Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Official Languages
Issue 4 - Evidence - Meeting of May 3, 2010
OTTAWA, Monday, May 3, 2010
The Senate Standing Committee on Official Languages met today at 4:36 p.m. to study the application of the Official Languages Act and the regulations and directives made under it. Topic: study on Part VII and other issues.
Senator Maria Chaput (Chairman) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Honourable senators, I welcome you to the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages. I am Senator Maria Chaput, from Manitoba, and I am the chair of this committee.
Honourable senators, I would first like to confirm that your committee has just approved a budget of $110,038 for the committee's operations and activities, and that the budget will be submitted to the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration.
The committee is studying the application of Part VII of the Official Languages Act within various federal institutions. Today, we will hear from officials from the Department of Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, who will talk to us about how Part VII applies within their institution.
I would like to welcome Frank Fedyk, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic Policy and Research; Michel Caron, Director, Youth and Official Language Minority Communities; Cliff Halliwell, Director General, Strategic Policy Research Directorate; Ellen Healey, Director, Social Programs Division; and Silvano Tocchi, Acting Director General, Office of Literacy and Essential Skills.
Ladies and gentlemen, the committee would like to thank you for having accepted its invitation to appear before it. I would now ask you to make your opening remarks, and then senators will follow that up with questions.
[English]
Frank Fedyk, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic Policy and Research, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada: Chair and esteemed members of the committee, I thank you for giving me the opportunity to share with you some of the initiatives that Human Resources and Skills Development Canada has undertaken to support official language minority communities.
HRSDC's mandate is to build a stronger and more competitive Canada, to support Canadians in making choices that help them live productive and rewarding lives, and to improve Canadians' quality of life.
[Translation]
Within this mandate, Human Resources and Skills Development is committed to support initiatives to foster the vitality and development of official language minority communities and to promote the use of French and English in Canadian society.
[English]
HRSDC supports the implementation of section 41 of Part VII of the Official Languages Act in various ways: as a partner in the Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality 2008-2013; through the development of departmental action plans on the implementation of section 41 of Part VII; and by working in collaboration with stakeholders representing official language minority communities and other federal departments.
First, HRSDC is a partner in the Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality 2008-2013, a major initiative supporting the commitment of the Government of Canada to our two official languages.
The roadmap allocated HRSDC a total of $94 million over a five-year period, 2008 to 2013, to support four separate initiatives in the area of social and economic development of official language minority communities. I will describe each one of our four initiatives briefly.
The Enabling Fund for Official Language Minority Communities is a significant positive initiative that HRSDC has undertaken to enhance the vitality of official language minority communities. This initiative is the Government of Canada's cornerstone in regard to the economic and human capital development for these minority communities. Total funding for this initiative is $69 million over five years. In his 2006-07 annual report, the Commissioner of Official Languages recognized the enabling fund as an example of a positive measure.
Another initiative under the roadmap is the Family Literacy Initiative. Its purpose is to improve access to family literacy services by supporting networks and partnerships with official language minority communities. Family literacy services are being integrated into existing community programs and services and are being tailored to specific literacy needs of the community such as those of immigrants. Total funding for this initiative is $7.5 million over five years.
The Child Care Pilot Project, a third initiative under the roadmap, supports research to better understand the impact of child care programs on the linguistic and cultural development of children across Canada and to help them succeed in school. HRSDC dedicated $13.5 million to this project over five years.
Finally, there is an initiative to build the capacity of non-governmental organizations for early childhood development. This initiative recognizes the important role that non-governmental organizations play in building relationships and creating a conducive environment for early childhood development.
HRSDC dedicated $4 million over five years to help not-for-profit organizations promote linguistic and cultural early childhood development programs and services in official minority communities.
[Translation]
HRSDC is also active in supporting the development of official language minority communities outside the Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality.
[English]
Under the 1994 accountability framework, HRSDC is one of the 32 designated federal institutions whose activities are important for the development of official language minority communities. This designation means HRSDC must develop action plans for the implementation of section 41 of Part VII of the Official Languages Act and report annually on its activities.
HRSDC has demonstrated its leadership in the following areas: awareness, consultations with communities, communications, funding and program delivery, coordination and accountability.
[Translation]
I would like to give you some examples from our most recent reports on results that demonstrate our commitment to the development of official language minority communities.
[English]
For example, the New Horizons for Seniors Program, which funds projects that help improve the quality of life for seniors and their communities, communicates with the Fédération des aînées et aînés francophones du Canada to ensure program success in official language minority communities. HRSDC regional officials also contact provincial and territorial organizations to ensure strong relationships, thus building opportunities for official language community members to take advantage of the offers of guidance and assistance from departmental representatives.
Since 2008, more than 270 projects were funded that directly benefited official language minority communities all across Canada. Under the Adult Learning, Literacy and Essential Skills Program, $2.8 million was allocated in 2009-10 for projects related to literacy and essential skills in minority communities, including specific tools for the workplace in these communities.
Immigration contributes to the skilled labour force in Canada and is a key issue for francophone minority communities. HRSDC, through the foreign credential recognition program, allocated over $1.1 million for 36 months, 2008 to 2011, to the Consortium national de formation en santé for a research project on employment integration conditions and service for francophone immigrants with foreign credentials in the health field in minority communities.
Pilot sites were established and are up and running in St. Boniface, Manitoba — Collège universitaire St-Boniface; Ottawa, Ontario — Cité Collégiale; and Edmundston, New Brunswick — Université de Moncton. A feasibility study is nearing completion for the establishment of a fourth site serving the Toronto and Southern Ontario area.
In the province of Quebec, the department implemented a number of projects intended for anglophone minority communities. A total of 598 projects received funding totalling $5.2 million. The vast majority of these projects were funded through the Canada Summer Jobs program, enabling anglophone youth to acquire work experience and employability skills through workshops and on-the-job experience that will help them in future employment.
As much as possible, HRSDC consults or works in collaboration with representatives of the official language minority communities in order that our actions take into account, where possible, the needs and priorities of these communities. In February 2010, talks were held with key representatives of the francophone and anglophone minority communities in the context of the preparation of the departmental 2010-14 Action Plan.
HRSDC also collaborates with other federal departments on official languages issues. For example, our department is a member of the Citizenship and Immigration Canada Francophone Minority Communities Steering Committee. Another example is HRSDC's partnership with Industry Canada, supporting research in the area of community economic develop.
[Translation]
I have presented a brief overview of steps we have taken to ensure the successful implementation of section 41 of Part VII of the Official Languages Act. I want to assure the esteemed members of the committee that HRSDC will continue to support initiatives and to explore other avenues to foster the development and vitality of official language minority communities and to promote linguistic duality.
[English]
Thank you again for this opportunity to present HRSDC's accomplishments with regards to Part VII. We will be pleased to answer your questions.
[Translation]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: The official languages commissioner gave your department an average grade with regard to compliance with the Official Languages Act for the years 2004-2005 and 2005-2006. I do not know whether you have made significant improvements, but it would seem that your department still faces challenges with regard to compliance with Part IV and services to the public; Part V concerning language of work; and Part VI concerning equitable participation under the Official Languages Act. That is due in part to shortcomings in terms of active offer of service and low participation rates of Quebec anglophones in the public service.
Could you tell us why the public service has problems recruiting anglophones in Quebec? What are the obstacles to increasing their participation?
[English]
Mr. Fedyk: That is an excellent question. However, we are the experts in Part VII of the act. If there are issues with respect to Part IV and Part V, we have other experts that are responsible for those areas. We will be more than pleased to invite them to appear before the committee. Unfortunately, we are the experts on Part VII of the act, which is support for the minority language communities.
[Translation]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: That means that you take Part VII into account when making decisions. Do you consult regularly with official language minority communities?
As well, what kind of relations does your department maintain with the provincial governments with regard to the application of Part VII?
[English]
Mr. Fedyk: We have regular consultations with the official language minority communities. We have our action plan, as I explained. This past February, we had consultations with both the anglophone official language minority communities as well as the francophone communities. They provided us with input in terms of their priorities and needs so that we can take them into account. We committed to meeting them again in the fall, so we will have follow- up discussions with them.
With respect to provincial consultation and coordination, a lot of the program and benefits — and, Mr. Caron can elaborate on some of these as well — we do in partnership with the provinces. A lot of our labour market initiatives provide funding to the provinces, whether it is Quebec, or Ontario or any of the others. Part of the terms and conditions that we include is recognition that the minority language of communities must be consulted as well as benefitting from the initiatives. Collaboration is ongoing.
Can you elaborate, Mr. Caron?
[Translation]
Michel Caron, Director, Youth and Official Language Minority Communities, Human Resources and Skills Development, Canada: In the agreements that we reach with the provinces and territories, we always try to include provisions to ensure services in the minority language.
If I may, I would like to come back to the issue of general consultations. In addition to the consultations that our department holds with official language minorities in the course of administering our programs, we also hold discussions in order to understand how program changes or renewal might affect the communities.
For example, we hold regular discussions with regard to our enabling fund. Last year we developed a new performance measurement framework for the operation of the enabling fund and had discussions on a quite regular basis with the organizations that benefit from our program funding. In short, the department holds both general and more specific consultations.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: When you hold consultations, do you do so province by province or, for example, do you hold federal-provincial conferences that bring together all of the provinces?
[English]
Mr. Fedyk: For the most part, our agreements are bilateral with each province. There are deputy ministers' and ministers' conferences where we talk about the general agreement and the terms and conditions, but each of the accords are bilateral agreements. It is in those terms and conditions that they are incorporated.
[Translation]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: They are bilateral. That is what I wanted to know.
The Chair: I would like to come back to the first question asked by Senator Fortin-Duplessis. It always surprises me when the experts — if I can refer to you as such — of Part VII of the Official Languages Act are not aware of the department's initiatives regarding the other parts of the act. A number of witnesses have stated, and we see this here, that Parts IV, V, VI and VII of the act are intertwined.
[English]
I was surprised by your answer. Can you add to it?
Mr. Fedyk: Yes; we are a large department, so we have Service Canada, which is the service delivery arm for our ministry and for many other departments. Service Canada constantly strives to improve its availability of services in both official languages, wherever and however Canadians approach us, whether it is by phone, in person or through the Internet. I am not responsible for that area, unfortunately. We are work in collaboration, so we are well aware of their services and coordinated in our efforts. Unfortunately, I cannot give you details in terms of all the initiatives they are taking.
[Translation]
The Chair: Could you forward the senator's question to the person responsible and send us a written response?
[English]
Mr. Fedyk: Of course; we would be more than pleased to.
[Translation]
Senator De Bané: You mentioned that several senior officials within your department — including Élisabeth Chatillon, Michel Hamelin and Pierre Lavigne — were official languages champions or delegated champions. What do you mean exactly by official languages champions?
[English]
Mr. Fedyk: In our department, we have champions for many of our areas. In terms of official languages, we have champions of our employees. We have an office of coordination and accountability, but we have senior officials who also act as champions to ensure that our employees are able to work in either one of the official languages; we celebrate different anniversaries, such as the celebrations of the day of language duality. They act as champions for promotion and awareness of the services that we offer to our employees, as well as employee rights and responsibilities.
Senator De Bané: The role of champions, if I understand you, is to motivate their people?
Mr. Fedyk: It is to facilitate awareness throughout the department. For example, we have celebrations of the Fête de la Francophonie. Events are held in the noon hour throughout our buildings in the Ottawa and Gatineau area.
[Translation]
Senator De Bané: Madam Chair, we should perhaps ask all departments to have champions, as we see here in the list of these officials.
[English]
One of the first things you said to us today that struck me is that the mandate of the department is to help Canadians be productive and make the right choices, and within that mandate of right choices, to be more productive to serve both official communities. With all due respect, the Canadian Constitution, the supreme law of the land, spells out clearly that the duality of this country, the two official languages, are a fundamental characteristic of this country. Instead of expressing it your way — as long as it is within the mandate of allowing Canadians to make choices and to be more productive — the Constitution, which is the most important law, does not talk about the priorities of your department; it talks about the duality of the country as a fundamental characteristic.
I leave that point for your reflection. That being said, you invited us to talk about Part VII, so I will do that.
First, have you adopted any measures to make your employees conscious of, or sensitized to, the duty of the department to implement Part VII of the law? Second, are there any obstacles, internal and external, that make the implementation of Part VII difficult?
Mr. Fedyk: Let me turn, first, to the measures that we are taking to ensure our employees are aware of our obligations. As a department affected by the Federal Accountability Act, we are well aware in preparing our annual action plan, and report on the activities with respect to that act. We also have established an office of coordination and accountability that provides information sessions to all our employees on the Official Languages Act, Part VII. We run sessions on Part VII for the orientation of our new employees. We run policy shops to develop policies and to look at policies from a perspective of support for our official language minority communities. We celebrate, as I mentioned, some of the special days, such as the Rendez-vous de la francophonie, and we have had dialogue sessions with our communities and our employees with respect to that act.
In addition to the champions, we have a network of official languages departmental coordinators across our business lines and across the country. We have the informal network and then, the formal network in terms of their constant talking and dealing with how to better liaise and improve.
Senator De Bané: Mr. Fedyk, you have answered extensively, giving me the point of view of the department, which is important. However, everything depends on where one sits. From the point of view of the communities, can you give me examples of things that you have done, through all those structures that you have in place, to show communities that you are proactive?
Mr. Fedyk: We consult with them, as Mr. Caron elaborated, regarding our programs and services. We have ongoing formal and informal consultations.
[Translation]
Senator De Bané: Mr. Caron, could you give us some concrete examples to show how you have been proactive in the communities? The associate deputy minister has spoken to us about what has been done within the department. I would ask you to elaborate on the measures that have been taken with your clients.
Mr. Caron: I will not discuss the Enabling Fund for Official Language Minority Communities, given that it targets communities directly. We have frequent discussions with our partner organizations concerning the administration of the program.
I could give you an example of how we seek to implement Part VII in a given program. You are perhaps familiar with the Canada Summer Jobs program. It is a program under our department that helps employers offer students summer jobs to enable them to gain experience and earn a bit of money for their studies.
To ensure that this program is useful for communities, we developed an evaluation tool for the approximately 30,000 applications we receive each year under this program. The criteria used to evaluate the applications are as follows: will the student be working in his or her second language? Will the student be working with an official language minority community? Or, will the student be participating in a project that provides services to an official language minority community? This is a way of supporting the communities in the administration of a given program.
[English]
Mr. Fedyk: Another example is our New Horizons for Seniors Program. We communicate with the various organizations — national, regional and provincial — to ensure that they can spread the word with respect to availability of this program so official language minority communities can benefit. Also, we ran training sessions on how to fill out a good application so they can be successful. We have taken the feedback into consideration in the design of our application of the New Horizons for Seniors Program. We are constantly learning and identifying best practices.
Senator De Bané: Mr. Fedyk, has your department consulted with the Department of Justice Canada about what is entailed by positive measures so that the spirit and the letter of Part VII of the act is taken into consideration? We have realized that several departments have not yet thought through what they must undertake to fulfill that section. Have you liaised with that department?
Mr. Fedyk: We have not consulted one on one, but a committee of departments is participating in the roadmap. Our department is one of those on the committee, as is the Justice Department. We have had discussions as to what it means to take positive measures in support of the act. From our perspective, we support the guideline that the Department of Canadian Heritage has developed, namely, that anything that contributes to the official language communities fostering full recognition and use of both official languages is a positive measure.
We cite some of our measures as being positive measures. We consider our enabling fund and the tables where we work with the communities with respect to economic and employment development in official language communities a positive measure.
Senator De Bané: I assume from your answer that there is an opportunity to discuss best practices for ensuring full implementation of Part VII with other federal departments?
Mr. Fedyk: Yes.
Senator De Bané: Can we say that the logical next step is that the Government of Canada make regulations governing the implementation of Part VII? I find it interesting that several departments meet together. However, when I look at the administrative regulations of Treasury Board to all departments, the regulations are a great number of volumes where everything is dictated. Every civil servant from Newfoundland and Labrador to British Columbia does the same thing. They all have all those administrative manuals. Do you think Treasury Board should add another volume of regulations concerning the implementation of that section?
When I inquire about something, I am referred to volume 32, Treasury Board regulation such and such, chapter X, et cetera. Maybe we should do the same for something so vital for the unity of our country. If the unity of our country goes out the window, then making the right choices to fulfill a productive life, all of that mandate, goes with it.
I think it is time to think about a regulatory framework so that all the departments will undertake that section. We fear for many departments. A few days ago, we had officials from another department before us. I asked them, You promised five years ago to do the following; has that been done in the last five years? The assistant deputy minister said, I will be frank with you; I have no idea.
Mr. Fedyk: That is both a big question and a complex one. From our perspective at HRSDC, we are under the accountability framework so we are one of the 32 organizations. We have a plan. We are required annually to report on results. I think we are already transparent and accountable. You can look for our annual reports. We report through the Department of Canadian Heritage who then reports through Parliament to Canadians.
For those organizations that have already been implicated by the 1994 Accountability Framework, perhaps regulations are not necessary because we are already accountable on an annual basis for our action plans and for the results achieved. That accountability is achieved in a uniform and transparent template. It is one that we all use, so we can compare initiatives and plans versus reality. We can see whether departments have met the target or whether they need additional effort. I leave it to you to decide whether other departments should be subjected to the same level of public reporting as the 32 under the accountability framework, of which we are one.
Senator De Bané: Thank you very much.
[Translation]
Senator Rivard: You piqued my curiosity with your opening remarks. I realize that all these programs are very interesting and that the budgets are allocated over five years.
There is the Roadmap framework, with a budget of $94 million over five years; the Enabling Fund for Official Language Minority Communities, with a budget of $69 million; the Family Literacy Initiative, with a budget of $7.5 million; and the Child Care Pilot Project, with a budget of $13.5 million.
You also referred to a $4 million program seeking to strengthen the capacity of non-governmental organizations that work in the area of early childhood development for official language minority communities.
If I understand correctly, all of these programs receive funding over a five-year period, but one of these programs, in partnership with Canadian Heritage, was eliminated in April 2009. Could you give us a brief overview of what this program achieved? And is it solely Canadian Heritage that will be responsible for the follow-up to this program?
Mr. Fedyk: Could you repeat the question?
Senator Rivard: One of the programs you referred to was eliminated in April 2009. It is the Interdepartmental Partnership with the Official Language Communities, in partnership with Canadian Heritage.
What were the advantages of this program? Could you provide us with a brief overview? And will Canadian Heritage take over this program, or has it been completely abolished?
The Chair: Senator Rivard, are you referring to the IPOLC?
Senator Rivard: Yes.
The Chair: It is the IPOLC program.
Senator Rivard: This program was been abolished in April 2009. Do you feel that the government should have maintained it? What are the concrete impacts of the elimination of this program?
[English]
Mr. Fedyk: Is this the interprovincial mobility of students program?
Senator Tardif: No.
Mr. Fedyk: I am confused.
Senator Tardif: I believe Heritage Canada partnered with other ministers and other departments to leverage a certain amount of money. For example, Heritage Canada could partner with Industry Canada to put forward a specific program and it was a leveraging program for monies across departments and ministries.
Mr. Fedyk: We each have our budgets from the roadmap and we collaborate with respect to research projects and with Citizenship and Immigration Canada in terms of foreign credential recognition. I am not familiar with this particular program, and I believe neither are my colleagues. Unfortunately, we will have to return to the committee with details. I apologize.
[Translation]
Senator Rivard: You may send us your answer in writing.
[English]
Mr. Fedyk: Yes.
[Translation]
Senator Losier-Cool: My first question is very specific. You may choose to reply in writing, later after the meeting. As concerns the different programs listed in the report, whether New Horizons or literacy programs, I would like to categorize them.
Does your department provide funding for francophone communities in northern New Brunswick? Is funding provided in the areas of literacy, services for senior citizens, youth employment, early childhood services, communications?
And what are the mechanisms you use? Are you familiar with the new action plan for self-sufficiency in northern New Brunswick, implemented by the provincial government? Have meetings been organized to discuss this program?
In addition, I would like to know how much money has been allocated to each of these programs. If you do not have the answers to my questions right now, I would like to receive them in writing.
[English]
Mr. Fedyk: Unfortunately, we do not have the detail with us by each region but we can provide a response in terms of what our programs support in that area of New Brunswick.
[Translation]
Senator Losier-Cool: Mr. Caron, my question concerns business internships and summer jobs for young people. Could you provide me with details concerning the funding granted in northern New Brunswick with regard to these internships? Your department called it something else, but I know that there is funding earmarked for this program.
The Chair: Do I understand that you will send this information to the committee?
Mr. Fedyk: Yes.
[English]
Senator Seidman: I am going back to your presentation, Mr. Fedyk. You say that the roadmap allocated $94 million over a five-year period to support four separate initiatives and you list the initiatives. I assume these initiatives apply to all minority language communities across the country. Is that the case?
Mr. Fedyk: Some of them are pilots, like the child care pilot. Mr. Halliwell can elaborate on the communities we are active in there. The enabling fund supports official language communities across the country; anglophones in Quebec and francophones across the country. Our literacy programs are for francophone communities outside Quebec. Our child care development is through a francophone organization. Our colleagues can elaborate if you wish details on either one of them.
Senator Seidman: To be clear, the literacy initiative is for francophone communities outside Quebec. What is the child care project?
Cliff Halliwell, Director General, Strategic Policy Research Directorate, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada: It is for minority francophone communities as well outside of Quebec, for a reason that I can explain.
Senator Seidman: I want to be clear. The enabling fund is Canada-wide, as you said. I thought you said there were four.
Ellen Healey, Director, Social Programs Division, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada: There is the early childhood development.
Senator Seidman: Is that Canada-wide as well?
Ms. Healey: Yes.
Senator Seidman: Perhaps we can come back in a minute to explain the family literacy and the child care pilot project, but I want to move along to the other examples you gave. Is the New Horizons for Seniors Program Canada- wide as well? It is.
Then you say in the province of Quebec, the department implemented a number of projects intended for anglophone minority communities. A total of 598 projects received funding totalling $5.2 million. These projects were mostly through the Canada Summer Jobs program. Can you elaborate more on these 598 projects? Were they all Canada Summer Jobs programs? Were there other projects?
Mr. Caron: Of those projects, over 500 of them are Canada Summer Job projects. Basically, they are contribution agreements with employers, whether they be not-for-profit, public sector or smaller private sector. The projects are small agreements that fund summer jobs for students. They are wage-subsidy programs, essentially.
Mr. Fedyk: The program is active throughout Canada. We only highlighted the ones that were in Quebec.
Senator Seidman: That is what is confusing me, namely, why you highlighted that piece. You say it is a Canada-wide program.
Mr. Fedyk: Yes, all those programs.
Senator Seidman: Every province has their jobs program.
Perhaps we might learn more about the family literacy initiative and the child care pilot project.
Mr. Halliwell: I can start with the child care project. It applies to francophone minority communities primarily because the problem that it was designed to deal with, namely, young kids being inadequately prepared to start into school and perform in school, seemed much more prevalent in the francophone minority communities than in the anglophone minority communities. That is probably connected to the simple fact that the minority anglophone communities in Quebec are typically of a much larger scale of community and are denser and more able to support themselves.
The anglophone communities, in Quebec as well, did not see this problem as a priority, although this project started before I joined the department. I think it was conceived at least five or six years ago. The francophone communities have been cognizant of the lack of preparation of kids for school and of a need to find some kind of solution at the child care point, before they enter formal schooling, that will improve their preparation and, to a degree, their connection to their culture as well. What is fascinating about this project is that it is a rarity in government, but should be less so. It is an attempt to conduct an experiment in which some children are given the intervention and others are not. One then sees what difference it makes. We are pleased that we were able to secure the funding to have a longer follow-up study of those kids. By the end of this summer, all the children will have had the intervention, but we will follow them to include their performance in Grade 2 to Grade 13, for example, before we have final results to see whether there is a difference. If there is a difference — and we have not yet found out because we are still testing — we want to see if the difference persists through Grade 2 as well.
The nature of the intervention is already being adopted in other minority francophone communities. Many of them have been kept in the loop on this study.
The root problem appeared not to be a problem for anglophone communities in Quebec.
Senator Seidman: Thank you. That program is an interesting one.
[Translation]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Concerning the program set up for early childhood, do you know if more young francophones have enrolled? You have invested sums of money and made efforts to implement a program, but have you seen any improvement?
In one of the reports of the Commissioner of Official Languages, a problem or shortcoming with regard to early childhood services was pointed out.
Do you know whether the number of enrolments has increased?
Mr. Halliwell: What do you mean by enrolments?
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Enrolments in French-language schools in anglophone communities.
Mr. Halliwell: With regard to this pilot project, we have just received preliminary results, that is, from the very beginning of the program. We are waiting for the preliminary results over the next two years before analyzing the concrete impact on their preparation. I understand that you are referring specifically to the impact on the choice of language of education, which is indeed extremely fascinating, but we will have to wait.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: When you receive these results, we would be very interested in having you share them with us.
[English]
Senator Seidman: Can we hear about the family literacy initiative?
Silvano Tocchi, A/Director General, Office of Literacy and Essential Skills, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada: With respect to the Family Literacy Initiative, the initiative referenced by Mr. Fedyk speaks to a series of activities that we are undertaking in francophone communities outside of Quebec. The initiative was designed in that way because when we looked at literacy rates in minority language communities, there seemed to be particular challenges present in francophone communities outside of Quebec that were not present in the same way in anglophone communities inside of Quebec.
That being said, we managed this initiative inside a broader context where we looked to support literacy and essential skills initiatives across the country. In that context, we have an initiative that specifically targets anglophone communities in Quebec. We felt that we had a vehicle by which to address those issues in that context as well.
Senator Seidman: That is excellent. Great programs.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: Before asking a question, I would like some clarification on the amounts associated with the Roadmap. You referred to four programs and amounts of money to support each one: the Enabling Fund, $69 million; the family literacy program, $7.5 million, and so forth. What I would like to know is whether the amounts associated with each program are included or are over and above the total of $94 million.
[English]
Mr. Fedyk: The $94 million is for the four major initiatives, the enabling funds.
Senator Tardif: It is not in addition? It is part of it?
Mr. Fedyk: It is part of the $94 million.
Senator Tardif: Thank you; I wanted to verify that. Can you give us information on how that money was divided province-wide and across the country?
Mr. Fedyk: Yes.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: Now, further to a question put by Senator Fortin-Duplessis concerning agreements with the provinces, you stated that your agreements are more bilateral, is that correct?
Mr. Fedyk: Yes.
Senator Tardif: Do you ensure that language clauses are included in these agreements with the provinces to guarantee services for official language minority communities in the province in question?
[English]
Mr. Fedyk: Yes; all our agreements with the provinces and territories are expected to address, as part of their terms and conditions, access to the programs in both official languages and where appropriate, consultations with the communities in their implementation. It is not an issue, but the approach is that we have arrangements with Quebec so that all our benefits are provided in both official languages where numbers warrant access to the program.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: For example, if you reach an agreement in the area of immigration with the Province of Alberta, do you ensure that the province has language clauses that oblige it to provide services to better integrate immigrants who choose French?
[English]
Mr. Fedyk: Immigration is for the Department of Immigration but in terms of our labour training programs for new agreements, access to the benefit, whether it is part of our labour market agreement with Alberta or labour market development agreement with Alberta, recognizes that services are to be provided in both official languages.
Senator Tardif: Do you have follow-ups to assure yourself that the programs are in fact respected?
Mr. Fedyk: There are ongoing consultations between the ministries and there is annual reporting in terms of indicators with respect to the clientele that benefits from the programs.
Senator Tardif: We have discussed positive measures and what you are doing in your ministry. Can you tell us what obstacles you see towards better implementation of Part VII of the act?
Mr. Fedyk: That is a good question. Rather than call them obstacles, I would label them challenges. Many challenges that we face with respect to the design and delivery of our programs are that the programs are national in approach but, as we well know, each of our official language minority communities is unique, so we try to ensure that there is sufficient flexibility in the program to allow for response to the particular needs and priorities of each of the communities. We set broad parameters with respect to the objectives of the program and then try to ensure that implementation of the program is in a manner flexible enough to be adapted to the community. That flexibility, to me, remains a challenge.
Mr. Halliwell: As well, from the perspective of Service Canada, a challenge that they had not envisaged in the middle of 2008 was coping with the enormous increase in workload that resulted from the recession. From a bureaucratic perspective, it is widely seen that the department responded well, given how much of a surprise this workload turned out to be for all concerned.
Gearing up for that kind of a caseload was clearly job number one for the department, and the implementation of the economic action plan was clearly job number one. Probably from the point of view of those who needed that help and those services, it was job number one as well. I think we have done well on that score, but it took an enormous amount of departmental attention at that time. We all live in hope that we will soon be focusing on some of those other issues.
[Translation]
Senator Losier-Cool: I would like to ask a question concerning the specific nature of the programs or their objectives. When the Department of the Environment, for example, wants to set up a project, it carries out an environmental impact assessment study, if a dam or some kind of structure somewhere is being considered, in order to determine what the environmental impact will be. What do you think of the concept of linguistic impacts on programs that would be set up by the federal government?
[English]
Mr. Fedyk: That is an excellent question and comment. In our ministry, each time a memorandum to cabinet goes forward, our group examines it for its impact from a Part VII standpoint, and then with our colleagues from the standpoint of Part IV and Part V, so all our memorandums to cabinet with respect to new policies, or changes to existing ones are examined from a linguistic lens to ensure we respect our obligations to the Official Languages Act.
Also, that is true for our implementation, once the policy is decided with respect to Treasury Board submissions, so accessing the funds to deliver the programs are also subjected to a review to ensure programs are implemented consistent with our obligations under the Official Languages Act. We agree.
[Translation]
Senator Losier-Cool: Could a linguistic impact be considered a ``positive measure''?
[English]
Mr. Fedyk: I would say that is a positive measure.
[Translation]
The Chair: I have a final question concerning positive measures.
[English]
In a nutshell, how do you define a positive measure?
Mr. Fedyk: It is as you senators have examined. Are we looking at all our policies and programs from a perspective of whether this policy or program will benefit our official language communities and promote the use and recognition of both official languages? By providing that lens or assessment in all that we do, is that part of how we look at the policy?
The Chair: Is there anything else to add?
[Translation]
Mr. Halliwell: As a researcher, I would say that a positive measure is a measure that makes a difference, especially for evaluations of pilot projects that are geared to this aspect, namely, to determine whether what people think can truly make a difference. This is very important, I believe that there are methodologies around this approach and experiences that should be conducted with other actions.
This is a way of finding this out, and especially, it is an approach that could be used as part of targeted policies with a view to making a difference with regard to a specific group.
Senator De Bané: Would you also agree that, within this concept of positive measures, an important element is proactive action, where people take the initiative to act and develop policies that are also proactive, that is, where an initiative is taken?
Mr. Halliwell: I would say yes, because ultimately — and still in my capacity as researcher — I believe that it is our community of researchers who identified the problem thanks to a pilot project. In fact, such an approach was advocated. This is not something that was requested by the communities at the outset, but we work very hard with them. They became very interested and we would not have succeeded without their support.
Senator De Bané: I suspect that Mr. Halliwell is not only a very competent researcher and academic, given his answer, but also a man of action.
The Chair: Thank you very much for appearing before this committee.
We will now suspend proceedings while we wait for our next witnesses to arrive.
(The committee suspended.)
(The committee resumed.)
The Chair: Honourable senators, we are resuming our business. The committee is currently studying the implementation of Part VII of the Official Languages Act within various federal institutions.
We welcome representatives of Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada to discuss this implementation within their institution.
We have with us Mr. Gérald Cossette, Associate Deputy Minister, Ms. Monica Janecek, Director, Employment Equity, Official Languages, Staffing, Corporate Resourcing Division, and Mr. Alexandre Drago, Senior Advisor, Intergovernmental Relations Division and former Departmental Coordinator for Part VII of the Official Languages Act.
Ladies and gentlemen, the committee thanks you for having accepted the invitation to appear. I would now ask you to speak and the senators will then ask you questions.
Gérald Cossette, Associate Deputy Minister, Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada: Madam Chair, honourable senators, it is my pleasure to be here today to speak to you about the initiatives Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada has put in place to implement Part VII of the Official Languages Act.
For the past two years, my department has been undergoing an important transformation process. We are focusing our activities on certain key priorities, including our commitment to the Official Languages Act.
[English]
As you know, our department is one of the 32 institutions designated by the 1994 accountability framework for the implementation of section 41 and section 42 of the Official Languages Act. Since our department is under this framework, we must develop an action plan and submit an annual report of our achievements to the Department of Canadian Heritage. Since 2005, the law has required that all federal institutions take positive measures.
Our department works in close collaboration with the Department of Canadian Heritage, which plays a coordinating role among federal institutions, developing exemplary practices to facilitate the implementation of section 41.
[Translation]
To that effect, in 2007 we adopted an action plan to better coordinate our efforts regarding Part VII.
The main objectives of the plan are to put initiatives in place to raise awareness among department employees; ensure better coordination of department activities related to Part VII; strengthen ties with minority communities; favour certain partnerships with other federal institutions, such as Canadian Heritage and Citizenship and Immigration Canada; and maximize opportunities provided by the Speakers Program to establish ties with the communities.
Allow me to note a few achievements. First, to encourage greater employee mobilization, we have created a network of sector coordinators responsible for section 41 at headquarters. The aim is to more effectively coordinate the contribution of a dozen key divisions responsible for major sectors, such as La Francophonie or the regional offices.
We have since broadened our efforts and set up a network that includes representatives of all branches at headquarters, the regional offices and our mission abroad. This network deals with all aspects of the Official Languages Act.
[English]
Our department participates in all the meetings of the federal government's network of section 41 coordinators. We also participate in the interdepartmental working groups on culture promotion, which increase the opportunities for meeting and sharing with minority communities.
In June 2010, the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade will host the meeting with the section 41 coordinators from all departments. The meeting will focus on how we can work better in promoting Canada's linguistic duality internationally. Moreover, our participation on the Citizenship and Immigration Canada committee to implement the strategic plan to promote immigration to francophone minority communities allows us to contribute through our initiatives to recruit international students.
We have established relationships with a number of organizations representing the communities, including le Réseau de développement économique et d'employabilité and the Quebec community groups network to establish dialogue and information-sharing on our respective mandates and priorities.
[Translation]
Through our Speakers Program, we have contacted many communities, including the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada, to inform them of the program and invite them to plan an event or a conference.
We have arranged meetings with members of the Fédération des francophones de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador and the Société Saint-Thomas-d'Aquin.
[English]
The department's regional offices also play a critical role in supporting linguistic minorities. They contribute financially to community projects through the Invest in Canada program. For example, assistance was provided for the development of an Internet portal for a number of bilingual municipalities in Manitoba.
Our department also contributed to the organization of the fourth World Acadian Congress by lending an employee from the Office of Protocol to help the organizers manage the protocol issues. More recently, we have set out a number of awareness initiatives for managers and employees at headquarters related to Part VII.
Last fall, the department held a leadership conference that brought together 350 senior public servants from headquarters. Our heads of mission also joined in the conference by telephone. On that occasion, we were pleased to welcome the Commissioner of Official Languages, who gave a speech on the critical role played by our department in the promotion of Canada's linguistic duality in the world. He effectively sensitized our executive cadre on the pivotal role they each play to fulfill that commitment.
[Translation]
We have an in-house communication strategy to draw all employees' attention to Part VII. The deputy ministers and the official languages champion communicate with all staff on a regular basis.
We also arrange in-house awareness activities, including information kiosks and workshops. Last January, we organized activities in connection with the 40th anniversary of the Official Languages Act.
We have also set up a program for assistant deputy minister regional engagement champions. Minority communities are one of the target clients of this program.
Each year, the department plays a very active role in promoting La Francophonie. To celebrate the International Day of La Francophonie, the department provides financial support to the mission so they can organize or contribute to a variety of events, ranging from receptions to film festivals.
When planning its activities and programs, the Commonwealth and Francophone Affairs Division takes into account the importance of involving francophone and Acadian communities in international francophone celebrations.
It is worth noting that during the Francophone Summit in Quebec City in 2008, representatives of the Société nationale de l'Acadie were part of the Canadian delegation and attended some closed-door sessions.
That same year, our department was very active in promoting the 400th anniversary of Quebec City around the world through the network of Canadian missions.
This year, we marked the International Day of La Francophonie with an event in support of the Haitian people. The Minister of Foreign Affairs and Haiti's Chargée d'affaires in Ottawa, Her Excellency Ms. Gissel-Menos, spoke eloquently about the deep ties between our two countries, but also between Canada and the entire French-speaking world.
[English]
Last February, DFAIT made numerous efforts to ensure that Canada showed an exemplary level of bilingualism in its activities at the 2010 Winter Olympic Games. For example, all promotional products related to the 2010 Reasons To Do Business in Canada program were in both official languages.
[Translation]
We are well aware that there is still work to be done to implement Part VII of the Official Languages Act.
We would like to continue along the lines of the initiatives we have already begun. We are evaluating how to raise even more awareness in the missions abroad. We continue to be open to dialogue and sharing with official language minority communities.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Welcome; we were looking forward to having you.
I notice that the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade has received no funding under the Roadmap for Canadian Linguistic Duality between 2008 and 2013.
Moreover, my review of your department's budget documents has not made it possible for me to determine how much the department is spending on official languages within its regular programming.
Could you clarify this point and tell us why there is this lack of transparency on the part of your department in this area?
But before you respond, I would like to tell you that I find your presentation quite positive as regards the steps that you have taken to apply Part VII of the Official Languages Act.
Mr. Cossette: I am not in a position to provide you with detailed data on the department's spending for official languages. Obviously, there is the official language training program for staff. Funds are also disbursed to the various missions abroad to organize activities related to the Journée de la Francophonie.
Regarding the budgetary structure for the department as a whole, we can forward information to you regarding all of our activities.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Thank you. What type of relationship does your department have with the Government of Quebec to implement Part VII of the Official Languages Act?
Mr. Cossette: There is no formal agreement with the Government of Quebec in this regard. Obviously, in our missions abroad, when there is a need, we deal with Quebec government representatives on-site to organize functions.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Do you do the same with the other provinces?
Mr. Cossette: It depends where and what the various missions organize in the countries they are in. There is not necessarily a plan for the entire network.
Senator Tardif: You indicated in your presentation that you are making an effort to promote Canadian linguistic duality throughout the world. You also indicated that you showed an exemplary level of bilingualism in your activities at the 2010 Winter Olympic Games. You referred to the 2010 Reasons To Do Business in Canada program. What steps are you taking to ensure respect for both official languages during the G8 meetings and in all communications to the public?
Mr. Cossette: The Olympic Games were public events, in other words speeches by the president of VANOC, Government of Canada representatives and others are public, whereas G8 and G20 summits are closed sessions.
In the context of press conferences the Prime Minister and other ministers may give, it is expected that federal officials would be in a position to respond to questions in both official languages. However, the summit is not a public event. It is not open to the general public. The sessions will be closed and a number of languages will be interpreted during both of these events.
Senator Tardif: What arrangements have you made for the interpreters? Do you have a budget for that? You will be providing translation in both official languages? Will you also be providing translation for languages other than the two official languages in our country?
Mr. Cossette: For both events, the Secretariat for the G8 and G20 summits has a budget which does indeed include simultaneous interpretation into several languages.
Senator Tardif: How large is this budget?
Mr. Cossette: At this point, I am not in a position to give you a figure. Twenty countries have been invited to the G20 Summit aside from guests who are not formally part of the G20. Therefore, we will only be able to determine the final budget once these countries will have confirmed their attendance and specified their translation needs.
Senator Tardif: Is there always translation between the two official languages? Is that a priority? For instance, you provide translation from Arabic into French or Arabic into English?
Mr. Cossette: There may possibly be 18 to 20 languages, so, French and English will be included among the languages that will be translated.
Senator Tardif: Very well. Can you tell me how many Canadian ambassadors are currently bilingual?
Monica Janecek, Director, Employment Equity, Official Languages, Staffing, Corporate Resourcing Division, Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada: All heads of mission are bilingual and we ensure they have obtained their level of bilingualism before they depart on a mission. These positions are similar to those of EXs, level CBC.
Senator Tardif: Heads of mission are not ambassadors.
Ms. Janecek: Yes.
Senator Tardif: So, all diplomats have —
Senator De Bané: Is Canada's ambassador to Washington, Mr. Doer, bilingual?
Ms. Janecek: We require that all of our employees obtain bilingualism before they leave for missions abroad.
Senator De Bané: Yes, but those that are appointed by order in council, they are appointed by the government, not the department.
Ms. Janecek: There were some cases, but they were given language training regardless. Perhaps they do not have the training required for a C level in oral expression, but before they leave they are offered training. I know that such cases exist.
Senator De Bané: Are you telling my colleague that all ambassadors are bilingual? That Mr. Doer, our ambassador in Washington is bilingual?
Ms. Janecek: They have knowledge of both official languages before they leave.
Mr. Cossette: Not all heads of mission. All heads of mission are appointed by order in council, some of these individuals do not have a CBC level.
That said, in missions like Washington, London or Paris for instance, if the mission head is an anglophone, his number two will be a francophone. Therefore, in Washington, you have Mr. Doer, and the second in command at the embassy is Mr. Guy Saint-Jacques. If you go to London, the head is Mr. Wright and then you have Claude Boucher. So what we try to do, in large missions where often the appointments are so-called political ones, is have the second in command always be someone whose first language is the other official language.
Senator Losier-Cool: This is your department's policy?
Mr. Cossette: That is the practice. Historically, this practice has become entrenched in the last several years.
Senator Tardif: Our ambassadors reflect our country, our history, our culture and our values. I believe it is important, when heads of mission are appointed at the highest levels, that these people be fluent in Canada's two official languages.
Senator Losier-Cool: I would simply like to add something to what Senator Tardif said, namely that the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages received, in August 2009, a complaint from the Fondation de la langue française in Quebec, calling upon the government to ensure that our highest-ranking officials abroad be bilingual, as you have just said. I am pleased that this is the way things are done.
To begin, I would like to thank your department for participating in the Congrès mondial acadien. You mentioned this in your presentation. I spent two very intense weeks at the congress, and I can guarantee that the presence of your department was greatly appreciated.
I know that officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade will go to Haiti this week. I hope that Canada will still consider Haiti as a priority. Haiti is a member of the Francophonie, and I believe that Canada bears a responsibility for this country. We cannot wait for France to step in; it is up to Canada to look after the reconstruction of Haiti, as a member of the Francophonie, and to ensure that Haiti is reconstructed with the participation of all Haitians.
I will now move on to the issue of official languages. More and more francophone immigrants are coming to Canada because the francophone population is growing in this country. I do not know whether you can answer my question, or whether I should put it to the officials of Citizenship and Immigration Canada. Are immigration officials working in Canada's missions abroad, whose mandate is to promote Canada, bilingual, to ensure that we attract francophones to francophone communities outside Quebec?
Mr. Cossette: I would prefer it if the officials from Citizenship and Immigration Canada answered that question. We can provide you with figures, if you want, with regard to the number of Citizenship and Immigration Canada officials that are posted abroad, as well as their linguistic profile. We can find that information and send it to you.
Senator Losier-Cool: Thank you. I will ask my question when we hear from representatives from Citizenship and Immigration Canada.
Senator De Bané: Mr. Cossette, I was pleased to hear you talk about the role of the department, as it relates to projecting Canada's image abroad, in your presentation. You mentioned, amongst other things, the speech given by the official languages commissioner when you invited him to speak to employees of your department.
You summarized his presentation in your opening statement this way, and I quote:
The Commissioner of Official Languages, who gave a speech on the critical role played by our department in the promotion of Canada's linguistic duality in the world.
Mr. Deputy Minister, what troubles me is that here, in Ottawa, there are over 100 foreign embassies, as well as many consular offices located in Canada's major cities. Every day, I see the signs posted on these embassies in Ottawa, most of which completely ignore the existence of both official languages.
When I travel to Paris, I see the various embassies from countries around the world, and on the signs posted on these embassies, there is the official language of the country in question, but also the language of the country I am in, namely France.
But here in Canada, signs are only posted in English or, if there is any French, the lettering is microscopic, as is the case with the U.S. embassy.
The Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade is responsible for protocol, and each embassy must deal with this department. Perhaps it is time to tell the various embassies that the Canadian Constitution establishes both French and English as Canada's two official languages, that they have equal status, and that embassies will have to post their signs in both languages if they want to be perceived as being embassies and high commissions which follow the basic rules of politeness.
Is there any way to get them to do so? As the official languages commissioner pointed out, you play a vital role in projecting Canada's image abroad. Who is going to tell those embassies, that have been in Ottawa for years, that they must post their signs in both official languages?
Something happened in 1982, and it is high time that we follow up on that event. We now have two official languages, and I hope you will confirm that I made you aware of this issue, that you will study it and report on it, as well.
Mr. Cossette: I can assure Senator De Bané that we will study the matter and report on it. I think it is appropriate to ask these foreign missions to respect the bilingual character of Canada and to try, to the greatest extent possible, to post their signs in both official languages.
Some foreign missions in Canada already do so. As far as the others are concerned, perhaps the time has come to be a little more aggressive in telling them that they are welcome to do so, too.
Senator De Bané: On behalf of all committee members, I can say without the slightest doubt that they admire what you said in your statement. I have been working as a parliamentarian in Ottawa for 42 years, and it saddens me greatly to see that not much has changed as far as the signs on embassies are concerned.
I am very pleased with this statement, and with your unconditional commitment. Senator Fortin-Duplessis, the deputy minister deserves our admiration, does he not?
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Yes, truly.
Mr. Cossette: That being said, I cannot guarantee any results, but we surely can try.
Senator De Bané: When you talk, ambassadors listen because they know they have to go through your department. So when your department sends them instructions, you can be sure that they will be followed.
Senator Tardif: I would like to come back to the issue of our highest-ranking, and second highest ranking heads of mission, and official languages. For example, if the second highest ranking head of mission is a francophone and he would like to speak to an ambassador in French, but the ambassador does not speak French, his language rights have been violated, is that not so?
Mr. Cossette: Very few heads of mission do not understand French. Some do not speak it, or understand French poorly, because they were recently appointed, or because they are not government officials. Consequently this might be because they come from different backgrounds and are selected for their personal attributes and their professional history.
That being said, it is expected, and a given, that within the department people have the right to speak the language of their choice, be it English or French.
Senator Tardif: For example, if Ambassador Doer in Washington meets with the ambassador of France, which language will they speak?
Mr. Cossette: They will speak English. But there are very few ambassadors who cannot speak French.
Senator Tardif: I would like to talk about the international repercussions following the elimination of the Francophone Promotion Fund. What measures have you taken to ensure that the impact of this decision will not be too disastrous for our image?
Mr. Cossette: Are you referring to the Francophone Promotion Fund? I have to admit that I am not familiar with that initiative.
Senator Losier-Cool: It is an international fund.
Senator Tardif: Yes, an international one.
Alexandre Drago, Senior Advisor, Intergovernmental Relations Division, Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada: I can say a few words about this issue. I know that, several years ago, there was a fund like that. I was the coordinator within the department for that file, and we made sure that the Francophonie Affairs Division remained very proactive in promoting the Journée internationale de la Francophonie, as well as a series of activities related to the international Francophonie.
As Mr. Cossette mentioned in his presentation, each year there are a series of events, receptions and movie festivals which are held in many countries, and the Francophonie Affairs Division supports these initiatives.
Senator Tardif: I would like to come back to the issue of ``positive measures''. Since you talked about these measures a little earlier, what ``positive measures'' have you taken with Canada's official language minority communities?
Mr. Cossette: One of the programs we have at the department is the regional champions program. Most assistant deputy ministers are responsible for representing their department within a province. For example, one of our assistant deputy ministers was from Newfoundland. Therefore, his responsibility was to go to Newfoundland once in a while to meet with the various business communities and provincial authorities.
Within the framework of this initiative, we asked mission staff to contact minority official language communities and to offer them their services, in case they wanted to hear presentations on Canada's foreign policy or the way the department works, or on other matters.
Therefore, we have an approach which is based on speaking to communities, and we continue to do so. We are acting more proactively by offering them our services. When ambassadors visit a region, we can organize an individual meeting with the ambassador, or have him meet a larger group. We can also adapt the presentations to better meet the needs of each community.
These events happen much more on the east coast than elsewhere in the country, given the vitality of the Acadian community in eastern Canada. But this program is available for all minority official language communities. We are now much more proactive in letting communities know that this service exists.
Senator Tardif: Is this a service which sends out speakers?
Mr. Cossette: Yes, it is a service which sends out speakers and organizes exchanges.
The Chair: Mr. Cossette, in 2007, the official languages commissioner published a study in which he made several recommendations to the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. When you receive this kind of report, do you take the recommendations into account? Do you conduct an analysis? Do you prepare a plan of action based on the recommendations? What happens after this kind of report is made public?
Mr. Cossette: Whether the report comes from the Commissioner of Official Languages or from any other parliamentary agent, indeed, the department has the responsibility to analyze the report and respond with a strategy that addresses the issues raised.
Consequently, depending on the issues which were identified, we ask the department's senior officials to develop a list of corrective measures which will then be implemented. Senior managers are responsible for ensuring that the recommendations are, indeed, implemented.
The Chair: As far as the 2007 report is concerned, do you have a document outlining strategies for action?
For example, the commissioner recommended that any document produced in a language other than French or English should contain a summary in English and in French to illustrate the quality of our two official languages. This was one of his recommendations. Was each of his recommendations analyzed and, based on that analysis, has your department produced a plan of action?
Mr. Cossette: That is how we proceed.
The Chair: Could we receive a copy of it?
Ms. Janecek: We followed up with the Commissioner of Official Languages. He made about 28 recommendations and they all have been implemented. There is no problem, we will provide you with that.
The Chair: Can you send us everything?
Ms. Janecek: Yes.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: I have an additional question on this subject. Earlier, you mentioned to Senator Tardif that, regarding the G8 and G20 meetings, if a document is produced in a language other than French or English, a brief summary in French and in English would be included. Mr. Deputy Minister, have you seen any progress in this regard since the commissioner raised the matter?
Mr. Cossette: There has been progress within the department. We are making efforts to ensure that the documents will be produced in both official languages, and that they will be written in good French.
Be it on the Internet or on paper, most of the internal and external publications will be produced in both official languages. In the English document, there will not be a French summary, but the document itself will be available in French. Therefore, every public document of the department will be available in both languages, as well as on the Internet.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Therefore, we can say that there has been progress.
Mr. Cossette: Yes, absolutely.
The Chair: Why did you decide not to include a summary in English and in French with each document? Based on my experience, in most cases, people will ask for the document in English, but not in both languages. I personally will request both language versions, as a matter of principle, but in reality, most of the time, people will ask for documents in English.
In that case, can we actually say we are promoting Canada's two official languages, if we do not include, with every document, a brief summary in both official languages? What do you think about this?
Mr. Cossette: I believe this is not done simply because the documents are provided in both official languages, but nothing prevents us from doing so.
The Chair: Do you think it is a good idea?
Mr. Cossette: Yes, this is a communication practice we could adopt.
Senator Tardif: I certainly support our chair's recommendation because, once again, I believe that we are not only responsible for creating ``positive measures'' but also to promote our two official languages across the country.
I would like to come back to the G8 and G20 meetings. Will bilingual security agents be hired for those two events?
Mr. Cossette: Thousands of police officers will work at both events. Since these officers will come from across Canada, it is impossible for all of them to be bilingual.
On the site closest to where the events will take place, the RCMP will decide how to proceed. The selection of officers is based on their technical expertise, and not on their language skills. I cannot guarantee, Madam Senator, that the officers working closest to the site will be bilingual.
Senator Tardif: I understand, Mr. Deputy Minister, but unfortunately we saw an example of this in Vancouver, two or three years ago, where one person was detained by mistake because of poor comprehension of the language. Therefore, I encourage you to study the situations where there are greater risks, perhaps in airports or when people are arriving, and to make sure, at least in strategic locations, that people will be able to work in both official languages of this land.
Mr. Cossette: I have taken note of your recommendation and I will not fail to transmit it to those who are in charge of security.
Senator De Bané: Mr. Deputy Minister, with regard to publication in both official languages that we discussed earlier, I think that there are two main alternatives, one of them has been called in the United States the Equal but Separate option, which means one version in French and one in English.
Here, over many years, we have said no to that alternative. Fortunately, in the Department of Justice, the rule is still being followed: in the same volume, both versions are present. As we heard earlier, if each of the two versions was published in a distinct volume, there would be a serious risk that one of the versions would be widely distributed whereas the other version would not. This is the reason why, where our laws are concerned, we said that both languages have the same value, and the judge must take both versions into account to understand what the legislator had in mind. Both versions are there.
Perhaps it would cost more money to have both versions in the same publication, but your department would thus become a true voice for the French and English fact everywhere in Canada and abroad.
I am afraid that an English version containing with a few paragraphs in French may not reach the desired objective. I have participated in many international conferences in various capacities and I noted that 95 per cent of the time, English is the language used in all these international meetings. If Canada really wants to project to the outside world this linguistic duality that is enshrined in the country's supreme legislation, I would like very much, Mr. Cossette, for you to study closely both the advantages and the costs of adopting such a formula. Let both languages be equal, but moreover let them be in the same publication, tumble format, and then you would really be a voice for the linguistic duality of Canada. And you will receive all our admiration one more time.
Mr. Cossette: This is a tall order.
Senator De Bané: No. It was like that for many years. When I came to the Senate, both versions were in the same volume for government documents.
At a certain point in time, someone said that so many could be published in English and so many could be published in French, and if each language were done separately, we could save a few pennies. No doubt this is so, but linguistic duality is supposed to be a fundamental feature of Canada, and its meaning must be recognized.
Mr. Cossette: Obviously, there was a change from written documents towards electronic documents. Consequently, electronic documents are available in both languages. However, a problem arises because of the fact that the Web page will always be in either one or the other language.
Senator De Bané: Yes, but we simply have to select either English or French. It is perfect.
Mr. Cossette: The fact remains nonetheless that the first image is either in English or in French, according to the choice that is made, but the Web page itself — unfortunately — is not presented in both languages.
Senator De Bané: Nothing of that should be changed. I understand that. I am concerned about the written document.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator De Bané: I would like to thank Mr. Cossette for his commitment to ensuring that all the embassies in Ottawa and all the consulates across the land be instructed to post up their information in both official languages on an equal basis. That will be a great day.
The Chair: I thank you all and I wish you all success.
(The committee adjourned.)