Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Official Languages
Issue 11 - Evidence - Meeting of October 19, 2009
OTTAWA, Monday, October 19, 2009
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages met this day at 4:32 p.m. to study the application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it, within those institutions subject to the act. Topic: Study on Part VII and other issues.
Senator Maria Chaput (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Honourable senators, we have quorum and so I will call this meeting to order.
I would like to welcome you all to the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages. I am Senator Maria Chaput, I am from Manitoba and I am the chair of this committee. I would like to begin by introducing you to the committee members who are here with us this afternoon.
[English]
On my far left is Senator Neufeld from British Columbia; then Senator Seidman from Quebec.
[Translation]
To my right, we have Senator Losier-Cool from New Brunswick, Senator Tardif from Alberta and Senator Jaffer from British Columbia.
During the first part of today's meeting, we will be hearing from Ms. Maria Barrados, President of the Public Service Commission of Canada. Ms. Barrados is accompanied today by Mr. Donald Lemaire, Senior Vice-President, Policy Branch and Mr. Robert McSheffrey, Director of Consultation and Counselling Services.
Our committee is currently studying the implementation of Part VII of the Official Languages Act, with specific regard to measures undertaken to this aim by several bodies. The committee is hoping to learn more about successes and initiatives of the Public Service Commission of Canada on this front.
The committee is also eager to hear from the commission about the audit report it published in May 2009 concerning possible unauthorized access to second language evaluation tests.
Ms. Barrados, the committee thanks you for having accepted its invitation, the floor is yours.
Maria Barrados, President, Public Service Commission of Canada: Madam Chair, honourable senators, thank you for inviting me to meet with your committee. You have asked me to speak about our audit on possible unauthorized access to second language evaluation tests as well as the work that the Public Service Commission is doing to implement Part VII of the Official Languages Act.
I am accompanied this afternoon by Donald Lemaire, Senior Vice-President, Policy Branch, and Official Languages Champion at the PSC, and Robert McSheffrey, Director, Consultation and Counselling Services in our Personnel Psychology Centre, which manages our language tests and services.
The Treasury Board, as the employer, sets the official languages policy. The Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer sets the standards that determine language proficiency levels and the Canada School of the Public Service is responsible for language training. The PSC is responsible for developing instruments to test individuals' proficiency in their second official language against these standards.
Merit, as defined in the act, establishes official language proficiency as an essential qualification for public service jobs.
This brings me to our audit report concerning the unauthorized possession and use of the PSC's second language evaluation tests, which was tabled in Parliament earlier this year.
While the PSC is responsible for developing the second language tests, we have delegated language testing to more than 1,200 language assessors across departments and agencies. During 2008-2009, more than 75,000 tests were administered to evaluate reading and written expression.
We initiated the audit after a public service employee who attended the Nec Plus Ultra (NPU) language school noticed that practice tests supplied by the school were similar to PSC tests.
Our audit concluded that the NPU language school was in possession of and used the PSC's SLE reading and writing tests without the authorization of the PSC.
The evidence showed that NPU students had much higher success rates on these two tests than the general population. The evidence also showed that NPU gave its students practice tests that were practically identical to the PSC tests.
[English]
We take this matter very seriously and are committed to taking the necessary steps to maintain the integrity of our tests. As a result of the audit, the Public Service Commission of Canada, PSC, has replaced the two tests that were affected. We estimate that it costs about $1 million to develop a totally new test with four different versions in both official languages. We are implementing the recommendations of this audit, and we have reviewed overall test security and taken appropriate measures.
The 115 Nec Plus Ultra, NPU, students who took the tests following their training have been given two years in which to be re-tested by the PSC. Any employees not re-tested before June 2011 will have their post-NPU training results for reading or writing invalidated by the PSC. This re-testing is under way. The PSC also agreed to review the cases of those individuals who wanted to bring forward any exceptional circumstances. To date, the PSC has successfully resolved cases involving 26 students through retesting, retaining their pre-NPU scores or following a review of their exceptional circumstances.
Issues have been raised by NPU and Ms. Madeleine Rundle's new legal counsel about the manner in which the PSC has treated NPU, about the content of the audit report and about how the PSC is dealing with public servants who attended NPU for language training. The issues raised reflect an inaccurate interpretation of the facts. I have asked the Department of Justice Canada to assess proceeding on seeking damages to recover the costs resulting from this situation.
I would now like to turn to Part VII of the Official Languages Act; in particular, the positive measures that the Public Service Commission has taken to support the development of official language communities and to promote linguistic duality.
We work closely with departments and agencies to advertise job opportunities in the federal public service and coordinate national recruitment campaigns. Our policy on advertising requires that opportunities open to the public be posted on the PSC website at www.jobs.gc.ca. All information is in both official languages and all communications throughout the hiring process are in the preferred language of the applicant.
Canadians continue to be very interested in public service jobs, providing more opportunities to increase public awareness of bilingualism in the federal public service. The number of tests for second-language evaluation has increased in recent years. With modernized tests, the PSC can continue to ensure that second-language requirements for bilingual positions are assessed fairly and consistently across all federal organizations that are subject to the Public Service Employment Act, PSEA.
Our regional offices have been active in their outreach activities with members of local official language communities. This outreach involves career fairs as well as information sessions that are often organized in concert with other federal departments and agencies to promote job opportunities in the federal public service. We have also undertaken special projects with the Université Sainte-Anne and Glendon College. Perhaps I can elaborate on some of these initiatives during the question period if members so wish.
Madam Chair, the promotion of Canada's linguistic duality is an essential aspect of all of our activities. We are dedicated to maintaining a bilingual public service that continually strives for excellence and fully respects our two official languages.
[Translation]
I would like to thank you and the committee members for your interest in the work of the PSC. I am happy to respond to your questions.
[English]
Senator Jaffer: Thank you very much for coming and sharing what you are doing. I am interested in the work you do and do have a few questions. From what I understand, the Public Service Commission of Canada is national. Am I correct to say you help people across the country?
Ms. Barrados: Yes.
Senator Jaffer: When I see the assistance public servants or bureaucrats receive here in Ottawa to learn a language, it is, in my opinion, 10 times better than what they receive in my own province of British Columbia. In B.C., public servants have great difficulty obtaining the bare minimum language training. As a result, I truly believe discrimination exists against public servants in my province because one of the goals, Ms. Barrados, I would imagine is mobility of public servants across the country. If they are not given the same opportunities as people are in the Ottawa region or in the Ontario region, I believe they are being done a disservice.
I know language training is available, but what level of language training is available to people in my province? I understand from the people I speak to that you do not get language training in the regions until you reach a certain level — you will know this better than I, EX-1, et cetera — unlike here where you get language training at another level.
Ms. Barrados: The question, in part, is something that should be put to your next witness from the Canada School of Public Service.
First, the employer determines what the language requirements are for each job. Many of the jobs are unilingual in fact — unilingual English or French, mostly English because that is the distribution of the population in the country. Therefore, it is the job of the Public Service Commission to bring people into those jobs who meet the requirements. We are no longer responsible for training, although we have been in the past.
Through all our regional offices across the country, we promote official languages. We ensure all our work is fully capable of being bilingual. We can provide services and support to other departments so that when they do the national area of selection and run competitions, we can provide assistance to screen and test bilingual people. We do outreach in the communities to bilingual people in areas of their province where their office is located to ensure that people are aware of the bilingual jobs.
You are right, senator, in that the entry for many people is not so much of a barrier in terms of language — because many unilingual entry jobs exist — but for further promotion. Within the public service and to reach the more senior levels, there is a bilingual requirement for everyone.
Senator Jaffer: That is the challenge. I understand where you are coming from, and I admire the work you do, Ms. Barrados. I understand that it is not only about unilingual jobs. Many jobs are unilingual. However, I feel very passionately that people in my province will never receive those promotions here in Ottawa because they are not given the same opportunity to become bilingual as public servants in Ottawa; and that is unfair. I very much respect what you are saying, and I know that you do not give the training, but I feel that you are responsible for, in the end, the health of the public service. An imbalance exists here. Even though it does not completely fit within your mandate, I still feel one of your responsibilities is to try to balance the inequities across our country.
Ms. Barrados: You will find that the Public Service Commission remains committed to promoting diversity and representativeness, as well as bilingualism. We consistently argue and promote those things.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: Ms. Barrados, as I understand it, you are responsible for the Public Service Official Languages Exclusion Approval Order, which gives employees who fail to meet a certain standard two years to bring their second language skills up to scratch. Statistics indicate, however, that certain employees are categorized as being bilingual, even though they do not have the requisite skills to justify being classified as such. They hold bilingual positions, but have not met the requisite standard. Statistics reveal that, in 2007, 9.2 per cent of federal public servants holding bilingual positions failed to meet the language requirements of their position.
Do such employees have to undertake language training? What happens if they do not achieve the requisite skill level within two years?
Ms. Barrados: Mr. Lemaire will be able to give you a more detailed answer, but I will begin my making some comments. Firstly, a public service official languages exclusion approval order is required for an employee to fail a non-imperative position. To obtain a non-imperative position, the employee must undertake to learn the second language over the course of the next two years.
When the two years are up, an extension of a further two-year period can be granted; in other words, the employee can have up to four years to reach the requisite level. If, after four years, the employee still does not meet the language requirement, he or she cannot remain in the bilingual position. We are currently undertaking a process to identify those employees who have already been granted a first two-year period to learn the second language. Sometimes, non-compliance with regard to the extension process does arise, but after four years, the employee must be reassigned to another position.
Senator Tardif: The former Commissioner of Official Languages, Ms. Dyane Adam, recommended that, henceforth, new recruits should be bilingual, and that within five years, bilingualism should be a mandatory condition of employment. What do you think of that recommendation?
Ms. Barrados: I believe that it is very important to have a bilingual public service, but I also understand that it is important to give people the opportunity to enter the public service through the non-imperative staffing route. It sometimes happens that we have a shortage of specialists or expertise in a particular field, and we cannot find a candidate who speaks both official languages.
However, thanks to non-imperative staffing, we have the option of employing the candidate with the required expertise and skills. We look at who is available within the public service, but we give people a grace period to bring their second language skills up to scratch.
Senator Tardif: If I understand you correctly, you are saying that you do not agree with Ms. Adam's recommendation that we employ people who are already bilingual?
Ms. Barrados: Perhaps I did not express myself clearly. We begin by looking for bilingual candidates. But, if we cannot find somebody with the requisite skills, or if there is an issue of diversity at stake, we have the option of using non-imperative staffing. Obviously, however, non-imperative staffing is costly in terms of training and, furthermore, the employee must be willing to undergo second language training, which requires a not-insignificant amount of effort.
Senator Tardif: What percentage of employees hold non-imperative positions?
Ms. Barrados: Our annual report provides two categories of figures. Firstly, it provides information as to new recruits. This figure stood at around 300 last year.
Secondly, it provides information as to how many employees are not in compliance with the language requirements of their position, and this figure stood at 69 people. We have made a concerted effort on this front and, as a result, there has been a decline in the number of people failing to comply with the language requirements of their position. For example, four years ago, the figure stood at almost 900 people.
The Chair: Mr. Lemaire, is there anything that you would like to add?
Donald Lemaire, Senior Vice-President, Policy Branch, Public Service Commission of Canada: No. I think that Ms. Barrados gave a very complete answer.
Senator Losier-Cool: I have a question for each of our witnesses. Firstly, Ms. Barrados explained some of the figures contained in the report. Can you tell us how many people in total work for the public service?
Ms. Barrados: The Public Service Commission of Canada, which works with the core of the public service, represents around 200,000 employees.
Senator Losier-Cool: Could you tell us what percentage of these employees are bilingual?
Ms. Barrados: Perhaps we could get back to you with a written response.
Senator Losier-Cool: Mr. Lemaire, I am absolutely delighted to meet a champion. Our committee has been speaking about champions for a long time and I have been very much looking forward to meeting one. Welcome to our meeting.
Could you tell us what you understand by the term "positive measures"? There is a lot of talk about using "positive measures" to improve bilingualism.
Mr. Lemaire: I should perhaps begin by explaining what a champion does. Without downplaying the importance of the role, I should point out that I did not undergo a competitive process to become a champion. I did not do anything specific to merit the appointment. A champion's role is, among others, to promote respect for official languages in the workplace by informing employees of their rights and responsibilities.
Our role is to ensure that employees and managers have access to information sessions on responsibility stemming from Part VII of the Official Languages Act with regard to official languages in the workplace. The Public Service Commission of Canada is not one of the departments required to report on Part VII, given that our mandate involves relatively little involvement in the community.
Senator Losier-Cool: Do you consider involvement in the community to be a "positive measure"?
Mr. Lemaire: Yes, I believe that community outreach activities relate to Part VII. For example, we are undertaking outreach activities in the Maritimes and in the west to ensure that people are aware that bilingual positions exist in their region and in the federal public service.
Senator Losier-Cool: Mr. McSheffrey, I would like to speak to you about exams. I was a second-language teacher for more than 30 years and my students often told me that they hated exams. As a psychologist, this is something that you understand. You spoke about changing, improving and modernizing the exams. Could you provide us with an example of a change that has been introduced?
Robert McSheffrey, Director of Consultation and Counseling Services, Public Service Commission of Canada: A range of exam options are now available. Increasingly, we are encouraging departments to offer language testing online.
We are also looking at the possibility of using automated testing where a computer generates a unique exam for each student, based on an automated question bank. By allowing a computer to randomly select a version of the exam, we can better ensure the integrity and security of the exam process. We are exploring different avenues and looking at different language models that could be included in the exams in the future.
Senator Losier-Cool: Do you have enough funding to carry out these improvements?
Ms. Barrados: I regularly receive requests for additional funding from the consultation and counselling service. The PSC has the responsibility for reviewing how funding is allocated. We were able to find money for the consultation and counselling service, but I know that there will be more requests. It is a question of priorities.
Senator Losier-Cool: My next question is for our psychologist. Is it true that French-speakers outperform English-speakers in the exams?
Mr. McSheffrey: Historically, that has been the case. It depends on the year, the tests and the level being examined. There are three levels: A, B and C. The success rate depends on each of these factors. Historically, it is, however, true that French-speakers outperform English-speakers.
The Chair: I have a follow-up question to the ones that were asked earlier about Part VII of the Official Languages Act and "positive measures."
We all know that the Department of Canadian Heritage is responsible for official languages. To what extent do you work with Canadian Heritage to define "positive measure" and to ensure greater compliance with Part VII of the Official Languages Act? What is the extent of the cooperation between you and Canadian Heritage? Could you give us some concrete examples of how it has borne fruit.
Ms. Barrados: Mr. Lemaire, as a champion, and other staff members who have official languages responsibilities, are members of a working group that was struck by Canadian Heritage. The Public Service Commission of Canada plays a liaison role. We have undertaken a number of initiatives, such as the one with the Université Sainte-Anne, for example, where we are working with the university to help students access jobs in the public service. Our objective is to have a pool of bilingual people who could fill administrative positions. The initiative provides the university with the opportunity to offer students training that is tailored to the requirements of the public service. We are always willing to share our experience when we attend working group committee meetings.
Mr. Lemaire: We are involved in pangovernmental initiatives, and as the president just said, in more specific initiatives. For example, we have been involved in initiatives on language training and testing to better understand individuals' proficiency in their second official language. We have worked with them to demystify what is meant by bilingualism in the federal government. We are involved in discussions and we try to find ways of helping the public service as a whole, within the parameters of our mandate.
The Chair: It is certainly very difficult to define what is meant by "positive measures." That much has been obvious from listening to the witnesses who have appeared before this committee. Am I correct in thinking that "positive measures" can vary from one department to the next, depending on the terms of their mandates?
Mr. Lemaire: Indeed.
The Chair: When you have meetings like the ones that you have just described, do the different departments discuss what progress has been made with regard to "positive measures"? Can one department learn from another? Has the cooperation extended as far as Justice Canada or Canadian Heritage issuing directives defining "positive measures"?
Mr. Lemaire: We discussed best practices and community intervention. Personally, I have not been involved in any discussions attempting to define "positive measures" and I am not aware of any detailed directives on the matter.
Ms. Barrados: The PSC executive committee was given a presentation on Part VII of the act and we had the opportunity to discuss the plan. As the president of the PSC, I was present at this meeting. The meeting resulted in the various service initiatives now available in our institutions. These institutions were developed with guidance from Canadian Heritage. We are also very busy with career fairs and other outreach activities.
The Chair: Career fairs are a useful recruitment tool, are they not? They are a means of raising awareness about what public service employment has to offer. Do they also give you the opportunity to raise the issue of language requirements?
Ms. Barrados: They are a useful recruitment tool, and also a helpful means of raising the public service's profile. Promoting the public service's bilingualism is an important aspect of these career fairs.
The Chair: Do you organize career fairs all around the country? Are some held in the Atlantic region? Do you go out west, do you come to Ottawa?
Ms. Barrados: Yes, the federal councils hold them all around the country. Furthermore, the PSC is willing to send representatives anywhere in the country, and we are also studying the use of new Web technologies to raise awareness of job opportunities in the public service. All of these initiatives will be completely bilingual.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
[English]
Senator Jaffer: I have another question, and correct me if I am wrong. I understand that PSC is required to comply with the obligations and implementation of Part VII of the Official Languages Act. I understand that you have to consult the English-speaking community and the French-speaking community. I would imagine the consultations on this would be on how to promote official languages. What type of consultations do you have with the English-speaking community, especially in my province?
Ms. Barrados: Most of our consultation with the English-speaking community has been in Montreal, where we have identified challenges in achieving the representation we seek. I do not believe that we have done consultation on language in English in British Columbia. In British Columbia, our work and consultations are more on achieving the interest and levels of application of different people. It has not been around language.
Senator Jaffer: I believe that if French is to survive in Canada, it needs to be spoken in B.C. as much as here and in Quebec, especially by the communities that I represent, the ethic communities. As you know, my province has a great interest in French immersion.
I am concerned that no consultation takes place in my province under this legislation. I leave that with you for your consideration.
I would also like to ask about the positive measures taken by you to support — this is the real crux of it — the development of official language communities and to promote linguistic duality. What positive measures are you taking to promote linguistic duality?
Ms. Barrados: Most of our work is an extension of our obligations around recruitment. However, we make a point of ensuring that everything we do promotes not only work in the public service but that it is a bilingual public service, so you see that in all the material we produce, the outreach we do and the presentations.
We also put a great deal of effort into demystifying what is required to learn the language and to go through the testing at the Public Service Commission.
In addition to that, our extra efforts are development of internships and discussions, and working with groups that we have identified to meet particular needs. You have something similar to Glendon College in Toronto that is looking to train more bilingual people with public administration degrees and work with them to provide the opportunity to get the internships in a bilingual environment. I have already talked about Université Sainte-Anne where we are working with them to get the bilingual people we need working with the francophone population so that they have the level of bilingualism and the skills to come into the public service.
Our outreach is in the promotion of the public service, but also, in the specific initiatives, we try to provide opportunities for institutions and groups to access the public service.
Senator Mockler: My question concerns the Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality 2008-2013. In the notes prepared by the Library of Parliament it says that it contains no specific provision for language training. It goes on to say:
Based on the information provided further to the President of the Treasury Board's appearance before the committee last June, the language training expenditures of the SPS and PSC were reduced between 2006 and 2007. . . .
Recently, the Commissioner of Official Languages and the House of Commons Standing Committee on Official Languages stated that federal institutions must do a better job of getting young people interested in learning both official languages.
Do you have any comments on that?
Ms. Barrados: Our role is one of finding people and young people to meet particular jobs and job needs. Our role is one of evaluation and testing to ensure that people have the language requirements to meet the jobs. By and large, we have managed to find people who have the language requirements of the jobs. Our challenges come when people in the public service want promotions. They then have to improve their level of language.
We, as an organization, are not responsible for the language training. Our responsibility is to inform candidates whether they meet the standard or not, so I cannot really comment overall on the effort that the government is making on language training.
[Translation]
Senator Mockler: In New Brunswick, my own province, immersion schools strengthen our bilingualism. This helps young people who want a public service career. Do you have any data comparing the level of service provided to the general population of each of the provinces and territories on this front?
Ms. Barrados: No. Research was carried out about three years ago, I believe, as to whether there was a pool of bilingual people who could apply for positions in the public service; however, it has not been updated since. I do not really have any information to share with you about training or immersion programs in other provinces.
Senator Mockler: Does the commission closely monitor what is happening in the provinces to allow it to play a role of advisor and educator?
Ms. Barrados: To an extent, yes, but it is quite a challenge for us. We have received a number of requests from various groups seeking to benefit from our expertise in language testing. The provinces would like to learn from our expertise and use our tests. They want to use our evaluation system. I can provide them with information as to cost recovery, but I am hindered by the terms of my mandate, which extends only to the federal public service. I have no mandate to provide service to other provinces or their public services. It is rather difficult for us because I have received a number of requests.
Senator Mockler: That is exactly why I asked the question.
If your mandate were amended to allow you to work more closely with your provincial and federal counterparts, would it help you to improve bilingualism in Canada?
Ms. Barrados: It would improve compliance with and understanding of the standards required, as well as improving language skills. We receive a lot of questions both about moving from one public service to another and about our expertise. We have a network of experts specializing in all the key areas: language testing; standards; and, the reliability of language tests. However, given that the PSC mandate is restricted to the federal public service and other federal organizations, I can only provide the provinces with general information. I cannot, for example, provide them with information on language testing, even though we have received requests for support on this front.
[English]
Senator Neufeld: Senator Jaffer asked some questions specifically about language in British Columbia. Do I understand correctly that the mandate of the Public Service Commission is to promote bilingualism in the public service, that being French and English?
I want to take that a little further because in my province both French and English people are soon to be the minority. Asian people, East Indian people are hugely representative in our province.
Is there something that the Public Service Commission does to service those people who require services in a language other than French or English, which is not their mother tongue? If not, is it a phenomenon where maybe the world is changing, and we may have to start thinking more broadly about how we provide services to citizens of Canada?
Ms. Barrados: The Public Service Commission is a unique organization. We do not take directions from the ministers on how we conduct our business. My relationship is with Parliament. It is a 100-year-old arrangement that has been put in place, which means I am very much a creature of statute. PSC must do things that are clearly in conformity with our statute, the Public Service Employment Act or other related legislation. We follow the Official Languages Act and the Public Service Employment Act. The Official Languages Act talks about two official languages, and we have an obligation to follow that piece of legislation.
However, you raise another point that preoccupies us a great deal. We have an obligation as well that, in doing that, our acts also require us to ensure that we have recruitment that is representative of the population. We also have to worry about employment equity. I do worry about barriers of entry into the public service.
We take our Public Service Employment Act and the Official Languages Act as given; these we must follow. We also have concerns about employment equity. We are concerned about creating barriers to people entering into the public service by how we might post our advertisements, how we do our screening and how we do our assessment.
Senator Neufeld: I appreciate that answer. What effort is put forward by PSC to service people for federal programs in languages other than French or English? I know the Province of British Columbia provides for their responsibilities. I understand, and you spoke to that earlier, the Province of British Columbia, although it probably has a long way to go, does make an attempt to service those whose language is neither of the official languages in the province. As I say, many non-English-, non-French-speaking people in British Columbia need to be serviced by both governments. I appreciate the acts you have to follow, but I also appreciate reality, namely, that people need to access services in different languages. Do you do any of that at all?
Ms. Barrados: We are, if you like, the recruiter for the Government of Canada. We will worry about the languages that people are looking to have in jobs. It is usually one or the other official language, English or French, so we have to have a strong capability to deal with everyone in the Canadian public in either or both of those languages. However, circumstances arise where there are demands for other languages. We are not an organization that provides the services you are describing, senator, where someone might want to know about their pension or might want to know about some type of benefit that would be available to them. That is not the responsibility of the Public Service Commission.
Senator Neufeld: In plain English, to me then, if you do not speak either language, when you go to a federal office you are out of luck. You may not get service at all unless you can bring an interpreter with you. Would that be correct to say?
Ms. Barrados: It would be correct to say if you are looking for a job in the federal public service. You have to speak one of both languages.
Senator Neufeld: That is what I am trying to get at. How do you provide that service? People who are looking for jobs, I understand, that is what you are responsible for, but you also have to provide services to people, so that is interesting to me.
Can you explain the Nec Plus Ultra language school, NPU? Is that a private school? Is it a government-funded school?
Ms. Barrados: It is a private school. The approach that the government has evolved to — and this is something you could pursue more with the president of the Canada School of Public Service — is that a responsibility is given to departments to provide for the training. Much of that is done through contracts with private schools. NPU was one of these private schools.
Senator Neufeld: That is why you have asked the Department of Justice Canada to assess how they would have got your tests and your information.
Ms. Barrados: We did an audit of the circumstances that we had identified with that school. An individual came forward, actually, a public servant, and said, "I have just done the language test and the language test I just completed, which was the commission's language test, was remarkably similar to a practice test that I had done." That led us to look further, and we found that there was remarkably strong results from this particular language school as opposed to the rest of the population.
We also asked public servants who had attended this school to give us their practice material, which led us to conclude that the school was in possession of material that was almost identical to our tests.
My request to the Department of Justice is to assess us pursuing legal action to recover some of our costs because it is a very costly endeavour for us to put new tests in place. Many standards have to be met, and costs are associated with them, but costs have been associated with what we have had to do to correct this situation. We now have a number of public servants who do not meet the language requirements of their job because we do not have confidence in that test. Therefore, a re-testing process, a re-evaluation process, must be done to ensure that everyone does have the language requirements of the job. It has been a costly endeavour for us, and my question to the Department of Justice is how we can recover some of our costs.
Senator Neufeld: Your question is not how they came into possession of those documents or similar documents?
Ms. Barrados: We do not know how they came into possession. I am not sure that is a question I would put to the Department of Justice. However, they can advise if that is an appropriate issue for me to pursue. We spent quite a bit of time in the audit trying to determine how the language school came into possession of that material, and we could not make a conclusion.
Senator Seidman: I want to ask you specifically about the work that PSC is doing to implement Part VII of the Official Languages Act. In your presentation you refer to Part VII of the Official Languages Act, in particular to the positive measures that PSC has taken to support the development of official language communities and to promote linguistic duality.
Might I ask you to elaborate on what these positive measures have been specifically in relation to the anglophone communities in Quebec?
Ms. Barrados: The work we have been doing in Quebec has been through our regional offices and has been work with those communities in Montreal.
Mr. Lemaire, do you have more information on that particular activity?
Mr. Lemaire: For example, we did have a conference with the youth anglophone associations of Quebec, where we had people from across the province, through either video conference or in person, talking about the process in the federal government to support, encourage and inform them.
We do have regular meetings with the different associations to pause and assess. Sometimes it is useful to present how they apply, what the requirements are and what the benefit is of being bilingual, so even in some regions where we need some anglophone candidates and bilingual candidates.
Senator Seidman: Do you meet at all the universities, with other anglophone groups to ask perhaps for their input on what you might do to help them if they are interested in public service jobs?
Mr. Lemaire: We do meet with the main associations. We did not meet with universities. The only time we meet with universities is when we do job fairs, and then all universities are included, francophone and anglophone. Sometimes we have specific job fairs in the anglophone universities.
The outreach work is more with the different associations representing anglophones, especially in the regions, because that is where we have more issues of how they obtain information, services and access.
Senator Seidman: I would specifically follow up the point you are making now because, indeed, that is an issue that one hears and reads about in Quebec, namely, services to the anglophone communities in the regions in English from public sector employees. You say that you have ongoing relations with various networks in the regions, is that correct?
Mr. Lemaire: If I may add, as director in Quebec, I was a member of the federal council, and the Quebec Federal Council, which represents all the departments in Quebec, had a specific initiative to try to reach the anglophone communities outside the major centres. I am sure this has been ongoing, and they are still pursuing those outreach activities. This is done mainly from the regional federal council, which includes the leaders of the federal departments in the Quebec regions.
Ms. Barrados: The Public Service Commission of Canada is an active member, but our view is this is always on the recruitment side, and as we have bilingual capability in the rest of Canada, it is bilingual in Montreal as well.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: Are you able to give us a breakdown of how many employees hold bilingual positions, how many hold unilingual English positions, and how many hold unilingual French positions?
Ms. Barrados: I know that we have information on staff recruitment, the categories of position that were available and the language levels of the successful candidates. We will compile it and send it to you as soon as it is ready.
Senator Tardif: That would be greatly appreciated. Would it also be possible to have a regional or provincial breakdown? I am from Alberta and I would be very interested to know how many public servants from my province hold a bilingual or a designated French-language position.
Ms. Barrados: We have information as to how many employees are English-speaking and how many are French-speaking; however, I am not sure exactly how much information we have about the language requirement for each available position. We will go through our databank and send you what we have.
Senator Tardif: What time period does your recruitment data cover?
Ms. Barrados: We recruit every year and a report on the level and type of recruitment is compiled every year. Furthermore, we have statistics going back quite a number of years. Our data covers not only recruitment but also attrition; there is a constant turnover. It could therefore be quite difficult to extract exact figures pertaining exclusively to recruitment; however, I could also ask Treasury Board if they have any information that would be of help to you.
Senator Tardif: Now that we are in the throes of public service renewal, are you making a concerted effort to recruit more bilingual staff?
Ms. Barrados: Absolutely. We have always been able to use non-imperative staffing to take into consideration cultural diversity and other such factors, but there has been no change in the number of these positions as a proportion of the overall number of positions. We fully understand the importance of bilingualism.
[English]
Senator Jaffer: In preparation for today, I was really struggling with your two roles. I meet with you many times in my other committee. I see you have two jobs: one is to ensure that official languages are maintained in the public service, but your other big job is to ensure that our Public Service Commission reflects the Canadian population. However, you know that visible minorities are not reflected in the Public Service Commission of Canada, which is another day's topic in another committee.
How do you reconcile those two if you are not talking to the English communities in British Columbia? How can you do those two jobs? I see you have a real challenge. One of the problems that many people in British Columbia share with me — and one that I am hoping our committee will do something about — is that the training is left to the deputies. The deputies have a budget, and they have to be within the budget. The last thing they will do is send someone for French training when they have to come under budget. That is not your problem, but we need to look at that. I have difficulty in how you reconcile your two jobs.
Ms. Barrados: When I said that we did not speak to English communities, we speak to many people who are English speakers and many different language speakers in British Columbia.
Senator Jaffer: No, with the greatest of respect, I asked if you had consulted with English communities in British Columbia and you said, no.
Ms. Barrados: I said, no, but I am reflecting on my answer. You are right; that is what I said. Upon reflection, my answer was not a good answer because those we meet with in British Columbia, by and large, are English-speaking communities. You do not have specially-identified groups in British Columbia who define themselves as English-speaking communities.
To make another couple of comments on your observation, the public service has done much better on recruiting visible minorities. Our last numbers were that 18.8 per cent of all the advertised jobs in the public service went to visible minorities last year. That is a significant improvement, so we are making headway there.
I might, with a bit of fear and trepidation, suggest that learning another language is not only the responsibility of the employer but also the responsibility of the individual. It takes a two-part commitment. I know it is hard for adults, but the people who I have had working for me who I have seen succeed are the people who have put a great deal of effort into it themselves.
Senator Jaffer: I do not want to get into a debate with you. I agree; I would say that the responsibility lies three quarters with the individual and one quarter with the government. Where I have a problem is that the one quarter is not given in my province. I agree with you that it is the individual's responsibility, but I also believe the government's responsibility is not being carried out in my province.
[Translation]
Senator Mockler: I have two brief questions.
[English]
I will respect if you cannot provide us with the information now. I am very sensitive in looking at Canada's linguistic duality and the roadmap. Can you apprise the committee on the job fairs that you have had in universities in the last 24 months? Which universities are those, and what are the results?
Ms. Barrados: I can commit to giving that to the committee. If I start trying to list them now, I will probably forget some.
The Chair: You can send it in writing to the committee.
[Translation]
Senator Mockler: I would like to come back to the issue of the provinces. If there were greater cooperation with the provinces, would it be easier to ensure the success of the 2008 to 2013 Roadmap?
Ms. Barrados: That is an interesting question. I must always adhere to the PSC's mandate and we are a federal body. Nonetheless, I am certainly willing to work with my provincial counterparts. We hold meetings with our provincial colleagues and that allows us to exchange ideas and foster greater synergy.
However, the scope and nature of the support I can offer the provinces is limited by the terms of the PSC's mandate.
Senator Mockler: Given the significant sums of money transferred to the provinces for bilingualism under the Roadmap action plan, I think we should review your mandate to ensure greater cooperation and synergy in rolling out the Roadmap.
Ms. Barrados: That is a matter for the Parliament to determine.
The Chair: Thank you very much, Ms. Barrados, for appearing before the committee. It was a very interesting discussion.
Honourable senators, for the second part of our meeting, we will be hearing from Ruth Dantzer, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Canada School of Public Service. Ms. Dantzer is accompanied today by Mr. Sylvain Dufour, Director General of the Language Training Centre.
Our committee is currently studying the application of Part VII of the Official Languages Act and, in particular, measures taken by federal organizations to implement it.
We are hoping to learn more about the achievements and initiatives of the Canada School of Public Service on this front. Ms. Dantzer, thank you for accepting the invitation to appear before our committee today.
The floor is yours.
Ruth Dantzer, President and Chief Executive Officer, Canada School of Public Service: Madam Chair, members of the committee, it is a pleasure to meet with you today to discuss the important role the Canada School of Public Service plays in the promotion and maintenance of official languages in the federal public service.
The Canada School of Public Service has a presence in every province in Canada and has its head office here in our nation's capital. The Canada school is active in three main areas: firstly, mandatory and basic training; secondly, leadership training; and thirdly, skills upgrading.
With regard to official languages, our mandate, focused on the public service, is to develop learning products, provide learning advisory services, and ensure the quality of language services when they are provided by private sector language schools.
Official language policy and promotion is a cross government responsibility, but we think we play an important role in providing public servants with access to language training and maintenance with a unique set of tools and services. We also model, through our courses and our own operations, the importance of our two official languages.
[English]
I took the liberty of asking my office to actually give you some material from a recent announcement made last week as part of the Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality. In that package, you will find a unique pass code for each of you that will give you access to our Campusdirect courses. This is an online, web-enabled tool available to every public servant. We are very proud of the tools that we have provided for public servants. One of the most important roles that the Canada School of Public Service, SPS, plays is supporting public servants in maintaining proficiency in their second language. All these tools were developed in-house by the staff, under Mr. Dufour's leadership, for public servants. You will find that they are innovative solutions for maintaining language. In fact, last year — and this is a bit of boasting — we won the silver award at GTEC, which, for a school the size of ours, is impressive.
Last week as part of the government-wide, $1.1-billion Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality, the parliamentary secretary to the President of the Treasury Board announced that Canada School will be partnering with 11 Canadian universities as part of a pilot project giving them access to our second-language training suite. The pass code that is also part of the package will let each of you go on to Campusdirect and see for yourself.
In fact, this announcement — we will hopefully be able to talk about it — will give access to 11 universities so that they can train future public servants in both official languages. We are excited about it.
[Translation]
As I mentioned at the beginning, it is a real pleasure to be here this evening. I have deliberately kept my opening remarks brief so that I can address your questions, and in the process explain why official language promotion is such an important component of our mandate and our operations at the Canada school.
The Chair: I would like to begin by congratulating you.
[English]
This partnership with the 11 Canadian universities, it has been discussed many times at this committee why it was not done more that way. I would like to say this is a good initiative, and I am pleased to hear about it.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: I must say that I am very eager to see these second language teaching and learning tools. I am also happy to learn that the University of Alberta's Campus Saint-Jean will be involved in this new initiative. This is all good news, and I congratulate you.
However, I would like to return to the issue of funding granted to the public service. If I am not mistaken, there is now less funding available under the Roadmap action plan to support the public service, that is to say that no additional funding has been granted to support linguistic duality in the public service.
Indeed, funding has dropped at a time when requests for language training continue to rise. How are you able to continue offering quality language training given the increase in the number of people requesting such training?
Ms. Dantzer: I would like to begin by discussing funding. It is true that $2.5 million were earmarked for the pilot project and that this funding envelope is not available for public servants. However, as it is to be used for training future graduates, we have set up a partnership with various business schools. We hope that the majority of the students who use our learning tools will become public servants. The money earmarked for the pilot project is an investment for the future.
To my mind, the growing demand for language training is good news. Public servants can access our learning tools via Campus Direct from their office.
[English]
In English, I would say that a reach of about a quarter of a million public servants.
[Translation]
Our tools are aimed at training public servants who have already achieved level A or level B, and they are also a means of allowing employees to keep their language skills current. A common problem experienced by employees is that they get rusty if they do not have the opportunity to use their second language every day.
That is why Campus Direct allows employees to undertake self-assessment.
Senator Tardif: You have fostered ties with colleges and universities. With regard to "positive measures," what have you done to fulfil your obligations under section 41 of Part VII of the Official Languages Act? In your action plan, you highlight the results you have achieved with regard to awareness-raising and consultation. Have you taken other concrete steps to fulfil your obligations under Part VII of the Official Languages Act?
Ms. Dantzer: Yes, I believe so. As we are responsible for fostering leadership skills in public servants, we are able to use our leadership training courses to promote official languages.
About four years ago, a new policy was introduced to ensure that all new public servants receive Canada school orientation training; there is one on-line session and one classroom session. New recruits are informed of their official language responsibilities during these training sessions.
Last year, more than 10,000 public servants attended orientation sessions. Furthermore, we provide other mandatory training courses; there are five mandatory courses for delegated appointments. If Parliament appoints a public servant to a delegated position, he or she must pass a Canada school training course. Last year, 5,800 mid-level public servants underwent training on Part VII of the Official Languages Act and their official languages responsibilities.
We also have a management program for those who want to become managers. The program is run three times a year and there are 30 students in each course. Each participant has to visit an official-language community, for example in Bathurst or Saint Boniface, to better understand the perspective of those living in another part of Canada. We take this responsibility very seriously.
Senator Tardif: I was glad to hear that last remark, because I was about to ask you that very question. Clearly, you are working hard with regard to public servants; but what are you doing with regard to official language communities? You said that you visit these communities and that, as part of the management training program, participants must visit an official language minority community. Do you encourage, for example, official language communities to offer language training themselves? Or is language training becoming increasingly centralized in eastern Canada or in central Canada, here in Ottawa? Can somebody in Alberta become an accredited provider of language training for the Canada School of Public Service? If so, would you consider that to be an example of a "positive measure"?
Ms. Dantzer: If you do not mind, I would like to ask Sylvain to answer. We do not yet have a standing offer for official language teaching throughout Canada. That would only start next year. Clearly, there is a responsibility before the process begins to hold consultations, perhaps mostly for Public Works because they manage the process. Sylvain Dufour could give you further detail.
Sylvain Dufour, Director General, Language Training Centre, Canada School of Public Service: Indeed, over the coming year, by next January or February, consultations will begin with all potential service providers throughout Canada, be it a minority community or other, to share the approach the school is implementing for a national call for tenders.
Consultations will be held so the people can understand the direction in which we are heading. Moreover, the Department of Public Works will make available to people, as it is doing now, services to help in the preparation of bids.
Senator Losier-Cool: As to the 10,000 public servants you referred to, are there departments that are more interested in your school than others or do the 10,000 public servants come from various departments?
Ms. Dantzer: They come from all departments. As soon as people are hired, they must attend an orientation session within six months of their hiring.
Senator Losier-Cool: This is my question: Are there specific departments that are more interested or motivated in having their employees become bilingual?
Ms. Dantzer: Of course; we currently have 70 professors teaching within departments. Clearly, there were some that were quickly prepared to take this next step.
One major change for the school is that we wanted to ensure training was done in the workplace. We think that it is much more effective than to send someone into a small classroom for six months and then to send them back to work.
Several departments were quick to ask for professors in-house. For instance, Transport Canada acted quickly, so did the Canada Border Services Agency, whose champion hired four teachers in the first year that the service was offered.
You know the departments are very different, each operates in its own way. The Department of Western Economic Diversification was one of the most creative; it offered a second language course. Indeed, there was a pilot project with the Saint-Jean campus that lasted a week and it gave public servants in Alberta an opportunity to practice the language for a week over the summer. It was very creative.
In B.C., for instance, in preparation for the Olympic Games, the Canada Border Services Agency made a request for 300 employees to be able to improve their knowledge of the official languages because they will be welcoming visitors from all over the world. We are here to respond to requests from departments and I would say that I have a rather creative team.
Senator Losier-Cool: Has demand increased over the years?
Ms. Dantzer: It is increasingly more creative. Deputy ministers know that it is their responsibility to do this within departments. It is a condition the clerk imposes on deputy ministers, so a report ensues. As you know, all deputy ministers want to stand out and so we have had to respond to some creative requests. Already 58,000 people have accessed the Campus Direct tools. That is a significant number and it is increasing.
Senator Tardif: Must all deputy ministers be bilingual?
Ms. Dantzer: Because they are governor in council appointees, I do not believe they have this same obligation. It is not found in Treasury Board policy because the Treasury Board is only responsible for hiring policy at the assistant deputy minister level and below.
However, I would say that it is monitored quite closely. People do notice when a deputy minister does not speak French and or a presentation is not delivered in both official languages. That is something the clerk raises every year.
Senator Tardif: They are responsible for the management of bilingual human resources in their department, are they not? So, if they are not bilingual, obviously, that can create problems.
Ms. Dantzer: What is important to us is the role modeling. Public servants know who speaks French and English and who does not. I believe all deputy ministers I know want to serve as a role model, so they try.
[English]
Senator Jaffer: Because I do not understand the public service as well as you do, are all the deputy heads here in Ottawa?
Ms. Dantzer: No. The deputy heads are not here for three or four agencies. Veterans Affairs Canada's deputy head is located in Charlottetown. For Western Economic Diversification Canada, the deputy head is in Edmonton. We have two new agencies for Southern Ontario, which I believe are in Guelph — I am not positive — and also a northern agency. It is closer to five or six.
Senator Jaffer: For the big departments, all the deputy heads are here, right?
Ms. Dantzer: Yes.
Senator Jaffer: How do the deputy heads sitting in Ottawa decide who in B.C. will get training?
Ms. Dantzer: For me, that was one of the innovations of the new model for language training that we introduced four years ago. If you will permit, up until that time, language training was focused on only those people who had a statutory requirement for languages, which meant that where you had unilingual positions, there was no statutory requirement in most cases. The new model basically said that you should be doing it for development and leadership. Therefore, deputies were accountable to ensure they had a workforce that was ready. You cannot, in the public service, become an EX-2 without getting a CBC-level language proficiency designation, which, if you wait until you are an EX-2, it is very difficult to learn.
I was at Treasury Board when the then minister insisted that we would start living by the letter of the law, and managers would have to be able to deal with employees in the language of their choice.
That was a very difficult time for the public service. We had amazing public servants who for 10 years had never been told that they had to get their French language designations and were suddenly given a deadline of two years to get them. It demoralized many people. The new model says that you should be training when it is inexpensive. I can train a PM-5 because if they are away for six months the cost of that PM-5 is much less than if I start only training at an EX-2 level.
Senator Jaffer: How many PM-5s in B.C. get the training?
Ms. Dantzer: We can only report on the numbers. We give about 4,200 learning days in B.C. I do not rank it by the level of the person who is taking the training, but I would say that we are not the only providers of language training. Often deputies or managers are really insistent to get someone at a private sector school, and they will get trained on their own. Departments are spending money. I can only report on the 4,200 learning days that I teach at the Canada School of Public Service, but other providers are out there. Does that answer your question?
Senator Jaffer: No. I hope the chair will give me a little leeway. From what I understand, now the responsibility for persons receiving training is on the head of the deputy, who obviously has delegated it to someone in B.C. Someone in B.C. decides who goes for training. I understand the demand for language courses offered by the public service has seen a decline. Is that correct?
Ms. Dantzer: Our numbers would show that we used to give training to people outside of public servants.
Senator Jaffer: I am just talking about public servants.
Ms. Dantzer: This is why the numbers may give you a false impression. While the numbers may have declined, it is because the base used to include more than public servants. Judges often receive language training from the Canada School, for example, across Canada. We found that we were giving more courses to more people in the West than we did before. I am happy to get you the numbers.
Senator Jaffer: Can you provide the numbers for how many people are being trained and how much money is being spent by you in the different provinces, please? I also want to know how many departments and employees are dealing with your public service language training and the cost of training across the country.
From what I understand, you are saying that some heads will get training outside your school. Is that what you are saying?
Ms. Dantzer: That is the option. We are not the mandatory trainer for public servants.
Senator Jaffer: Finally, you may have the answer to this. I cannot tell you how many public servants come to me and say that if they were in Ottawa, they would receive this training, but because they are in B.C., the deputy head does not think it is necessary. I could fill pages with such names. I am very concerned because people in my province are being denied rights of mobility and then promotions here because they do not get the training, as you said, early on.
Ms. Dantzer: That is why we are really excited by Campusdirect because it more equally balances out the power of the employer and employee. To some extent, employees are responsible to understand the situation. We tell them from their very first day in the public service, that they have entered a bilingual service and should expect to put this on their learning plan and start to move. They can do quite a bit on their own.
That being said, public servants get to know those deputies who are prepared to invest. We are part of public service renewal. I am sure all the senators have heard about the gap we will have with public servants. Deputies are being told to ensure they have public servants ready to take the next job, and the next job is one that nine times out of ten will require both official languages because the policy for Treasury Board is that an EX-2 level, wherever you are, must have a CBC designation.
It will not be the first time, but I think a culture change has taken place in the public service, and the reason that you are perhaps hearing about it is that people see that they are going to need it. They might not need it for the job they have now, but they will need it in four or five years. We believe that Campusdirect will actually provide a basis to help them get on their way.
Senator Jaffer: They see they need it. The frustration they have is that they do not receive it. They say that the deputy head or whoever says, "I have this much budget. I cannot have you go away for a year to do French training because I have to spend it on something else." One of the challenges — and I urge this committee to look at it — is that it should not be up to the deputy head because the deputy head has the short-term interest of his department's success while we are talking about the long-term interest of the unity of our country, which are two very different interests. The deputy head should not decide who goes for training. It should be someone else who does not have a budget issue.
Ms. Dantzer: Let me give two examples of people who are taking the long-term example. Canada Revenue Agency often hires new public servants. The last one, whom I met in Calgary, had a PhD in philosophy, and he knew that his next assignment was to spend his first year at Sept-Îles because he would be learning the beginning of the job.
Senator Jaffer: However, the one person does not do it.
Ms. Dantzer: This person was going back to Alberta. He had no intention of working in Sept-Îsle. Departments that have some scope are trying creative things.
Boasting once again, two weeks ago, we received the GTEC gold award for communities of practice. Computer technology will take us a long way toward getting people talking. You are likely right that not every public servant will receive training in the other official language for the first six months of their job. However, we are better placed now, and culturally people understand that it is important. Public servants move to what they need. Where we have given them the tools, we have seen them train themselves.
Statistics Canada has a most interesting story of a fellow in B.C. who self-taught with the Internet and some of the school's tools.
Senator Jaffer: We do not want the exception. I do not care about the exception. I am trying to learn French at my old age, and it is not easy. I am not talking about exceptions. I am talking about what is being offered generally. I am frustrated because when I go to B.C. people say to me, "It is not fair. If I was in Ottawa, I would get this training. You as my senator are not doing enough to ensure I get it."
You can see that I am very frustrated. I see the pain in their eyes. They will not get the promotions because we are not providing them with the training. I want to know exactly what training is being provided to these public servants in B.C. and what training is being provided in Ottawa.
Ms. Dantzer: I will be happy to provide that.
The Chair: Will you send the information requested by Senator Jaffer to the committee?
Ms. Dantzer: Yes, of course.
The Chair: Thank you so much.
[Translation]
Senator Mockler: When you are referring to the Université Sainte-Anne, what university are you referring to?
Ms. Dantzer: It is a partnership between Moncton and Halifax.
Senator Mockler: You said Moncton. The Université Sainte-Anne is in Nova Scotia?
Ms. Dantzer: Halifax, yes.
Senator Mockler: What role does the University of Moncton play in providing training for the public service?
Ms. Dantzer: The School of Public Service launched a university champion program. Over the last five years, approximately but mainly over the last three years, almost 21 deputy ministers have been paired with a university. Through the university champion, we will attract public servants and be able to discuss the public service's main priorities with them. Many of these champions are invited by the universities to provide advice on the level and types of courses offered.
To my knowledge, Monique Colette is responsible for the University of Moncton. There has been great dialogue between Ms. Colette and the University of Moncton.
The Université Sainte-Anne offered a two- or three-week summer program for public servants, at a slower pace, so they could improve their language skills. That program was at a very high level.
Mr. Dufour: We worked with the University of Moncton in terms of immersion. We have also, over the last few years, worked with the University of Moncton on the issue of language training for certain groups.
Senator Mockler: You intend to hold consultations with the provinces and territories to then launch a call for tenders to determine who would be the service providers. You find this to be a great and visionary idea.
What will happen in the Canadian public service with respect to offering more training once the provincial consultation process is over?
Mr. Dufour: The consultation process helps us better understand the needs of departments and, at the same time, see the capacity and interest that exists within the private sector, minority communities. colleges and universities. These consultations will help to determine interest and capacity. They will also help convey information on the Government of Canada's needs in terms of language training. It will help in determining what the needs are.
Ms. Dantzer: We would like to better prepare the private sector to provide courses for the public service.
Senator Mockler: I have a comment, further to my question. I would like to follow up on previous questions as to the role played by the deputy minister in providing better services to the public.
Will your experience and the tools you are currently developing enable deputy ministers to improve their individual performance within the departments?
Ms. Dantzer: Yes, I believe we are on the right track. We are building a foundation, and very important cultural knowledge. We receive requests to give public servants an opportunity to practise their language skills.
The tools and courses we offer and the fact that we offer courses in the second language are factors. We provide seven courses, like values and ethics, and public servants can attend these courses in their second language to practise oral expression. It is not about passing a test and forgetting about using the second language for five years.
[English]
Senator Mockler: I like to say that we are products of former Premier Louis Robichaud and former Premier Richard Hatfield of New Brunswick. We must be prudent not to generalize. There is no doubt in my mind that Richard Hatfield, a unilingual anglophone, did great things for bilingualism in the history of Canada during his tenure in office. With the new instruments you are providing, deputy ministers will undoubtedly adhere to the reality of our bilingual society in the future.
Deputy ministers are responsible for the implementation of official languages, the service of francophones and anglophones in both official languages and for linguistic duality.
My question would follow as a comment. Please, if you want to comment, I would appreciate it. If not, you could provide us with further information if you wish.
After those consultations, with the experience you have now and knowing that universities are under the Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality, can you provide more information on what it is all about and who will be the beneficiaries?
When we talk about bilingualism, we can take the Prime Minister of the day, Mr. Harper. I could sometimes say that his French is better than mine, and I think I am bilingual. How would you see society tomorrow with what we are providing today?
Ms. Dantzer: I can only relate my own experience. I went to school in Alberta, which is quite unilingual, and went to the sister college, Académie de l'Assomption, of Collège Saint-Jean, and it was a priority in 1965. My father believed that it was important, as a Canadian, to speak both official languages. In my experience as a public servant — I worked at the Department of Finance — is that Canadians are asked more often than anyone else in the G8 and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development to chair committees. The reason for that is because the expectation is that we can deal in both official languages. As a public servant, we learn early that Canadians have a proud tradition; much has been done to establish that in communities across Canada. I would say that young people, new generations, view languages as not just as two languages; they are looking for three and four languages. The potential for optimism, for Canadians, is very good.
I remain hopeful. We have not, in the past, allowed self-motivated people to move along, and some of these tools allow public servants to not wait around for their managers to say that they can take language training. They can self-teach and become motivated.
I remain optimistic; however, I work with some of the most creative people with whom I have ever worked, with respect to having a passion for official languages. Therefore, I am lucky.
Senator Tardif: I must say that your father was held in very high esteem. I certainly know that that is the case in Alberta. He has influenced many people, and I thank him for the vision that he shared with his family and with you at school.
[Translation]
Over the coming year you will be busy preparing a Master Standing Offer for the provision of language training throughout Canada. Do you believe that to give this contract to an organization or an institution in an official language minority community would be a positive measure?
Ms. Dantzer: We have to comply with Treasury Board guidelines with respect to contracts. We have already asked them the question with respect to Part VII to determine priorities. On the one hand, we would like to see progress for minority communities, but on the other, we must abide by clear rules that do not provide great leeway. We have not yet received a response.
Senator Tardif: Have you received advice from the Minister of Justice or Canadian Heritage on this point?
Ms. Dantzer: Not yet. We have asked them the question, but we have not yet received the response.
Senator Tardif: You have asked them the question directly to know what their interpretation of "positive measures" is?
Ms. Dantzer: That is correct.
Senator Tardif: It would help you better understand the issue surrounding Part VII. You will have to choose in some situations whether to apply the rule as it stands, which would not be a "positive measure" for the community, or whether you favour the community. Would that be your dilemma?
Ms. Dantzer: That is right.
Mr. Dufour: There are other ways of complying with Public Works and Government Services guidelines on contracts by looking at how we can put "positive measures" forward to foster the vitality of minority communities under this type of approach.
Senator Tardif: Can you play a leadership role or are you currently restricted in that sense?
Ms. Dantzer: We are going to wait for a legal opinion. There are other ways of advancing the cause. That was one of the criterias in our pilot project, to have ways of reacting, but we have to wait for the opinion. We are not experts in this field.
Senator Tardif: When did you ask for this opinion?
Ms. Dantzer: Not long ago. I cannot recall the exact date, but over the last month, not the last week. We had a feeling someone might ask the question.
The Chair: Thank you very much. Can you send us the names of the 11 Canadian institutions you are in partnership with?
Ms. Dantzer: Yes.
The Chair: Would it also be possible to know what the responsibilities of these 11 universities are under this partnership? If you are in partnership with them, you must have determined your responsibilities and theirs.
[English]
Senator Jaffer: Does the public servant have to pay for the course themselves?
Ms. Dantzer: It is free. The courses on Campusdirect are free. However, I should make clear that, if you are in the Coast Guard, which is a constant issue, they do not get Internet access. You will be amazed with these tools. What stops anglophones from speaking, even if they can, is that they are afraid of how they will sound. With this tool you speak into your computer, and it shows you how you sound so that you can correct your intonation. That may sound surprising, but technology will really help us.
Senator Jaffer: Therefore, it costs them nothing, is that correct?
Ms. Dantzer: It is free.
Senator Jaffer: Do we provide time for them to learn?
Ms. Dantzer: It depends on the ministry.
Senator Jaffer: When you say it is free, can any public servant use it? They do not have to go to the deputy, but it depends on their deputy if they have time to study, is that correct?
Ms. Dantzer: Yes; it is available. Many have access at home. We also offer courses, and they do not pay for those either. The ministry is responsible for paying for courses. It is provided, unlike if you were a lawyer or an accountant where you had to pay for your own course to keep up to speed. All these courses are paid for.
Senator Jaffer: You only pay as a lawyer if you are self-employed. Justice pays for them otherwise.
[Translation]
The Chair: Honourables colleagues, before adjourning the meeting, I wish to inform you that I will be absent from the committee for a few weeks. During my absence, senator Champagne will substitute as the chair of this committee.
Ms. Dantzer: I forgot to mention something. We will be given you CDs that explain our pilot project. They were just completed last week, and we did our best. The French version contains a misspelled word: the word discussion is missing an s.
[English]
I want to apologize, but it will be fixed before any distribution. If you only have three minutes to throw it into your computer, it goes through. It will be fixed before then. We just had people working over the weekend to ensure you would have it.
[Translation]
The Chair: Thank you very much.
(The committee adjourned.)