arnal: We are a foundation that promotes dialogue among cultures. You must remember where we come from. We come from the francophone community outside Quebec. We are part of an approach by the francophone community outside Quebec toward others. The others in this situation are Quebec francophones and the other groups that I mentioned earlier. So, yes, we have taken on a lot of roles.
[English]
Senator Jaffer: I would like some clarification. Coming from British Columbia, we hope that we will have other communications with you.
I am confused by the word ``cultural.'' It is linguistic and cultural. You are doing both.
Mr. Arnal: Yes. The reason we are called what we are called is because ``Fondation dialogue'' was already in existence and we could not use the same name. The ``des cultures'' part ``Dialogue des cultures'' was not our original desire. We saw ourselves, as our honorary president says, breaking down solitudes.
Senator Jaffer: If I understand, your role is that you are dialoguing between the community and VANOC.
Mr. Arnal: Yes.
Senator Jaffer: How often do you meet with VANOC? How does the structure work?
Mr. Arnal: I meet with them personally maybe twice a year, but our executive director meets with them regularly.
Senator Jaffer: What does ``regularly'' mean?
Mr. Arnal: It means whenever it is needed. It could be once a month; it could be once every week. It depends on the intensity of the level of activity that is occurring at the time.
Senator Jaffer: Are you happy with the results thus far? Do you see that they are on line?
Mr. Arnal: Initially, I think there was some difficulty in establishing exactly who was going to do what with whom and how often, but that seems to be fairly clear now. We are very happy with the way the subcommittees are functioning. We are happy with the way the national coordinating committee is functioning. We have an excellent relationship with the francophone community in British Columbia and with VANOC. Yes, we are pretty satisfied with the way things are going.
Through some of our other projects, we have also made fairly significant inroads into Quebec. We are satisfied as well that we will be able to work constructively and productively with various organizations and with the Government of Quebec.
Senator Jaffer: As a British Columbian, I am preoccupied with not letting our country down and not just having French as a formal part of the proceedings. Within VANOC, how well represented is the French language?
Mr. Arnal: I think initially they recognized that they had some work to do and I think they have gone about doing it. Yesterday, I was speaking to someone in Edmonton who has just been hired as a staff translator. She is originally from Quebec but is now working in Edmonton. You will be able to ask them, but we believe that they have a fairly clear and reasonable picture of their capacities, and where they need to bring in more capacity they do not hesitate to do so.
Senator Jaffer: As a woman, one of the things I have come to realize is that if you are not sitting at the table, the decisions are made for you. That is why as women we work very hard to be part of the political process. I worry when we have translators and not people who are speaking the language sitting at the table, and so I am anxious to know how many people are speaking French who are sitting around the table and who is speaking for the foundation, not for the coordinating role but to make sure that the language is there.
Mr. Arnal: I will answer your question directly and then segue into something else, if you are prepared to indulge me. I think that question is best asked of the people who are following us here.
Senator Jaffer: We will, trust me.
Mr. Arnal: This past weekend I was involved in Saskatchewan in another process in the francophone community to try and open up the identity parameters of the community. In 1969, we were speaking about official languages and the emphasis was on ``official.'' In the nineties, under several impetuses, there was a change and a shift in the thinking. It was more than semantics, and we went to the notion of linguistic duality. Recently, we have been hearing Canada's common languages. I share your view that we will be successful if we convince all of our visitors and every Canadian that French and English are in effect Canada's common languages.
I come from Alberta where the immersion programs are perhaps the strongest in the country right now — except for B.C. — where the francophone school board enrolments are going up by almost 20 per cent a year, so we are very optimistic. However, I think that this shift is continuing.
My own dream is that the Olympic Games will put us over the top into the next iteration of language policy, which is essentially the recognition by all Canadians that French and English are the two common languages of this country. When we achieve that goal, we will have achieved a fair bit.
Senator Jaffer: We have the same dream.
When people in B.C. talk about ``common languages,'' they often talk about others, and I have real issues with that phrase. I am old-fashioned and like ``official languages'' better, because then there is no doubt.
Mr. Arnal, obviously, members of this committee will continue to have this dialogue. I wonder, however, if you could send to the committee your thoughts on what things look like on the ground with respect to French. Something like that would be very helpful.
[Translation]
Mr. Watters: I think we are talking about two languages and a number of cultures. As a resident of British Columbia for a number of years, I have seen things evolve within VANOC. I do not think French is something anyone paid special attention to at first. I will give you a few examples. Most people in administrative positions with VANOC are now taking French courses. If we had suggested that three years ago, I do not think they would have done that. Enormous efforts have been made to hire bilingual people for senior positions, which was not done before. The President of VANOC is going to Quebec City with the Société de développement économique de la Colombie- Britannique to do the presentation there. That is something we would not have seen two or three years ago. And I am going to go further: last week, I met the mayor of Vancouver, Mr. Sullivan, and I pointed out to him that his telephone message was in English and Mandarin. I told him that with the Olympic Games coming up in 2010, it would be a good idea to add French. The next day, his message was in English, French and Mandarin.
People started from there; that is where they are and, after the Olympics, they will be there. Continuing progress is being made, but this is not bad will. The important thing for us as francophones is to take our place and to take it together.
Senator Murray: Mr. Arnal, I must say that what you have just told us about your role, contrasting the coordination role with that of representative, does not seem to correspond to what we heard at our hearings in Ottawa from witnesses from Sport Canada and Canadian Heritage. I remember very well that Senator Comeau asked who these people were from the Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures who had to protect his interests as an Acadian. I checked my impression with that of Senator Comeau, and, thus far, we have had the impression that you were to represent the interests of the Canadian francophone community to VANOC. That said, of course, you may comment on what I have just said.
Ms. Nicole Desjardins, Executive Director of the Conseil culturel et artistique francophone de la Colombie- Britannique, testified before our committee yesterday afternoon. She told us about certain concerns, including three in particular. Until now, I would have thought that these matters concerned your role and mandate. First, and Senator Jaffer has just mentioned this, Ms. Desjardins was concerned about the hiring of unilingual individuals for VANOC's administrative staff in the ceremony and cultural programs sector, and was also concerned that most of the future staff could well be unilingual English and that Canada's linguistic duality would thus not be respected.
Second, she noted that there was an absence of francophone artists at events that had been put on by VANOC in the past year.
Third, she was concerned about the fact that the cultural programs related to the 2010 Olympic Games are lagging behind the organization schedule for these Games, and, if I understand correctly, is afraid that, with this delay, we may be faced with a fait accompli at some point in the future in this sector, which is wall-to-wall English and that there may not be any time to make changes. Those are the three questions she raised in her presentation yesterday. I invite you to comment on that.
If you insist that your role is a coordination role and that these matters do not concern you and that we should turn to someone else or elsewhere, please say so clearly.
Mr. Arnal: Those matters concern us directly, and I thank you for that information. The information on the staff matter will be forwarded. Moreover, I imagine you are going to do it, but we will follow up as well with VANOC.
That falls under our responsibility. As for the activity timetable, we will make sure that the francophone community is well represented in all events. There were some abuses at first, but I think we will be trying to avoid any in future. As for the testimony of the people from Sport Canada, I do not want to seem to be splitting hairs, but I think this is important. We do not have any direct representation role as a mouthpiece. So we cannot say we represent him, her and so on.
But the mandate that has been given to us is to ensure that the francophone community across the country is well represented at Canada's 2010 Olympic Games.
Senator Murray: Ensure is the right verb. That is very important.
Mr. Arnal: Yes, ensure. As I told you, we are doing that without necessarily having the authority, the power to say that we represent John, Peter and Paul. We have a role to ensure participation. And, if at the end of the day, the francophone community is poorly represented at the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games in Vancouver, that will be our fault because that is our role. There is always the possibility that people will say they do not want to cooperate with you or that they do not want this or that. At that point, we can go back to the authorities.
Senator Murray: That is an admission of failure.
Mr. Arnal: Yes, but there will not be any.
[English]
Senator Murray: In answer to one of the questions from Senator Jaffer, you said that you meet with the group as and when necessary. In view of the concerns that were expressed by, among others, Madam Desjardins yesterday and in view of your answers, which I thank you for, we do agree that an early meeting is warranted —
[Translation]
— to ensure that corrective measures are taken.
Mr. Arnal: Indeed, we will be carefully studying the evidence that is given here before you and trying to get a clear understanding of the concerns expressed by the members of your committee, and we will definitely be giving you an indication that we have taken action accordingly.
Senator Tardif: I would like to clarify certain points that have already been addressed. I understand that this is not a representation role, but someone has designated you the ``mouthpiece for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games in Vancouver''. Who named you the mouthpiece? Was it VANOC? Was it Canadian Heritage? Was it the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique?
Mr. Arnal: A gathering of organizations was called by the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne, which was interested. That gathering recommended that the Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures be given the mandate.
Senator Tardif: Was it the FCFA that suggested you have that mandate?
Mr. Arnal: No, it was the group brought together by the FCFA. If you need the list of people at that meeting, we can send it to you.
Senator Tardif: You have a mandate. Someone said it's the Fondation. Who said that? VANOC? According to VANOC, you are the mouthpiece. Who gave you that mandate?
Mr. Arnal: According to VANOC, we are the link to Canada's francophone community. I think that is clear. Who gave us that mandate? It was the group of individuals and organizations that was called together by the FCFA in Ottawa and that concluded that we were the best organization to represent those interests.
Senator Tardif: But the $100,000 that you received for the 2010 Olympic Games comes from whom?
Mr. Arnal: It comes from Canadian Heritage.
Senator Tardif: So Canadian Heritage recognized the mandate that these organizations gave you?
Mr. Arnal: Yes, Canadian Heritage recognized the legitimacy of the group that did that.
Senator Tardif: Why do you have no one from the Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures on VANOC's executive committee? If you are the link — and that is where the decisions are made — why are you not on VANOC's board of directors?
Mr. Arnal: I believe our executive director has decided that the prevailing arrangements were sufficient for the moment.
Senator Tardif: I suggest that you look at that because I was involved in the 2001 Track and Field Championships and also in the World Games. I was on the board of directors, and we had a subcommittee, and you have to be on the spot, where the decisions are made — I agree with Senator Jaffer — because, afterwards, it is often too late to correct these deficiencies.
Mr. Arnal: We will raise that with our executive director.
Senator Tardif: The distance is starting to be felt. We also talked about various projects; if there is a problem, such as the fact that there will not be enough broadcasting in French, who solves that problem? Is it VANOC that has to be responsible? Is it the Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures? Is it the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique? When there is a problem, where is the management line to solve that problem, and how does that work?
Mr. Arnal: Ultimately, it is VANOC that manages the Games. It is not us. Ultimately, it stops there. The broadcasting problem was raised, and I know — since I have talked about it — that the people at VANOC and the Government of Canada are working on it. We have been told that reassuring announcements will be made at the appropriate time. So we are waiting and watching.
Senator Tardif: Who is responsible for recruiting enough francophone volunteers to meet the needs?
Mr. Watters: Someone at VANOC will start recruiting volunteers in 2007. We, the school board, have people who come from 78 difference countries. VANOC will be coordinating the volunteers, but we will also make sure that there is a greater francophone presence in that area.
Senator Tardif: If you need money to hire a francophone coordinator to do that, where will that money come from? Can the FCFA ask you for money to help with coordinating volunteer recruitment? Are they responsible for requesting that funding from Canadian Heritage? Will VANOC provide the money? How will that be done?
Mr. Arnal: That depends on whether the Government of Canada feels that that function was already included in the funding granted to VANOC. If it is clear to stakeholders that that function has already been funded or that it should be part of VANOC's basic infrastructures, that will come out of that.
Senator Tardif: Who puts those questions to VANOC?
Mr. Arnal: We do, among others.
Senator Tardif: You ask those questions. You are not only responsible for cross-Canada representation, but also for day-to-day issues, for proper day-to-day operation in areas such as volunteer recruitment, broadcasting and communications.
Mr. Arnal: Everything concerning fair participation by Canada's francophones in the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games in Vancouver.
Senator Losier-Cool: Is that more than a watchdog role?
Mr. Arnal: We have decided, to the extent possible, to conduct the least direct action ourselves. We are going to limit ourselves to coordination and brokerage for the various communities we work with.
First of all, there is a two-way dialogue; when VANOC needs something and they do not know where to get it or how to go about getting it, they come and see us. When we realize that there is some slippage compared to what we would like, we tell them and that is the way we communicate. I take note of your suggestion earlier that it would perhaps be a good idea that we be directly on the board of directors.
Mr. Watters: Based on the history of the past three years, relations with the francophone community and VANOC have been relatively tense. Over the past three years, we have moved from a confrontational position to one of cooperation.
I remember I was very shocked when all the senior positions at VANOC had been filled solely with anglophones. I believe the situation has been considerably restored, particularly since people are seriously taking French courses and we are increasingly taking our place.
As regards the point raised concerning francophone artists, I would like to point out that, when VANOC introduced its logo, Cirque du Soleil launched the logo, a launching that was attended by 20,000 to 30,000 people. It does not get any more francophone than that. francophones are increasingly taking their place, but a message from the Senate committee would definitely be welcome in enabling us to take our place even more.
Senator Robichaud: Earlier you talked about slippage. One association told us that we were two years behind culturally. Ms. Desjardins told us yesterday that we had missed opportunities. You must hear this kind of thing, do you not? Do you agree with that?
Mr. Arnal: We agree that, relative to the activity schedule and francophone participation in those activities, the start-up has been slow. We talked to VANOC about that and we are in the process of taking measures. But you also have to look at what we are organizing and the fact that the francophone communities have taken a certain amount of time to get equipped and to sign our agreements. But there, I believe that if you look at what has gone on until now, you will see that this will change, and I hope we will be able to see you every year until 2010 to report on the progress we have made and the challenges we are facing.
Senator Robichaud: A few groups have told us about their concerns about funding or the lack of funding for the work that has to be done, mainly to recruit volunteers so that the francophone community is well represented. Are you concerned about that?
I am sure you have taken that into account. Is that a concern for you? Earlier you seemed to say no, that that money had been provided. You also told us that, if we had planned that this activity was part of the agreement signed with VANOC and that the funds were already in place, we might perhaps have grounds to be concerned?
Mr. Arnal: At some point, the Government of Canada made certain decisions. It wanted to ensure that a national coordination mechanism was in place before starting to invest directly in one community or another.
The mechanism now exists. A first grant was paid directly to a community in British Columbia, without going through us, and that is what we are advocating.
Senator Tardif: We are talking about $40,000?
Mr. Arnal: Yes. We do not want to be a granting agency. We want the grants to come directly from the government.
Furthermore, if we think the federal government is not responding to the communities' legitimate requests, we will intervene, and it is our role to do that.
Senator Robichaud: Did you intervene in the case we are discussing?
Mr. Arnal: No. There was an initial request. As soon as the national coordination structure was put in place, the funding was immediately released — we are talking about $40,000.
So we are planning for the four sectors. The four sectors will submit action plans, and we will see in January whether they are subsidized.
Senator Robichaud: We will know the reaction to those requests in January?
Mr. Arnal: I see you have a copy of our plan. You see that January 2007 is the scheduled date for the action plans of the four groups and the coordination group to be filed.
Senator Tardif: So the four subcommittees are under your management?
Mr. Arnal: Yes.
Senator Tardif: And the funding that the subcommittees receive will be provided through the Fondation?
Mr. Arnal: The only funding we have received to date was intended for the organization of the subcommittees and, among other things, to pay for meeting expenses.
Senator Tardif: What about future funding?
Mr. Arnal: We hope that funding will go directly to the various cultural stakeholders who have been identified as a group through the process. So that funding will not go through us, unless the federal government decides otherwise, in which case we will not have a choice. That is not what we want, as we have clearly stated a number of times, verbally and in writing.
Senator Tardif: Who is responsible for the cultural subcommittee?
Mr. Arnal: That is Mr. Guy Matte.
Senator Tardif: You understand why I am asking the question? You say that the money can go directly to those associations, but who are those associations? It is not necessarily Ms. Desjardins's group?
Mr. Arnal: Yes. They have special status as host communities; so their presence is guaranteed. We also have the Fédération culturelle canadienne-française, which has offices in Quebec, and we will see other cultural groups.
Senator Tardif: The subcommittees have various groups?
Mr. Arnal: Yes.
Senator Tardif: We are not just talking about the British Columbia group?
Mr. Arnal: No.
Senator Tardif: So the money cannot go to a single group. There are subdivisions, subcommittees?
Mr. Arnal: Everything depends on the nature of the projects and whether they are presented on behalf of the committee or members.
Senator Robichaud: Hearing you, we are inclined to believe, even though you are entirely sincere, that, apart from some minor irritants, everything is going fine and in the direction you hope for. You are telling us there is no reason for concern, that the structures are in place, that we have the power to intervene and take corrective action along the way and that everything will fall into place. That is what I am hearing, is it not? Is there anything you would like to tell us and that we do not know?
Mr. Arnal: Not for the moment. If things were going badly, we would tell you. Obviously, we do not want to realize there are 56,000 problems two days before the Olympic Games. That is why I believe it would be good to be able to meet with you periodically to tell you about our concerns. You definitely have more influence than we do with government decision-makers.
Senator Robichaud: I am not so sure about that.
Mr. Arnal: I would not want to give you the impression that we are very naïve. We are not. We have been working in a minority setting for a very long time, and we know the issues. Our executive director has seen many others. The important point is that things are heading in the right direction. Nothing is perfect right now, but we believe we are headed in the right direction.
Your perception of our remarks is accurate. For the moment, there is no need to sound the alarm. If that day comes, we would like to have the chance to meet with you to tell you about it.
Mr. Watters: In conclusion, we need support from all parts. Your committee seems to have a lot of influence. Once again, we want to remind the major players that it is important that francophones take their place within these Games. We constantly remind them of that, and this message must come from all parts. I believe that this committee has the necessary influence to move this file forward.
To date, I do not believe we have encountered any major obstacles. However, if that happens, we will be the first to tell you. For the moment, we need your support to reinforce the message that French is important in our institutions.
Senator Comeau: I was informed of certain concerns, in response to my comment on the brief of the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique and of the concerns that it expressed about its budget.
I am going to cite page 9 of the brief that it submitted to us:
The community has also engaged in strategic planning, which remains to be finalized. We also determined that, in order to manage the enormous amount of work that has to be completed, we had to hire a person to coordinate all our community's initiatives and to provide a constant link among the various players. That position has just been granted to us, last week, thanks to Canadian Heritage. However, we will have to find a government partner, a source of funding to keep that position beyond March 31, 2007. Canadian Heritage unfortunately did not make a multi-year commitment. That deficiency is the heart of the problem. It seems to indicate that the determination that the government showed in public and the commitments it officially made do not automatically result in essential actions, ``positive measures''. I use the term ``positive measures'' in the context of Part VII of the Official Languages Act, as amended a few months ago.
Is there no doubt, from what we were told yesterday, that there are no funds?
Mr. Arnal: What is clear, from the comments, is that people have the impression that there is funding until March 31, but that there are no guarantees.
Senator Comeau: That is what they specifically told us.
Mr. Arnal: However, they did not claim that they had been told there would not be any funds.
Senator Comeau: There is a lack of dialogue here. Those allegations were made to us yesterday. It is clear that we are talking about Part VII of the Official Languages Act. And you are telling us they have not understood what has to follow. Somewhere there is a lack of dialogue.
Mr. Arnal: We see a certain frustration in the British Columbia communities. The fact that we are here is not making everyone happy. However, the Vancouver Olympic Games are still Canadian Games. That is why we are here.
The Fédération francophone de la Colombie-Britannique filed a grant application with the federal government. As I understand it, the Government of Canada answered that it would not be releasing any funding until it had clarified the Fondation's role with regard to the federation and VANOC.
Consequently, the roles are clear. I will be back here in Vancouver next Saturday to officially sign the memorandum with the Fédération francophone de la Colombie-Britannique. We have already signed the memorandum with VANOC, and the federation has already signed its memorandum with VANOC.
What we are currently experiencing are frustrations related to the start-up. The Government of Canada wanted to ensure that the mechanisms were indeed in place before releasing funding, thus avoiding tougher subsequent negotiations.
Senator Jaffer: How do you take the ethnic francophone community into account, more particularly the francophone African community?
Mr. Arnal: I will start with a brief comment, then Mr. Watters will tell you about what he intends to do here in British Columbia.
One of the things we want to get across is the image of the modern francophone world. The modern francophone world includes all kinds of people. You need only come to our campus to see how much the face of the francophone world has changed.
One of the objectives of our plan is to ensure that people get to know the francophone world in all its diversity. As we know, cultural heritage includes certain regional diversities as well as ethnic diversity. So we will be trying to represent all the manifestations of the francophone world well, racial, ethnic, regional and cultural.
Mr. Watters: With your permission, I will speak to you briefly in my capacity as executive director. As I mentioned, we are talking about 78 countries and 52 languages. We are very proud of that fact. We are one language and a number of cultures.
For the Olympic Games, we have just developed a very inclusive volunteer program. We are currently proclaiming La Francophonie through our multicultural nature. That is not a way of being inclusive; we take it for granted at the outset. We are not doing it voluntarily; it is part of our everyday lives.
Mr. Arnal: Another component that should not be forgotten are the hundreds of thousands of students at immersion schools who have developed an ability to contribute artistically, musically and in other ways in French. They should not be forgotten, and that is not our intention.
Senator Jaffer: I am as proud as you are of the fact that people from VANOC are learning French. However, I understand that the process is slow. There is no method for learning French instantly. So this is a different perspective: we have people who are taking up the challenge of learning French.
[English]
I do not want that to be confused. I am happy that people at VANOC are learning English, but that is different from knowing the challenges of representation.
[Translation]
The Chairman: I would like to thank you both for appearing before our committee. As you have undoubtedly noticed, we have around the table senators of great conviction, who are concerned for the two official languages and who want them to continue to be equally living and accessible across Canada.
We also thank you for your offer to come back and see us at some point. That is very much appreciated, and I have taken note of it.
We will now hear from representatives from the Vancouver Organizing Committee for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games, commonly called VANOC. They are Ms. Francine Bolduc, Program Director, Human Resources and Official Languages, and Ms. Renée Smith Valade, Vice-President, Communications.
We welcome you. As you know, you have about 10 minutes to make your presentation, followed by a question period. Without further delay, I turn the floor over to you.
Francine Bolduc, Program Director, Human Resources and Official Languages, Vancouver Organizing Committee for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games: Madam Chairman, first I would like to thank you for this opportunity to present VANOC's official languages plan. My colleague, Renée Smith Valade, Vice-President of Communications, is with me to answer your questions.
To begin, I would like to clarify VANOC's role and to describe the VANOC team. VANOC is responsible for planning, organizing and funding the 2010 Games. The team that will deliver the Games consists of 20 members of the board of directors, from various levels of government; our partners; eight members of the executive committee, including the executive director, Mr. Furlong; we will have 1,249 paid employees at the end of 2009; 3,500 temporary employees, who will also be hired for six to eight months before the Games; 25,000 volunteers, whom we will also hire in the last week before the Games; and 12,000 participants. So it is a big team that will be delivering these Games. We are talking about approximately 56,000 persons. These people will work on VANOC's vision, which is to build, together, a stronger Canada whose spirit is raised by its passion for sport, culture and sustainability.
From its inception, VANOC has made a commitment not only to meeting certain obligations, but to surpassing all those described in the multipartite agreement, in the contract of the host city and in the Olympic Charter. We want the Games to be a showcase for Canada's linguistic duality and rich cultural diversity.
We have a unique chance in this international event to animate our country's Francophonie and to leave a linguistic legacy. First, we have established a mission for the official languages within the Games. That mission is as follows: In order to showcase the linguistic duality and broad cultural diversity that is the pride of Canada, and to deliver the Games of all Canadians, VANOC will work in close cooperation with the country's francophone communities to promote our two official languages in all the aspects of planning and delivery of services.
Our approach is to develop in-depth knowledge and a commitment with VANOC to ensure that the official languages are integrated and planned, by the various functions, from the outset. We want these efforts to come from the heart.
After rereading the obligations stated in the multipartite agreement and the host contract, the Olympic Charter and reports from the Grands Témoins of Athens and Turin, we developed five strategies in order to deliver the Games from an official languages standpoint. With your permission, I would like to give you an overview of those five strategies as well as our achievements to date.
First, we want to create a working environment that encourages the use of French. We want the official languages at VANOC to become second nature for the people who work there and for this aspect to be put in the forefront.
Here are some of our achievements to date. We have made tools available to our employees through our documentation centre. Those tools consist, among other things, of dictionaries and standards. We have also established bilingual signage in our offices. Our business cards are fully bilingual. We also hold employee events on the theme of French language and culture. Bilingual magazines and newspapers are also available at reception, and we offer French courses to our employees and members of the executive committee.
Currently, 70 employees are taking French courses at three different levels. In cooperation with the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games Federal Secretariat, we have also developed an internal language policy that we will be implementing at the start of the new year.
Our second strategy is to ensure that the official languages are integrated into all planned communications, marketing tools, cultural activities and public programs. To date, the summaries of our calls to tender, which are available on our Web site, have been translated into both official languages. Our public communications, including media relations and our Web site, are bilingual. More than one-third of our employees are bilingual. We have also just hired two new perfectly bilingual people, who will be working in the communications service. In the communications department, nearly 50 per cent of employees are bilingual. We have just hired a translator who will facilitate the simultaneous interpretation process.
Our third strategy is to provide Games-related signage in the host city, to hold protocol activities and ceremonies and to offer all specialized emergency services in both official languages. Although this strategy will be applied more during the Games, we believe it is essential to plan for the official languages to be present from the outset, at the organization stage of these Games. To do that, we have worked in cooperation with the various VANOC functions and departments to ensure that their strategic and budgetary planning is done taking the official languages issue into consideration. We also intend to work with those same departments when we establish the operating plan scheduled for 2007.
The fourth strategy is to engage the francophone community across Canada. We think it is essential for VANOC to continue working with that community in order to deliver the Games in both languages. We want to benefit from its great passion, interest and resources.
To date, we have signed a collaboration protocol with the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie- Britannique, which represents francophone organizations in the host city, and with Fondation Dialogue, which represents francophone and Acadian organizations in the rest of Canada. You have moreover heard Mr. Arnal's testimony concerning that. The purpose of this agreement is to establish a process for effective consultation and cooperation with VANOC, not only as regards official languages, but also in other areas such as culture, education, and economic and community development.
We acknowledge that the francophone community of British Columbia has a major contribution to make as a result of its proximity and local expertise.
Our final strategy is to ensure that we recruit paid and volunteer employees who are able to communicate in French as well as English. We have hired bilingual employees for key positions, whether it be in reception, communications or official languages.
Of the 275 current employees, 15 per cent can converse in both languages. Our purpose is to maintain and even exceed that number. When we have to advertise a position in the newspapers, we also use the local francophone newspaper.
In the interview and hiring process, all candidates are questioned on their ability to speak French. In the case of positions for which knowledge of French is mandatory, that is those relating to public relations, we assess candidates' knowledge in a thorough manner.
We must also take into account and measure progress. To that end, we intend to establish key measures that will make it possible to assess progress during the planning and conduct of the Games. For example, we will take into account the number of bilingual employees and the percentage of communications issued in both languages. Establishment of these measures will be finalized in early 2007.
During and even after the Games, feedback will come from the media, of course, but also from partners, athletes, the public and the Grand Témoin. We want to ensure that the Grand Témoin's report for 2010 is glowing and that our approach serves as a model for future organizing committees. We hope to be able to achieve that objective.
We are optimistic about integrating the official languages into the conduct of the Games. We have developed a concrete, achievable plan, and we have a team dedicated to carrying it out.
The Chairman: Thank you for your presentation. I now turn the floor over to Senator Jaffer, who will be followed by Senator Tardif.
Senator Jaffer: You mentioned the Grand Témoin de la francophonie. Are you working with Ms. Bissonnette, or are you in contact with her?
Ms. Bolduc: When I went to Turin, I unfortunately did not have the opportunity to meet Ms. Bissonnette. I tried to meet her last June, when I was travelling through Quebec City, but she was not available. However, her report contains a lot of information that has helped us establish strategies. If we ever feel the need to go more deeply into certain areas, we will be pleased to seek Ms. Bissonnette's comments.
[English]
Senator Jaffer: Have you had the opportunity to look at her report?
Ms. Bolduc: Yes, absolutely. We read it from cover to cover. We also presented a summary of the report to our executive committee to make sure everyone is aware about what this is. We want to use it as a way by which we can sell the importance of official languages in the games.
[Translation]
Senator Jaffer: What percentage of VANOC's members speak English and French fluently?
Ms. Bolduc: Do you mean employees?
Senator Jaffer: No, I mean the VANOC committee.
[English]
Ms. Bolduc: The board of directors?
Senator Jaffer: Yes.
[Translation]
Renée Smith Valade, Vice-President, Communications, Vancouver Organizing Committee for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games: We have just replaced three board members. One member from Quebec, Jacques Gauthier, is bilingual and a few members from Whistler are as well. I believe that three or four of the 20 board members are bilingual. However, I would have to check because the number may be greater.
Senator Jaffer: We are talking about people who speak French fluently?
Ms. Valade: Fluently.
Senator Jaffer: Your board has how many members?
Ms. Valade: The board has 20 members.
Senator Jaffer: And four of that number speak French fluently?
Ms. Valade: To my knowledge, that is correct. However, I will have to check.
Senator Jaffer: What measures have you taken to ensure that the Games reflect Canada's linguistic duality? I have no doubt that you will have media in both languages.
[English]
However, I am not sure that on the ground, at the grassroots level, it will translate into French.
I come from Vancouver and I do not want a bad mark against my city in the sense that we did the icing well but the cake was rotten and so we need to work on the ingredients. As a woman, I do a lot of baking, so I know that the ingredients have to be good for the cake to taste good. We can have the icing right. We do this very well as Canadians; we have everything in two languages. However, in British Columbia we still have a lot of things to learn. I want to hear about what you are doing to make sure that on the ground there is this capacity. If you read Lise Bissonnette's report, that was the challenge, so what are we doing about it in a concrete way?
[Translation]
Ms. Bolduc: As provided in our strategy, we want to ensure that there are enough people who can speak both languages. In the field, these are the people who will be welcoming and promoting French. We just want to complete the strategic planning and budget review. We have made sure that all the services that will have to be delivered in both official languages have been integrated into the strategic planning process.
The next step is operational planning, and it is at that level that we will be building from the grassroots level up. We want to make sure that this planning results in concrete actions at the operational level. I worked with the various departments; this is already included in their planning, and we really want to make sure that it is included in their operational preparations to make sure that this is delivered exactly according to plan.
Ms. Smith Valade: I would like to add something to Francine's answer.
[English]
As you have heard from all of our partners who have presented before you, we work in very close partnership with other levels of government, particularly with the City of Vancouver, the Province of British Columbia, the Government of Canada, the municipal government in Whistler and all of the communities who are also hosting venues for the games. We see this as being truly a key area for our partnership. Mayor Sullivan has probably mentioned to you that he sees language and language capabilities of the citizens of Vancouver as a key element of the delivery of a warm welcome during the Games, as does Mayor Ken Melamed in Whistler. He is fluently bilingual and is very comfortable in promoting services in French in Whistler.
The answer to your question is that we are also encouraging our partners, who will have a clear role to play in delivering essential services to visitors during the games, to do everything they can to ensure that the games are offered in both languages. Their various staff and volunteers will be putting the best foot forward for Vancouver and British Columbia.
Senator Jaffer: I think I speak for all of my colleagues when I say that we were very impressed with the effort Mayor Sullivan was making. Unfortunately, the provincial government declined our invitation and will not be here.
I understand that the advisory board is composed of 20 people, four of whom speak French; then there is the working group, VANOC. How many people in VANOC are at the top, making decisions?
Ms. Bolduc: There are eight executive committee members, including John Furlong, our CEO.
Senator Jaffer: How many of them speak French?
Ms. Smith Valade: They are all being tutored in French, but I would have to say that one is very comfortable in French.
Senator Jaffer: Where do you fit into the structure? To whom do you report?
Ms. Bolduc: I basically report to Donna Wilson. She is one of the executive committee members who reports directly to John Furlong, and I report directly to her on official languages. As well, I have a lot of dealings with Mr. Furlong himself.
Ms. Smith Valade: I should add that the board of directors is considering voting today on another appointment to the executive team. If that appointment is approved, that individual is fully bilingual. That would make two members of the executive team who are fully bilingual.
Senator Jaffer: The French language was not very well represented at the closing ceremonies in Turin, and I am sure we have all learned lessons from that. Are you in a position to tell us what kind of arrangements are being made to represent our cultural duality and the real Canada that exists today, not what we saw at the opening and the closing ceremonies and during the Turin games?
Ms. Smith Valade: It is a good question and I would be interested to hear more about your sense of the ceremonies and where you felt that French was not represented.
The message that we were communicating through the closing ceremonies —whether we were successful or not is another question — and the theme was ``Come play with us.'' It was not so much about representing everything in Canada because in eight minutes it is impossible to represent the entire country. I think there were British Columbians who felt we did not represent British Columbia and Quebecers who felt we did not represent Quebec and Albertans who felt we did not represent Alberta. I am sure you can appreciate the hours and hours of work done by the committee across Canada in determining the theme of the closing ceremonies, including several very strong artistic talents out of Quebec who participated in the conception of the closing ceremonies. Nonetheless, the theme was ``Come play with us/Viens jouer avec nous,'' and in eight minutes we really had no language at all. Avril Lavigne sang one song that had that theme, and the rest of it was not language oriented but rather visual. We had visuals from all across the country, representing Canadians playing and enjoying winter sport.
Whether you like the closing ceremonies or not — and you can get 10 different opinions from 10 different individuals — our goal in those ceremonies is to highlight the cultural and linguistic duality of Canada.
Ms. Bolduc: Right now we are looking at preparing the cultural Olympiad and are holding consultative sessions in Vancouver. Actually, tomorrow morning we are holding a session with the francophone communities of B.C. and have also invited Fondation dialogue to attend. We intend to ask them about how they see this unfolding and the key themes that they would like to see during the cultural Olympiad. We are asking for opinions at this time. We are gathering a bit more information from the different communities in advance of the planning. We want them to share their vision about what the Olympiad should contain and some of the key themes. We also want to know what they have to offer in terms of resources so that they can maybe enrich the program. We are at that stage.
Senator Jaffer: Talking about what happened in Turin is a waste of time now because we have moved on, so I am not going to do that. I can tell you that as senators we are criticized continuously, but we try to do what we think best represents our country. I understand, therefore, what you said about there being 10 different opinions of what should happen. It is same thing for us. However, what is important for us all is that the games represent our heritage, our duality. This time we will have more than just eight minutes. This time we make the decisions; we choreograph the games. That is why we are very anxious to make sure that who we are is well represented. Certain things are not negotiable, such as our duality.
I am glad you are doing the consultations, but we have heard that the presentations have been done in one language and the presenters have been unilingual. I am sure you have heard the same thing, that a presentation has been given to the community but it has been in one language, English. That is one of the challenges we face. I bring this to your attention because coming from this city as I do, I want to make sure that we do not drop the ball on the language issue.
Ms. Valade: Absolutely.
[Translation]
Senator Losier-Cool: I have a very brief supplementary question concerning VANOC's board of directors. We have just heard from the Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures; they told us, and all committee members have criticized this, that they were not on VANOC's board of directors. You are consulting them afterwards or before, but they are not on the board of directors. Committee members strongly insisted that they should be at the table where decisions are made. Senator Jaffer did that in a very good way.
Would you please report that point to your officials, that we believe that the Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures should be taking part, where the decisions are made, as members of the board of directors. The reason I am asking this supplementary question is that Ms. Smith Valade added that a new member was appointed to the board of directors today.
Ms. Smith Valade: Yes, Mr. Jean Coutu from Montreal.
Senator Losier-Cool: There could be other appointments tomorrow.
Ms. Smith Valade: The members of the board are appointed by the four levels of government. That is not our choice. It is the Government of Canada, the Government of British Columbia, the municipal government and the government of Whistler that can appoint the members of the board of directors.
If you want someone on the board, you have to work with the governments to encourage them to appoint someone.
Senator Tardif: Thank you. I would also like to go in that direction by saying that it is true there are people who speak French on the board of directors, possibly three or four, and that there were perhaps one or two individuals out of eight on the executive committee, but there is no direct link as such between the board and the francophone community of British Columbia.
I think it is important to have some of those representatives at the decision-making level. Having said that, we were not aware that these were appointments that were made by the four levels of government.
I was happy to see your determination to make the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games in Vancouver an opportunity to display this country's linguistic duality and official languages, and you presented some of the initiatives already under way.
I would like to go back to slightly more specific questions. Yesterday, we were told that there was a lack of funding for certain activities such as, for example, cultural activities that might perhaps be proposed by the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique for coordinating bilingual volunteers. And we were told that VANOC was receiving money from the Government of Canada, obviously, and that there was a budget included in order to organize volunteers and set up the opening and closing ceremonies. How can the community, artists, the cultural sector and bilingual coordination have access to funding to enable them to do this kind of work with VANOC, to ensure the place of French in the 2010 Olympic Games?
Ms. Bolduc: The funding that we have for cultural matters, for example, is limited. There are budgets, but there are costs, depending on what we want to organize. There are astronomical costs. If you look at Turin alone, I do not know the total amount, but it was huge, and it must have cost millions of dollars. We are consulting the francophone community to see what it has to offer in the way of resources and so on. The first consultation will be of that order, and we will subsequently establish the plans, to determine how to organize the ceremonies, the cultural Olympiads festival.
Then we will be determining whether we have to hire people; if we want to hire artists, for example, that will be covered. We are offering everyone the opportunity. If we are looking for a francophone artist, then we will ask the Conseil culturel et artistique francophone de la Colombie-Britannique and the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique who is available and could carry out that mandate. That is how the money is spent. Ultimately, there is not a lot of money to share. I do not know whether that answers your question.
Senator Tardif: That answers my question. But if I understand correctly, the decision to involve francophone artists, whether from British Columbia or elsewhere in the country, is essentially VANOC's responsibility. And that will be depending on the money you have available. What are your criteria?
Ms. Smith Valade: Unfortunately, we are not the vice-president for culture, and he is unfortunately not here today. We are working with the Government of Canada to decide which artists and what kind of cultural celebrations we are going to put on. I would like to emphasize Ms. Bolduc's remark that we do not have enough money and, in our opinion, we do not have enough money to put on the kind of cultural celebration we want.
We are talking with the Government of Canada and the other governments to determine whether we can get more money to really put Canada's linguistic duality on display.
Senator Tardif: That troubles me because I have previously been involved in international sports activities, and lack of money is always used as an excuse for doing nothing in French. Could we wind up in the same situation? Will that be the excuse for not including French in cultural activities? By that, I mean all the ceremonies, protocol and so on.
Ms. Bolduc: The plans currently in development will take that into consideration. We really want to display Canada's wealth and linguistic duality. I spoke with the vice-president for culture and ceremonies and the director of the cultural Olympiad programs. Those two people will be meeting with the francophone communities tomorrow and will be holding a consultation session with them.
Senator Tardif: Do those two people speak French?
Ms. Bolduc: No. One can get by, the other no. I will also be there to facilitate the talks and to see what the plans are, see what they have to offer us and how we could work together to really achieve our objectives regarding wealth, cultural diversity and linguistic duality. They have assured me that that is what they have in mind and that they have a plan to present on that point.
Senator Tardif: Who reassured you?
Ms. Bolduc: Those two gentlemen, who are really committed on this point.
Ms. Smith Valade: You really should not conclude too quickly that everything we will be doing regarding cultural celebrations will be in English if there is not enough money. We are going to strike a balance between English and French. We do not have enough money to do everything we want, but everything we do will be balanced, to show the linguistic duality of English and French.
Senator Robichaud: I have a supplementary question. In your view, how much money is lacking to enable you to organize cultural ceremonies and celebrations that really meet your objectives?
Ms. Bolduc: I have no idea.
Ms. Smith Valade: I do not either.
Ms. Bolduc: Unfortunately, I do not have any information on the budgets, but that is a question I could get back to you on.
Senator Robichaud: You are saying you definitely do not have enough money, are you not?
Ms. Smith Valade: Right now, in our view, no. We are looking for money.
Senator Robichaud: Do you have half of what you would like?
Ms. Bolduc: Not even; I think it is one-third.
Ms. Smith Valade: Madam Chairman, I would like to mention that we have six board members who are bilingual: Mike Chambers, Richard Pound, from Montreal, Michael Phelps, Walter Sieber, Chris Rudge and Jean Coutu, who was appointed today.
The Chairman: Thank you. Before turning the floor over to Senator Comeau, I would like to point out, mesdames, that our intention in holding these hearings, as you said earlier, is not to draw hasty conclusions, but we are on the look-out and we must be because that is usually what happens; when there is not enough money, it is the francophone side that is eliminated. We are the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages of the Senate of Canada, and we must ensure that the official languages are well represented in all aspects of the 2010 Olympic Games.
Senator Comeau: I am very pleased that you made that comment that we, as a committee, should not make any recommendations before we have heard all the evidence.
Ladies, you say that you do not have enough money to conduct the bilingual ceremonies you would like, but do you have the total amount of the budget granted by the federal government for the 2010 Olympic Games?
Ms. Bolduc: No, unfortunately. That will take some research.
Senator Comeau: I listened closely to your five strategies, but I am particularly interested in the fourth, in which you said you had signed a cooperation protocol with the francophone communities across Canada, particularly with the foundations representing the francophone and Acadian communities of Canada. We heard from the Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures a little earlier; there was major confusion as to what was the role of the Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures, and it was clearly explained to us this morning that the Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures does not represent the francophone and Acadian communities of Canada. That was a quite direct and frank question.
They represent themselves and were selected by the Government of Canada to be the group that promotes a dialogue among the communities of Canada, the Aboriginal, ethnocultural, anglophone and francophone communities. But they do not represent the francophone and Acadian communities of Canada.
Your comments here, in your fourth strategy, seem to maintain this confusion about this group representing the communities. I would like to know why there appears to be a lack of understanding about the role of the Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures with regard to what they are doing with VANOC.
Ms. Bolduc: The Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures was created before I started working with VANOC. There was a meeting at one point with the federal government and various stakeholders from the francophone communities, in Ottawa, in March 2005, and they had to establish a way for VANOC to work with the francophone community across Canada and to do that effectively. It was then that the Fondation canadienne pour le dialogue des cultures was named as the catalyst and liaison, because we could not work with all the francophone communities individually.
Senator Comeau: I have no doubt about the sincerity, desire, capability or objectivity of that group. None at all. I think they are people who, to a great extent, have the best intentions for promoting language and dialogue in Canada.
Ms. Bolduc: Completely.
Senator Comeau: What troubles me is when they are presented as representing the francophone communities. They are not.
Ms. Bolduc: They are a link, a catalyst.
Senator Comeau: They said it this morning: they do not represent the communities. Even within the Fondation, they appoint themselves; if a member leaves the group, they go and find someone else. This kind of group cannot be a representative. This is the kind of thing we have to be very careful with because we can draw hasty conclusions and that may subsequently cause problems that cannot be solved.
This group also determines its own mission. It is not a mission that is given to them by someone; it is a mission that they set for themselves. In fact, they include Aboriginal people, anglophones and ethnocultural communities.
Once again, this is not a group that represents the communities.
All this started in Ottawa, when government officials told us that we francophones and Acadians of Canada had our spokespersons on the committee to see to our interests. At that point, that put my back up against the wall because, if someone is my spokesperson, I want to have a say.
I am not criticizing, but I am pointing out concerns that, one would say, are not being resolved.
That is more of a comment than a question.
Senator Robichaud: Have you heard a lot about broadcasting the Games in French?
Ms. Smith Valade: Yes.
Senator Robichaud: And you are definitely going to hear more about it. Is that file moving forward to your satisfaction, in that francophones across the country will be able to watch and listen to the Olympic and Paralympic Games?
Ms. Smith Valade: We were very pleased to hear the news last week that CTV will be providing free access to RDS and TQS. This is always a challenge for francophones outside Quebec. We will try to work together with CTV and the other partners to see whether we can do something else. It is always a challenge for us, but you can rest assured that our purpose, our philosophy, is to share the Games with all Canadians across Canada. We do not have all the solutions or answers to our questions, but we will continue working on it.
Senator Robichaud: My concern stems from an agreement that stated in one section that they undertook to do their best for broadcasting in both official languages. I thought that clause might be used to say that we did our best but that it did not work. For my part, I would not be prepared to accept not receiving that service. I know you are making every possible effort. It is not always easy, but sometimes you have to make a little additional effort to make sure you take another step forward.
Ms. Smith Valade: We have to encourage our partners; we have to encourage the people who have power to make decisions that will result in the Games being broadcast across Canada. I can say that we will continue to work to that end.
Senator Robichaud: When do you think you can tell us that a solution has been found to our problem?
Ms. Bolduc: We have not yet assessed the number of users who will not have access to the Games. We have not analyzed that yet. CTV has announced that it will provide free access to these two networks. For people who have digital cable and satellite, we know this opens the door for other francophones outside Quebec who will not have access. But what we have not assessed is who is left and who will not be covered. We have to conduct that study to try to find other possible solutions. We must know if there are a lot of people that we should focus on or whether we are covering most people. That is what we want to do soon in order to push that more.
Senator Robichaud: May I encourage you not to use the term ``francophone outside Quebec'' instead to say the Canadian francophone community? Because, as an Acadian, I prefer to be recognized for what I am rather than what I am not.
Ms. Bolduc: I will remember that.
The Chairman: One final question for Senator Tardif.
Senator Tardif: You pointed out initiatives that have been taken within VANOC, on the board of directors, French courses in communications. What are you doing with the private sector and the entire issue of sponsorships? We know they play an important role. First, they provide money and, second, support and visibility. What are you doing to ensure that linguistic duality is taken into account in the private sector, by the sponsors, in their products and the services they offer? Because that also reflects who we are and that is often our image for the general public.
Ms. Bolduc: I know that it is always harder with international sponsors because they do all the Olympic Games around the world. We want to work on encouraging them to do that. We cannot impose on them, but we can encourage them. For the companies, the national sponsors we have selected, some are already providing bilingual services; there is already access to translators, bilingual resources. When we talk about Rona, Bell and companies of that kind, it will be much easier to work with them to get them to present their products and services in both languages during the Games. The challenge will be to work with international companies, which do not necessarily have the two languages as a criterion.
Senator Tardif: Would that not be their responsibility, since they are offering their products and services in an officially bilingual country? Could we not refuse or impose, and clearly say that that is part of what Canada is?
Ms. Bolduc: The sponsors have already been selected, and we are not the ones who choose them. They are selected for all the Olympic Games, and it is already done. With the linguistic policy we have introduced at VANOC, what we want to do is really to try to share this corporate policy with our sponsors in order to start raising awareness now.
Senator Tardif: Can you explain to us briefly what that language policy is, and could you send a copy of it to our committee?
Ms. Bolduc: Absolutely. We developed it with the Games Federal Secretariat in Ottawa. It is a policy that is already been established. We used a lot of the criteria found in the Official Languages Act. We used its content to produce our corporate policy. I think you will be well served.
Ms. Smith Valade: We had a conference with sponsors two weeks ago, here in Vancouver. There were national sponsors, international sponsors and a few people from our group, including myself and a few others. We made our presentations in English and French. I believe the sponsors noticed that. We emphasized that we intended to encourage them to work with us to provide a bilingual presence while the Games are being held here in Vancouver.
The Chairman: Ms. Bolduc, Ms. Smith Valade, thank you very much for coming to the Standing Committee on Official Languages. I believe I can speak on behalf of my honourable colleagues in saying that we have no doubt about your good intentions. We note that you want the Games that will be taking place in Vancouver to really represent the Canadian francophone community and the two official languages. However, I would like to mention that, more often than not, and I am sure you are aware of this, you have to do more than merely encourage, you have to have mechanisms and policies in place. You often have to push, become a leader in this kind of initiative. We are counting on you. We hope you will keep us informed.
We will now hear from the spokespersons of the Canadian Tourism Commission. Ms. Chantal Péan is Senior Vice- President, Corporate Affairs and Corporate Secretary. She is here with Mr. William Harding, Senior Communications Advisor.
Good morning, Ms. Péan. I would ask you please to limit yourself to a maximum of 15 minutes for your presentation by summarizing it. That would be appreciated. My colleagues will no doubt have a lot of questions. The floor is yours.
Chantal Péan, Senior Vice-President, Corporate Affairs and Corporate Secretary, Canadian Tourism Commission: Madam Chairman, on behalf of the Canadian Tourism Commission, and myself personally, I would like to thank the honourable senators and the Committee Chairman, the Honourable Maria Chaput, for inviting the Canadian Tourism Commission to make a presentation to the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages as part of its study on the move of federal agency head offices and the impact on the application of the Official Languages Act.
To help the committee with its work, I have divided my presentation as follows: a very brief history of the Canadian Tourism Commission, and then I will discuss the impact of the Commission's move to Vancouver on its linguistic obligations.
In addition, throughout my presentation, I will try to address the various issues under review by the committee.
As you know, the Commission was created as a Crown corporation on January 2, 2001, following the coming into force of the Canadian Tourism Commission Act.
From 1995 until the act came into force, the Commission held the status of a special agency within Industry Canada. Prior to 1995, the Commission was a sector of Industry Canada.
In March 2005, the Government of Canada announced that the Commission's head office would be moving from Ottawa, a designated bilingual region under the Official Languages Act, to Vancouver, a unilingual region under that act.
Our head office officially moved to Vancouver on December 5, 2005, and the Ottawa office became a satellite office housing two employees, a government relations manager and an administrative assistant.
It goes without saying that the move has had an impact on the Commission and its employees. There have also been practical and legal consequences for the organization.
In March 2005, when the move was announced, the Commission had approximately 95 employees at its head office in Ottawa.
Of that number, only 19 chose to move to Vancouver. The Commission therefore had to make a considerable effort to replace approximately 80 per cent of its strength in a very short period of time. Allow me to add that the employees who elected not to move to Vancouver began leaving the Commission in July 2005. Despite the Commission's efforts, the recruitment process is still continuing. We still have 13 positions to fill. The Commission has thus operated on reduced strength for much of 2005 and 2006. In addition, there was a period of adjustment, learning and integrating all those new employees who come from various places in Canada and different industrial sectors.
Now let us turn to the subject of more particular interest to the committee, the legal and practical consequences of the move to Vancouver on the commission's obligations under the Official Languages Act.
Of the 19 employees who moved to Vancouver, nine are francophones and held bilingual positions in Ottawa. The move could have had a fundamental impact on the choice of language of work of those nine employees without the implementation, on June 27, 2005, of the Treasury Board Secretariat policy on maintaining the status quo with regard to the language of work right of employees who chose to move with the head office of an institution.
As a result of that policy, the nine francophone employees were allowed to maintain the status quo as regards their choice of language of work in Vancouver. The remaining 10 employees, anglophones, also have a choice of language of work.
The choice of language of work, of course, does not apply to new Commission employees who are not working at head office in Ottawa. Like other federal institutions located in Vancouver, the Commission may therefore offer its new employees a unilingual English work place as regards language of work.
The Treasury Board Secretariat policy has resulted in an obligation to provide a bilingual work place only to the 19 commission employees who moved from Ottawa to Vancouver, while carrying on its operations in a unilingual English work place for the remaining employees.
The policy does not affect the commission's other obligations under the Official Languages Act, such as those regarding services to the public, which take precedence over language of work rights in the act's hierarchical framework. Thus, to meet its service to the public obligations, the commission should have a certain number of bilingual employees, but the usual language of work would be English. And I will come back to this subject later.
The commission has thus addressed a difficult situation regarding language of work because, to meet its obligations to its 19 employees who have moved, including nine francophones, the commission had to conduct its operations in a bilingual work place.
The commission thus chose to manage its entire work place in Vancouver as though it was located in a region designated bilingual for the purposes of the language of work of all its employees.
The commission made that choice in order to create a work environment conducive to the use of both official languages, to respect the effective language of work rights of the 19 employees and to meet its other obligations under the Official Languages Act.
That decision has definitely affected the recruitment of new personnel. The results as regards hiring in this past year are as follows.
Total number of current employees in Canada: 82; total number of employees in Ottawa: one; total number of employees in Vancouver: 81; total number of positions to fill: 13; total number of employees for whom French is the official mother tongue: 29, including 13 recruited in Vancouver; total number of employees for whom English is the official mother tongue: 53; number of bilingual employees: 41, including 29 francophones; number of bilingual positions: 41; percentage of francophone employees: 35 per cent; and percentage of bilingual employees: 49 per cent.
The Commission has thus taken many measures to ensure an effective use of the official languages as the languages of work. For example, employees who so wish, have access, in both official languages, to commonly used work instruments, personal and central services, training, professional development, an intranet site, internal communications and a performance management program. In addition, the English and French versions of information, documentation, work instruments and communications are distributed in whole and simultaneously and are of equal quality.
I would like to emphasize one final point on language of work. The committee wants to know whether the employees hired after the move faced certain official language problems. In my humble view, the newly hired employees were welcomed in a bilingual environment in which an attempt is made to convey the values and principles of the Official Languages Act. The official employee orientation session last February was conducted in both languages. We explained our legal official language obligations to the new employees. We also offered simultaneous interpretation service to those employees. That same service is also offered every year during the employee retreat. At meetings, employees may speak or ask questions in the language of their choice, and answers are always given in the language used to ask the question.
As regards communications with the public and the provision of services, the move to Vancouver did not really change the commission's obligations. Consequently, whether it is in Ottawa or Vancouver, the commission is required to provide bilingual service to the public in the language of their choice.
Consequently, the Commission communicates with the public and offers services in both official languages; its oral and written communications are conducted in the language chosen by the public; documents are presented in both official languages; language placement rules are complied with; the English and French versions are of equal quality; signs and signage are in both languages. As I said, these practices were already in place in Ottawa.
It should be noted, however, that in order to meet its obligations to the public, the commission has recruited a number of francophone and bilingual employees.
The commission has thus designated 40 of its 95 positions as bilingual positions in order to meet its obligations in the areas of communications with the public and provision of services. As well, an additional position has been designated bilingual in order to ensure the supervision rights of nine francophone employees who are enjoying the status quo with respect to their choice of language of work. The commission thus has 41 bilingual positions.
Of the 41 bilingual positions, there were, on November 9, 2006: 29 employees who met bilingual requirements; four employees who were taking French-language training; six vacant positions that will be filled shortly and that are part of the 13 positions to be filled; and, lastly, two cases under review.
Other positions are also bilingual at the commission, as a result of the nature of the work that is performed, such as those in the translation and publishing sections.
Recruitment for those positions required a great deal of effort and significant expense for the Commission.
Since September 2006, the Commission has stepped up its French-language training efforts. The Alliance française has been selected to provide group and individual language courses to Commission employees. Nearly $80,000 will be spent on language training by the end of 2007.
The difficulty of course is in finding bilingual people who both meet our needs and have the necessary skills.
Another problem is training provided in French, because very few courses or lectures are given in French in Western Canada. So plans must be made for travel to the East.
My final point is the impact on the development of the official language minority communities and the promotion of linguistic duality.
The committee wants to know whether the move has had a positive impact on the development of the francophone communities in British Columbia.
It is hard to answer that question after carrying on our activities in Vancouver for only 11 months. However, we can provide a brief picture of our achievements under section 41 of the Official Languages Act.
In 2005 and 2006, following a transition period during which the Canadian Tourism Commission had to devote its efforts to moving its head office, the commission resumed its activities in the areas of official language minority community development and promotion of linguistic duality.
The Canadian Tourism Commission has continued its efforts at raising awareness, consultation, communication, coordination and liaison, program delivery and accountability.
The Canadian Tourism Commission has developed a three-year action plan from 2006 to 2009 based, for the first time on the results of the implementation of section 41 of the Official Languages Act.
The fact that the Canadian Tourism Commission is now in Vancouver means that it is located in a minority francophone environment, which means that its efforts with regard to section 41 not only concern its pan-Canadian projects, but can also benefit from its proximity to western Canada. Thus, for example, the Commission recently discussed with the Société de développement économique de la Colombie-Britannique opportunities available to the official languages minority communities during the period leading up to the 2010 Olympic Games and thereafter.
On November 9, the commission met with the tourist representatives of RDEE in Quebec city to update its orientations for the years 2007-2011 and to present its plan for the 2010 Olympic Games. In addition, a representative of the Canadian Tourism Commission will be attending future meetings of the RDEE tourism representatives group.
Every year, the Canadian Tourism Commission invites the official language minority communities to the commission's cross-Canada tour, which stops in a number of Canadian cities. This tour is one of the commission's most important tools for communicating with the tourism industry across the country. Members of the following organizations have attended the tour presentations in the past: the Association franco-yukonnaise de Whitehorse, the Société de développement économique de la Colombie-Britannique, the Chambre économique de l'Alberta, from Calgary, and the Centre de villégiature et d'apprentissage de Memramcook in New Brunswick. Participants received documents in the official language of their choice and took advantage of a unique opportunity to provide their comments on the Canadian Tourism Commission's programs.
The commission hopes that its presence in Vancouver will have a positive influence on the development of the francophone communities in British Columbia. It has taken part in a number of French-language events.
In conclusion, the Canadian Tourism Commission and its employees went through a very difficult transition period in 2005 and early 2006.
The commission not only had to manage the loss of a significant number of employees, but also to offset a considerable loss of its organizational memory and human resource investments. Despite this difficult time and thanks to the keen efforts of its old and new employees, in Canada and abroad, the Canadian Tourism Commission has managed to successfully complete its activities. In addition, the commission has provided quality services and respected the rights and its obligations under the Official Languages Act.
In that respect, we are proud to inform you that the Canadian Tourism Commission has received a positive letter from the Public Service Human Resources Management Agency of Canada concerning its official languages annual review 2005-2006. That letter reveals that the Canadian Tourism Commission, and I quote:
... is meeting its official languages obligations. The Official Languages Branch therefore requires no particular follow-up for next year.
The Official Languages Branch also congratulated the Canadian Tourism Commission on its efforts:
... and for its continuing commitment to the official languages program in various sectors, including its publications, its Web site as well as minor improvements to indicators in the 2005-2006 annual report of the Commissioner of Official Languages.
In conclusion, the Canadian Tourism Commission supports maintaining the language of work rights of the employees of federal institutions whose head office moves from a designated bilingual region to a unilingual region.
In addition, the Canadian Tourism Commission suggests that federal institutions moving from a bilingual region to a unilingual region should, if possible, offer a bilingual work place, with all resulting rights and obligations, in order to guarantee the actual language of work rights of employees who move and the vitality of the two official languages. This measure would also ensure true fairness among all the employees of the federal institutions concerned in the area of language of work.
The Canadian Tourism Commission has adopted this bilingual operating practice in its work place in order to offer real rights to those who have moved, in particular to its nine francophone employees who moved from Ottawa to Vancouver. Allow me to assure you that this decision has been beneficial for the Canadian Tourism Commission as a whole.
Based on our experience, we can say that this practice, that is to say offering a bilingual work place to all employees, has also had a positive effect on the other components of the Official Languages Act, such as services provided to the public, the development of the official language minority communities and the promotion of linguistic duality across Canada.
That is the end of my presentation, and I thank you for allowing me to share the experience of the Canadian Tourism Commission with you.
Senator Tardif: Thank you for your presentation, which has provided a lot of information that will help us get a clear understanding of the situation. We are aware that the Canadian Tourism Commission has gone through an at times difficult transition period. Thank you for that.
I would like to clarify certain information that you passed on. You told us that 19 employees had moved from Ottawa to Vancouver, nine of whom were francophones. So only 19 of those employees were protected by Part V of the Official Languages Act. As regards all the employees that you have subsequently hired, because you were located in a unilingual region, you were not required to comply with Part V of the Official Languages Act. I understand that you nevertheless chose to provide a bilingual work place in order to support those employees.
Do you believe that an amendment should be made to the Official Languages Act to state that, where there is a move from a bilingual region to a unilingual region, the organization or institution that moves, or the head office that moves, should offer a bilingual work place and that those organizations should be treated as though they were still in Ottawa, regardless of where they are located?
Ms. Péan: Based on the experience of the Canadian Tourism Commission, it is really hard to isolate 19 employees and give them bilingual service while giving the remaining employees unilingual service. Based on our experience, the recommendation is that you should offer a bilingual work place to all employees. That is what the Canadian Tourism Commission chose to do. In any case, it is practically impossible to hold a meeting in English for some people and in two languages for others.
Senator Tardif: I recognize that, and I am very happy to hear that you chose that orientation because it is indeed very difficult to do that, but you will agree with me that the act as such would allow you to disregard the other 73 employees who are not part of that group and not to meet the obligations under Part IV, services to the public, or under Part V, language of work.
Ms. Péan: Absolutely.
Senator Tardif: If you had any recommendations to make to the government regarding other moves, would you tend to want to offer a bilingual work place?
Ms. Péan: Bilingual, yes.
Senator Tardif: I also note that you discharged your responsibilities toward the francophone community and said that you proceeded in that way. However, yesterday, we heard from the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie- Britannique, and they told us with regret that they were still waiting for a representative from the Canadian Tourism Commission to attend the meetings of federal officials, the section 41 interdepartmental coordination group whose mandate is to work with the francophone community. Are you trying to remedy that? Has the Canadian Tourism Commission begun a process to send a representative to the meetings of federal officials, in accordance with section 41?
William Harding, Senior Communications Advisor, Canadian Tourism Commission: The Canadian Tourism Commission would obviously like to receive an invitation to that meeting. As we told you, we have only been here in British Columbia for 11 months, but I can tell you myself that I met with the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique in April 2006 to make the acquaintance of the members of the community. I also met with the coordinator of government research relations in November 2006, and she told me the same thing, that we had not yet had the chance to go to that meeting, but I told her that we wanted to get an invitation.
Senator Tardif: Thank you. The Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages has stated that, in the past, you did not have any official languages policy or guidelines and that your evaluation was considered poor, particularly with regard to the question of official languages within the organization and Parts V and VII of the Official Languages Act.
Today, you stated in your brief that you had been congratulated. I appreciate the fact that the Official Languages Branch congratulated you on your efforts:
... and for its continuing commitment to the official languages program in various sectors, including its publications, its Web site as well as minor improvements to indicators in the 2005-2006 annual report of the Commissioner of Official Languages.
So we are talking about minor improvements. In your view, what should you do to improve your performance rating?
Ms. Péan: We adopted an official languages policy, and that policy is included, I believe, in the triennial report that will be submitted to the Commissioner of Official Languages. We have taken a lot of measures to improve service in French to employees of the Canadian Tourism Commission. As I mentioned, we go so far as to offer simultaneous interpretation at certain important meetings so that employees feel really free to ask questions in the language of their choice.
Everything is offered in both languages. We often delay the publication of certain documents to ensure that both documents appear at the same time, in English and in French. We have taken a lot of measures since the last report of the Commissioner of Official Languages.
[English]
Mr. Harding: We did develop the plan. It outlines all the necessary components that the audit revealed and that our president responded to, making the commitment that we would develop this plan. It contains our policy and a very serious accountability framework that holds all levels of our management to account, including staff, and a newly developed CTC official languages committee that will report back on all parts of the act and assure that the strategic management committee of the CTC has full review and approval over all of our recommendations. This is a results- based plan, in line with the desire of the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages to see palpable outcomes. We presented a draft of the plan yesterday as part of our annual evaluation with the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages. Our case handler was very satisfied and in fact noted that the plan was quite comprehensive in parts, especially dealing with Part VII of the Official Languages Act regarding linguistic duality in respect of official language minority committees.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: I thank you and encourage you to continue your efforts. Good luck.
Senator Comeau: I would like to go back to the fact that you are a Crown corporation, not a government department. Does that remove certain responsibilities under the Official Languages Act? In other words, are your responsibilities less great or less extensive than if you were a department?
Ms. Péan: The Canadian Tourism Commission Act clearly states that the commission is subject to the Official Languages Act. So we are 100 per cent subject to the Official Languages Act.
Senator Comeau: You have exactly the same responsibilities under the act as you would if you were in Ottawa?
Ms. Péan: Exactly.
Senator Comeau: The fact that new employees do not have the same rights as the nine employees enjoying the status quo, could that situation be the same in Ottawa as well?
Ms. Péan: No.
Senator Comeau: Because, in your situation, you moved from a bilingual region to a unilingual region?
Ms. Péan: Yes.
Senator Comeau: So the fact that you are in a unilingual region changes your responsibilities?
Ms. Péan: Yes.
Senator Comeau: Now, in view of the loss of your organizational memory, which it seems to me was very hard for you, should we reassess the move that has taken place? I see the impact that your move has had on your organization. Considering that result, as a government, should partial moves or phased moves be considered in future?
Ms. Péan: At the very start, when the gouvernment started talking about the move, it suggested creating a satellite office in Vancouver. That was one of the proposals that we made and that was not accepted.
So my answer is that that depends on the government's objective. That decision is for the government to make, and the government would know best whether a satellite office could better serve its interests.
Senator Comeau: From a practical standpoint, personally I do not see a lot of problems in transferring only the head office, when services such as market research, data and international market research, for example, could be provided elsewhere.
Ms. Péan: That is always a possibility, but, as I said, that was not the gouvernment's decision.
Senator Comeau: In your case, it was all or nothing. That was the case of the Department of Veterans Affairs, which completely moved to Prince Edward Island.
The reason why I am asking you these questions is that, in the past, I thought that a department such as Fisheries and Oceans could perhaps move its head office, without necessarily moving its statistics or research services. Based on your experience, do you think the same organizational memory loss problem could arise for Fisheries and Oceans?
Could a committee perhaps be created to review that specific situation?
Ms. Péan: The Canadian Tourism Commission is a specific case. It is a business case. Confidentially, at the commission, we often say we should enumerate all the stages in the move and examine their impact.
Senator Comeau: What a nice study to suggest for Ottawa!
Senator Robichaud: If the Canadian Tourism Commission had moved to a bilingual region of the country, what difference would that have made to the impact that that move had on the commission?
Ms. Péan: I do not think the difference would have been great, because the language question was not the only decisive factor for employees. A lot of people decided not to move because of their family situation, because of children, their spouse, and so on. I very much doubt that would have made a difference.
The only advantage we could have had in moving to a bilingual environment would have been in hiring. It is much easier to hire bilingual people when you are located in an area of bilingual people. In our case, three to six bilingual positions have remained to be filled for nearly 11 months. We are having a lot of trouble finding qualified bilingual people. We have managed to fill a number of positions, but the last parts of the hiring process are becoming increasingly difficult. We have to turn to other bilingual regions to try to attract people to Vancouver. If we were in a bilingual environment, that would probably — I say probably — be easier.
Senator Robichaud: Mr. Harding, do you want to add anything?
Mr. Harding: I would just like to add that we have to be aware that we are only looking at the language of work. For services to the public, linguistic duality and services to the minority communities, it is the same thing in Vancouver, Montreal or Halifax.
Senator Robichaud: Of course, because the clients have not changed.
You also said that one of the main factors in employees' decisions was their family situation. Personally, I understand that a spouse may find it difficult to get a job as a result of a relocation; I understand that people are concerned about day care services, schools and seeing how their children adjust. In a way, those concerns might be lessened by going to a bilingual region, but the situation regarding a spouse's employment would remain the same.
Ms. Péan: I maintain my comment from earlier: I am not convinced there would have been a big difference if we had moved the Canadian Tourism Commission to Moncton or Fredericton, where the work place is bilingual.
Senator Robichaud: I must unfortunately conclude that I will not be able to make this point to encourage these institutions to come and move to New Brunswick, where we can offer those services.
Senator Tardif: I would like to go back to the matter of the difference between settling in a bilingual region and settling in a unilingual region.
I believe the difference concerns all of Part V of the Official Languages Act, that is to say the ability to work in the language of one's choice. The difference is at that level. The service to the public obligation remains the same. As regards Part VII, the advancement of linguistic duality and the vitality of the francophone minority communities, and now with section 41, offering positive measures, all that remains the same.
In a unilingual region, what changes is non-compliance with the obligation to allow employees to work in the language of their choice.
Senator Robichaud: New employees.
Senator Tardif: Exactly. Those who were already in a bilingual region keep the same right, but, when you move, new employees who were not in a bilingual region do not have the same guarantees of those rights. In my opinion, it is important to try to find a way to function in all that. For the moment, we have only adopted a provisional policy, that we will continue to protect those 19 employees even if they are in a unilingual region. Our committee is trying to make recommendations to the government for future moves. What should we plan on? For the moment, that was a test, but what should we suggest to the government? If we contemplate moving the head offices of federal institutions in the future, what should we suggest? You are suggesting a bilingual work place?
Ms. Péan: Absolutely. Based on our personal experience, I would recommend offering a bilingual work place.
Moreover, our new official languages policy — this is clearly written in the policy — states that we offer a bilingual work place to all employees without drawing a distinction between new employees and those who have moved.
Senator Tardif: The Commissioner of Official Languages said that we should treat all head office moves as though the head offices were in Ottawa, regardless of whether they are in a unilingual or bilingual region.
We are dealing with an institution subject to the Official Languages Act, and we should not draw a distinction between a bilingual region and a unilingual region. Would you agree with that recommendation by the Commissioner of Official Languages?
Ms. Péan: Absolutely. If we maintain the Treasury Board's transitional policy, yes.
Senator Tardif: What would you think about reviewing the entire matter of designated bilingual regions? Would the impact be more significant if we adopt this policy?
Ms. Péan: It is very hard to answer that question.
Senator Tardif: I understand. Thank you.
Senator Robichaud: Since francophones are in the minority in your offices, have you noticed a decline in the use of French in conversations? I have previously noticed that people in the minority are inclined to adopt the language of the majority. Have you noticed this situation in your offices?
Ms. Péan: Personally, I would say no. On the contrary, a lot of members of our team admit they had never spoken as much French as now.
As regards new employees, you may remember that I mentioned in my presentation that, by offering a bilingual work place, we are assisting linguistic duality because anglophones from Vancouver who are part of the Canadian Tourism Commission are now exposed to a bilingual environment and, consequently, understand that people can work in French, and that that is done. That is good.
Everyone wants to take French courses. A lot of anglophones would like to take the course, even though their positions did not require bilingualism. It was simply for their own personal experience. I think the work place is conducive to the vitality of both official languages.
Personally, in my group, when I hold meetings, I often conduct meetings only in French. Some, even if they understand French, can ask questions in English, and I answer in English. If the majority are francophone, I speak French. In each section, there are at least two or three francophones; people talk to each other in French. It is as though I were in Ottawa, because I am one of the people who moved.
Senator Robichaud: Bravo! Thank you.
Senator Losier-Cool: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I will be very brief. First of all, for everyone's benefit, you will allow me to make a minor correction. I noted that, on page 12, you mentioned that the Centre de villégiature de Memramcook is in Halifax, whereas it is in fact in New Brunswick.
I am reassured when I see young people like you, Canadians who are perfectly bilingual. I am straying a little from the Official Languages Act, and I will go back to tourism, because you are at the Canadian Tourism Commission. We know that tourism in that province is something that is developing a lot. In your marketing programs, do you have a specific niche for francophone tourism?
Ms. Péan: We are advertising in France, but francophone tourism as such is not one of our target markets or a target segment. When we advertise, we advertise by region, by segment or by niche, and francophone tourism is not a separate segment.
Senator Losier-Cool: That was the purpose of my question. I was wondering whether there was a way to target — and you can definitely do that — the francophone sector market with more advertising in countries like Belgium, Haiti, France and other Canadian regions as well? Could that be part of your mandate?
Ms. Péan: That could be part of our mandate. All our decisions are based on research. When we advertise in a market, it is based on research that says that, yes, this is a market that we can attract to Canada. That is why we have seven primary markets. We have niches, we have clearly determined segments, and all that is based on research.
Our three pillars are based on research, piloted by the industry, and led by the markets as such.
Senator Robichaud: In tourism, the operators back home, in the Maritimes and in the Atlantic, complain that there has been a serious decline in the industry, which has fallen into a fairly alarming situation for those who work in the industry. Do you have any data confirming that that is in fact the case?
Ms. Péan: In tourism, in the United States, yes, there is a big drop in U.S. tourism. In the overseas markets, it is the contrary. There has been an increase in the number of tourists, from overseas markets.
Senator Robichaud: They only come to certain regions?
Ms. Péan: Across Canada. Moreover, we have documents that we could distribute following the presentation that ultimately provide a picture of 2005 as a whole, by province.
Senator Robichaud: I would like that.
Ms. Péan: And by market, by country.
Senator Robichaud: Bravo! I would like to receive that information. Thank you.
The Chairman: You will submit the information to our clerk? Thank you.
Senator Jaffer: Thank you very much for your presentation. It was very interesting. For me, it is absolutely necessary that your move succeed, because we would like other institutions to move here.
[English]
You said a number of times, and I accept that completely, that if people are bilingual they do not have the other competencies to be able to find a job with the commission. Has any thought been given to training people who are bilingual but do not have the qualifications to get the job?
[Translation]
Ms. Péan: If I understand correctly, the question is whether we can hire people who are bilingual, but who do not have the skills to carry on the Commission's operations.
Senator Jaffer: Yes.
Ms. Péan: In my view, it would be really difficult to do that, because we are talking about qualifications, expertise. We are talking about professionalism in marketing. It would be very difficult to hire someone who is bilingual and to send him to take marketing courses in order to promote Canada and attract foreigners. The reverse can be done, but at a very high cost to the commission. Hiring someone who is qualified for the work, but who is not bilingual is something that is done, but, as I said, you have to send that person on French courses. That person is gone for nearly a year. So we lose that experience and the costs become very high. I do not know whether I have answered the question.
[English]
Senator Jaffer: You have very well, thank you.
I have a more general question. If a person wants to learn French from the public service in B.C., what is available and how available is it?
[Translation]
Ms. Péan: It was very difficult for the commission to find a service in the public service as such. We have Alliance française to provide French courses to our employees. So I imagine there must be other institutions, not necessarily in the public service, that are able to provide French courses to people in British Columbia.
[English]
Senator Jaffer: I know the challenges, but I want my colleagues to know them as well because I hear from public servants all the time that French language training is not as available as it is in other parts of the country. One of the challenges is as you have just set out. Even if there would be government facilities available as they are in Ottawa, am I correct in assuming that the federal government has not set aside enough money for language training in British Columbia as it has in other parts of the country?
[Translation]
Ms. Péan: Unfortunately, I cannot answer that question.
[English]
Senator Jaffer: That is not fair to you. Thank you.
[Translation]
The Chairman: I have a more general question, but it concerns the commission's budget. The budget that you had in 2006-2007 was more than $76 million. Has that budget remained appreciably the same now that you are operating from Vancouver? That was my first question.
Second, in that budget, you had an amount of money for the relocation, the move, that was not completely used and was therefore taken back, and, a moment ago, you talked about an additional expense for training and recruitment. Could you have used that amount for recruitment? Has the budget remained appreciably the same?
Ms. Péan: Yes, the budget will remain exactly the same, which is at approximately $75 million for 2007.
The Chairman: Since you did not use all the moving expenses, they were taken back, because they were identified solely for the office move. Is that the case?
Ms. Péan: The government told us that we would receive $25 million for the move, including $8 million for marketing.
The Chairman: Very good.
Ms. Péan: As a result of the announcements, $5.6 million was taken back from us.
The Chairman: So when you talked about the major recruitment expenses in your presentation, I assume those expenses were much greater because you are here and you must be thinking of staff recruitment?
Ms. Péan: That is because we had to hire 80 per cent of our staff. That was a precaution to give notice to others who will be moving or will be called upon to move, to say that the move will be pretty costly. For recruitment, interviews, bringing in people and so on cost a lot of money. Even hiring temporary people. When we announced the move, people started to leave; it was a big wave. So we could not hire immediately. What we did is we hired temporary people so that we could fill the positions. We had to pay those people, to train them, because there was a learning period in all that, and then, in the meantime, we had to start hiring people permanently to move with us to Vancouver.
The Chairman: Recruitment can be part of the major expenses when there is an office move. If they are not among the major expenses, I assume you are forced to take that money elsewhere and perhaps offer fewer programs, or I do not know what?
Ms. Péan: Yes, you have to make cuts to other programs.
Senator Tardif: I simply wanted to ask a supplementary question to that question. The $5.6 million that was not used was identified in the cuts as money that had not been used, so that money was taken back. Was that money not used because you did not fill your positions quickly enough or because they were temporary, not permanent positions? Why was not that $6.5 million used?
[English]
Mr. Harding: My understanding is that the money was not used because in fact it had already been spent and allocated, but there was a delay in getting that money from Ottawa. When we heard news that the $5.6 million would not be forthcoming, we had already spent the money on the good faith that it would be coming. As a result, any marketing initiatives were left out. However, we have juggled some finances and have made do without the funds, and we will be proceeding with our marketing plans as scheduled.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: Did choosing to offer a bilingual work place cost you more?
Ms. Péan: Yes, because we had to try to hire people who came from bilingual regions.
The Chairman: Ms. Péan, Mr. Harding, thank you very much for coming to meet with us this morning. Thank you for your presentation and your answers. If you have any additional information to send us, I would ask you please to send it to the committee clerk.
The committee is adjourned.