Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Official Languages
Issue 2 - Evidence - Meeting of October 27, 2011
OTTAWA, Thursday, October 27, 2011
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages met this day at 9 a.m. to study the application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives under it, as well as the use of the Internet, new media and social media, and the respect for Canadians' language rights.
Senator Maria Chaput (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Welcome to the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages. I am Senator Maria Chaput from Manitoba, the chair of this committee. Before I introduce the witnesses joining us today, I would like to invite the members of the committee who are here to introduce themselves.
Senator Poirier: Senator Rose-May Poirier from New Brunswick.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Suzanne Fortin-Duplessis from Quebec.
Senator Tardif: Claudette Tardif from Alberta.
Senator Dawson: Dennis Dawson from Quebec.
The Chair: Today, we welcome the Honourable Tony Clement, President of the Treasury Board, and representatives from the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat. Welcome to all.
[English]
It is with pleasure that the committee welcomes you here today, and I would like to thank you for being with us this morning.
[Translation]
The Treasury Board Secretariat is responsible for developing and co-ordinating federal principles and programs in order to ensure that the official languages are respected in federal institutions. It oversees their actions in terms of communications with and services to the public, language of work, and equitable participation of francophones and anglophones in the public service.
This appearance is an opportunity for the committee to hear the President of the Treasury Board talk about the annual report tabled by the Secretariat in Parliament in June 2011, as well as other issues relating to official languages within its mandate.
As you know, the committee has recently decided to undertake an extensive study on the use of the Internet, new media and social media, and the respect for Canadians' language rights.
The committee hopes that the President of the Treasury Board will be able to contribute to this work. The committee is aware that officials from the Secretariat will also appear on Monday to discuss this topic and they will be able to provide more information.
The committee also intends to look at Air Canada's obligations under the Official Languages Act. The committee hopes that the President of the Treasury Board will be able to contribute to this study as well.
Mr. Clement, thank you once again for accepting our invitation to appear today. I would now like to invite you to take the floor. The senators will ask you questions afterwards.
Tony Clement, P.C., M.P., President of the Treasury Board: Thank you, Madam Chair. Honourable Senators, thank you for inviting me to appear before you today to discuss, among other topics, the latest annual report on official languages.
I am pleased that Daphne Meredith, the Chief Human Resources Officer, has accompanied me today, along with Marc Tremblay, Executive Director of Official Languages; Corinne Charette, Chief Information Officer; and Mimi Lepage, Executive Director of Information and Privacy Policy.
[English]
First, let me quickly explain our mandate. The Treasury Board Secretariat is responsible for developing and coordinating policies and programs related to Parts IV, V and VI of the Official Languages Act.
It is mandated to help institutions that are subject to the act to serve Canadians in the official language of their choice.
The Treasury Board Secretariat also ensures that federal institutions create a work environment conducive to the use of both official languages in regions designated as bilingual for language-of-work purposes. It ensures the provision of equal employment and advancement opportunities to English-speaking and French-speaking Canadians. This contributes to the building of a work force that reflects the presence of francophones and anglophones in our country.
Last June, I tabled the Annual Report on Official Languages for 2009-10. The theme was the language of work, and it covered the application of Parts IV, V and VI of the Official Languages Act.
I am pleased that the report took note of the progress within the federal public service in several areas. For example, the percentage of employees meeting the language requirements of their position rose from 92.5 per cent in 2009 to 93.2 per cent. In regions designated bilingual for language-of-work purposes, 92.7 per cent of supervising staff met the language requirements of their positions.
[Translation]
In designated bilingual areas, the vast majority of federal organizations had efficiently put in place methods to promote the use of both official languages in the workplace. For example, official language champions played an increasingly active role as ambassadors of linguistic duality and there was greater collaboration between departments.
The report also underlined areas for improvement. In particular, organizations were expected to encourage their employees to use the official language of their choice in meetings.
[English]
Finally, the report highlighted good practices around the language of work, such as the use of simultaneous translation in meetings, the organization of language-related workshops and the sending of regular reminders about language use.
Let me tell you about a few more things my department is doing to help federal institutions as they seek to improve their performance around official languages.
The Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat advocates the sharing of best practices. To this end, it organized a number of events during the 2009-10 period. They included the annual conference of official language champions, with the participation of approximately 70 champions and co-champions, and the Best Practices Forum, where organizations shared information about activities and initiatives they had put forth to support the official languages program.
TBS also developed a grid to help federal institutions ensure their programs and services conformed with the Supreme Court decision in the Caldech case. As you are aware, this ruling dealt with the government's constitutional duty to provide services of equal quality in both official languages.
I would like to turn now to an area of interest to all of us, as you mentioned, Madam Chair: social media.
My department is developing guidelines on the use of social media as a means of communication between government and Canadians and also within the public service. The guidelines will also cover social media as a means of service delivery to the public and as a working tool among employees. A key part of the guidelines concerns how to apply the requirements respecting both language of work and the communications with the public to social media.
Finally, the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat is undertaking a wide-ranging exercise, the review of the implementation of the official languages regulations to do with communications with the public and service delivery. This exercise, which takes place every 10 years, consists of a review of the linguistic obligations of federal offices in light of the most recent national census. This review will be conducted between January 2013 and fall 2015. It aims to harmonize the government's linguistic obligations with demographic shifts in the Canadian population that could affect service demand.
[Translation]
We expect all institutions will maintain their efforts with regard to official languages, and that these efforts will bear fruit so that employees continue to express themselves in their preferred official language without any hesitation. Linguistic duality and the values it incorporates are fundamental to a modern and efficient public service.
[English]
Thank you again, Madam Chair, for the opportunity to speak to you today, and I certainly welcome your questions.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Minister.
[Translation]
Honourable colleagues, I would like to remind you that the meeting with the President of the Treasury Board is one hour long and it will finish at 10 a.m. So I ask the members to keep their questions short and concise. I also ask the witnesses to be brief.
I will give about five minutes to each senator for questions and answers from the witnesses. If we have some time left, we can have a second round.
Senator Tardif will ask the first question.
Senator Tardif: Mr. Minister, you were right when you said that the Treasury Board Secretariat is responsible for the development and general co-ordination of the federal principles and programs relating to the application of official languages specifically under Part IV (communications with and services to the public), Part V (language of work), and Part VI (equitable participation of English-speaking and French-speaking Canadians).
You also play a role in implementing Part VII, the advancement of French and English, as well as enhancing the vitality of official language minority communities.
Our committee prepared a report in June 2010 on the implementation of Part VII of the Official Languages Act. In our report, we clearly saw that many federal institutions were not aware of their role in implementing Part VII. There was inequality in the implementation between federal institutions and agencies. In his latest annual report, the commissioner also found that there were inconsistencies in implementing Part VII from one department to another. He recommended that Part VIII of the Official Languages Act be turned over to the Treasury Board, meaning that the act be amended in order to assign more responsibilities to the Treasury Board. So your responsibilities are: to establish policies to give effect to Part VII; to recommend regulations to the Governor in Council to give effect to Part VII; to issue directives to give effect to Part VII; and to provide information to the public and to federal institutions relating to the policies and programs that give effect to Part VII.
Do you agree with the recommendation of the Commissioner of Official Languages?
Mr. Clement: Yes, I can tell you that it is crucial to understand that all federal institutions play a key role in implementing the act internally, and it is not only the responsibility of the Treasury Board, of course. Every institution, every department is supposed to have a responsibility; that is important. But it is definitely possible for the Treasury Board to play a role in implementing Part VII in federal institutions. Of course, in terms of the rights of francophone and/or anglophone communities, it is important that this duality be reflected in the documents prepared by every department.
[English]
We do have a role to keep supporting that. I would balance that with, of course, the obligation of each department and agency within government, that they have their own responsibility. Merely because we have an overarching responsibility does not mean we can forget that each institution has an obligation under the act as well.
Senator Tardif: Mr. Minister, I understand what you are saying. You are absolutely right that every department and agency has responsibility. Part of the problem is that no central agency coordinates and provides a direction and authority. That, I think, is the largest weakness in the governance structure of the application of the Official Languages Act. There is no central department or agency to do so.
It seems to me that the Treasury Board Secretariat, in its role and in its authority, would add to this governance structure, and I would hope that you would take that under advisement because I think it is clearly lacking.
[Translation]
Mr. Clement: As I said, it is important to promote the role of the official languages throughout the public service.
[English]
As I said, we have this official languages champions promotion initiative, where we highlight and champion best practices. We try to share best practices across the public service. I think that is an appropriate role for Treasury Board Secretariat, and it also stimulates the leadership within the public service to take this aspect of their responsibilities quite seriously.
I do think that is an appropriate role. I guess I am hesitant to accord to the Treasury Board Secretariat a top-down role where, if the impact of that is to reduce the pressure across the system, people then say, well, ``Treasury Board Secretariat is responsible for that.'' I think that would actually result in a net loss in the system. I think it is important to keep individual responsibility across the departments front and centre, so that they do not think it is somebody else's responsibility, and, therefore, gaps do occur.
Senator Tardif: I think absolutely that things are now falling in the cracks. There is a lack of coherence and a lack of continuity. Some federal agencies are doing quite well applying Part VII of the act and encouraging positive measures; others are not.
While it is very difficult for one minister to tell another minister, ``You are not doing your job,'' it is the ministry next door, when somebody above gives the signal, I think a lot more attention is paid to it, and I would hope that is a role that you would consider. As it is now, it has been five years since modifications to Part VII of the act have been brought into force in the Official Languages Act, and many federal institutions still do not know what the term ``putting forward positive measures'' means and the impact of that for the development and the vitality of official language minority communities.
Obviously, there is a lack there, and, Mr. Minister, without taking away the responsibility, it seems to me there is a way of putting forward management practices that recognize the important role that every department and government institution has to play while having somebody take full ownership and responsibility.
Mr. Clement: Thank you. I certainly have noted your concerns, senator, and take them under advisement. In order to respond completely, I would return to my opening remarks, where, when we look at the 2009-10 annual report on official languages, there was progress that had been made in terms of language of work, in that 93.2 per cent of employees meet the language requirements of their position, which is above that found in 2009. In regions designated bilingual for language-of-work purposes, 92.7 per cent of supervising staff met the language requirements of their positions. I think those are good things. I always try to find glasses that are half full — or 92.7 per cent full; certainly that is not to detract from the work that still has to be done, but I believe we are on the right track.
[Translation]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Welcome and thank you for accepting the committee's invitation, Mr. Minister.
Just now, on page 5 of your presentation, you talked about the use of social media. This fall, our committee will examine the use of the Internet, new media and social media, and the respect for Canadians' language rights. But it would seem that this Internet culture is not really available to francophones living in a minority community.
Yet we know that a minority culture is very different from a majority culture, and it needs to be expressed in terms that are familiar to the people belonging to the minority.
Before asking ourselves who is responsible for promoting this culture, is it not more appropriate to try and get to know the culture first and become involved?
In your opinion, can all francophones across Canada use the Internet, new media and social media, regardless of their status or place of residence?
Mr. Clement: Thank you, senator. I agree that it is important to develop tools that are compatible with social media. As I said before, the Treasury Board Secretariat has developed draft guidelines for the external use of Web 2.0, in order to better define the obligations related to communications with and services to the public.
There will certainly be an appendix on official languages to provide additional guidance to federal institutions, to recommend best practices and to give advice on how to comply with official languages requirements when using the Internet and social media, such as blogs, wikis, YouTube, Facebook, and so on. Those are obviously new practices, but I can tell you that there is an obligation to have guidelines for the current situation.
[English]
I am welcoming the deliberations of the Senate as well. If you have some suggestions or thoughts on these matters, I am very interested that you are taking this committee to examine these issues as well. It is new for all of us, and I think it is something that we have to turn our minds to.
Just by way of anecdote, I was doing a Parks Canada event in my riding, and I was very impressed that Parks Canada was tweeting as I was doing the park opening, in both official languages. My tweets were coming in both languages from Parks Canada, and I thought it was an excellent signal for their audience that they are prepared to do that.
I think these things are happening, but I think some guidelines would be helpful.
[Translation]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: In your opinion, do the social and new media that the federal government is currently using meet the linguistic needs of francophones in a minority situation?
Mr. Clement: What I can say is that the official languages need not prevent Canadians from using the Internet, new media and social media. We have to have some tools, of course. But we are faced with a challenge and it is important to find solutions.
[English]
All I can say is that we are working on it. Let me state again that there should not be barriers to use of the Internet, new media or social media as a result of these requirements. At the same time, there are opportunities.
[Translation]
Communicating promptly and directly with employees and with Canadians is a challenge, but it is also a great opportunity to promote democracy, to promote communication between the public and the Canadian government. It is very important for the future.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Mr. Minister, I think there is a hitch, because remote communities do not have exactly the same services as those living in or around cities.
Twelve years ago, telephone and Internet companies were authorized to charge a bit more for their Internet services in big cities in order to be in a better position to set up Internet services in the regions. And we know for a fact that it never happened. People in remote regions have a hard time accessing the Internet. And those who do have access do not have access to high-speed Internet.
Do you think that governments at that time should have required companies to provide high-speed Internet in the regions and should have done a follow-up afterwards to make sure that the companies did their job?
Mr. Clement: Since I was the minister of industry and I had some of those responsibilities, I can say that it is the responsibility of both sides: the private sector and the government. It is important to have regulations and directives for the private sector in order to increase their broadband coverage. At the same time, we created a program under the economic action plan for other underserved regions. The program targets the private sector, and it includes a funding plan for broadband.
[English]
We put in $225 million, particularly for the outlying areas. We know that the private sector providers are expanding and doing it faster in the cities, but our concern was more outlying areas, Northern Canada and northern parts of Ontario, Quebec, Manitoba — you name it. As we are helping to build in those areas and the private sector builds, perhaps, in the southern parts moving up, there would be a continuity of service.
That process is well under way. I know the contracts have been given out mostly, and they are building the infrastructure.
[Translation]
But the objective of the program is to be able to say, at the end of 2012, that more than 98 per cent of Canadians have access to broadband. I feel it is a feasible objective.
[English]
It is realizable, and it will be very helpful to these issues that you raise.
[Translation]
Senator Dawson: Mr. President of the Treasury Board, the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications, which it is my pleasure to chair, did a study on Digital Canada that led to some findings and recommendations. The previous government was making revenue from selling broadband, and your government has sold over $4 billion worth of broadband. As Senator Fortin-Duplessis said, you made $4 billion and spent $225 million.
I feel there must be a way for the government to speed up the process. I know that you were developing a digital policy for Canada when you were at Industry Canada. I hope that your successor is going to announce it soon.
Mr. Clement: Yes, it is very important to have a digital strategy for Canada, a strategy for innovation, a strategy for a competitive environment. In my view, this digital strategy is a must. Society as a whole is responsible for this type of strategy, not just the federal government, even though the government does play a part. This is also the responsibility of the provinces and territories, as well as of municipalities and communities. It is a strategy for the whole country. I hope we can have this strategy soon in order to promote the other policies of our country and of our department.
[English]
I think that strategy will be helpful for us to regain some ground. What I am reading from you is that your conclusion is that we have been losing some ground. I agree with you, but it is fixable; it can be done. However, as I said, it will take all of these different sections of society. I am hopeful and optimistic that that can occur.
[Translation]
The Chair: I would just like to add something to Senator Dawson's comments. In Manitoba, it has been at least three years since the Manitoba Association of Bilingual Municipalities has developed a strategy to form a network with all the francophone rural municipalities across Manitoba; there are about 20. The association submitted the project to Industry Canada and, as far as I know, it has not yet been approved. The association then sought partners in the private sector and in the province. I like what I am hearing from you and I hope this will continue.
Mr. Clement: Perhaps Minister Paradis can answer this question.
[English]
Senator Poirier: Thank you, minister, for being here and your officials for being here this morning and taking the time out of your busy schedule. I appreciate it. Your answers and direction will definitely help us as we move forward with the committee.
I have a couple of questions. On page 5, you mentioned how your department was developing the guidelines for social media as a means of communication between government and Canadians and that the public service was also using it. I want to have your thoughts on whether you feel the government can take advantage of going forward with all of the new and social media that will be out there while, at the same time, lessening the risk for official languages.
Mr. Clement: I think the Senate must be of the same opinion because you are studying it. The opinion is quite well advanced now that social media is critical and integral to how we are able to communicate and do our jobs as public servants.
I dare say, having had some discussions on this matter, that if we are trying to hire the best and the brightest, great young people coming into the civil public service, and they are used to having tethered tablets and instant social media feedback and can do half their work at the coffee shop without any difficulty, and then suddenly they are transformed into public servants and none of that is available, that would be a bizarre situation. I think we all agree that we want to make it easy and exciting for people to join the public service and that they can use these kinds of tools in order to succeed and to do their jobs.
We have to provide the right guidelines and the right structure to make this positive and also responsible. That is what we are trying to work on.
Perhaps Ms. Meredith or Ms. Charrette wants to add something and cut in on this discussion.
Corinne Charrette, Chief Information Officer of the Government of Canada, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat: Thank you, minister. Social media is an exciting development. It is widely requested by public servants, and particularly younger public servants, as the minister has indicated. I do not see why it would be a barrier. In fact, I think it is an enabler.
[Translation]
I feel the use of social media will allow for more frequent and diverse communication, and it will encourage all employees and the public to communicate in the language of their choice.
[English]
From a guideline perspective, what we are going into — and perhaps I will be able to spend more time with you next week discussing it — is that we do distinguish between official communications and, for instance, professional or personal communications. On official communications —
[Translation]
I am pleased to say that we have a Facebook presence in both official languages; 36 institutions actually have bilingual accounts that promote key departmental messages in both languages. As the minister said on Twitter, we have 66 institutions with official bilingual accounts, sending tweets in both languages simultaneously. Social media are certainly a tool we can use to enhance the vitality of both official languages.
Senator Poirier: If I understood correctly, though you are in the process of developing guidelines, those using the media now on the government's official sites may do so in both languages?
Ms. Charrette: Absolutely, they follow the official languages policy and continue to communicate in both languages.
[English]
Senator Poirier: You mentioned on page 6 something to do with the most recent national census. I know that the secretariat is responsible for implementing directives relating to whether a geographic area is designated bilingual for the purpose of communicating with the public. I know that you will probably be starting the review based on the results of the 2011 Census.
I am curious. If the census finds that an area no longer warrants bilingual service due to a population decrease, how would the transition to a single language occur without affecting the minority language community in that area? Would there be a multi-year transition plan?
Mr. Clement: I will go out on a limb and say yes, but perhaps I can leave it to the experts to animate that a bit. Ms. Meredith, will you take this one?
Daphne Meredith, Chief Human Resources Officer, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat: Certainly. We are working with Statistics Canada now in preparing to consider the results of the census. We are building the team. This is quite a big exercise, as you would know from previous experience when it happens every 10 years.
We will be looking at how the current regulations apply with the new census data. We will be sensitive, as we were in the past, as to how this might affect the provision of service in all regions of the country. It is a sensitive issue; we will ensure that the people in each region are respected. We will be working through the implications of the census with each department that provides service. It is a complicated exercise, requiring great sensitivity to the issue as well as to possible bridging and an implementation strategy once we actually get the data and can start applying it.
Mr. Clement: It looks, as well, Ms. Meredith, rereading my notes here, that the application exercise probably is a two- or three-year process. It will start in 2013. The goal is to get it done by 2015. It looks like there is a lot of planning already under way, as Ms. Meredith mentioned.
There is another factoid here. First, there is a statutory requirement to do this. Second, it involves approximately 9,000 of the 11,000 federal offices subject to demographic rules and measurement demands. As Ms. Meredith said, it is quite a complicated exercise. There are a lot of different factors and variables but planning is well under way.
[Translation]
The Chair: I have another question following on Senator Poirier's question.
[English]
Mr. Minister, you do know and are aware that the regulations have not been updated since they were adopted in 1991. We are currently working with regulations that have not been looked into as to whether they really reflect the reality of 2011.
Mr. Clement: That is right.
The Chair: Do you have any comments regarding that?
Mr. Clement: As I said, we are going through a 10-year exercise now. We are in the process of examining these very questions. I do not think we are at the stage now of offering any details, but certainly this body, if you have thoughts and suggestions, we would very much like to take it under advisement.
The Chair: La Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada had made a proposal. They were talking about adopting universal official languages regulations. Has that been discussed amongst the team?
Ms. Meredith: That would apply a similar regulatory approach to different parts of the Official Languages Act. We are working with the regulations on Part IV, as the minister said. To add, the reality of 2011, we think, will become clearer, of course, when we know the results of the census. That is very much part of our deliberation.
As concerns the other parts of the act, we are using a policy approach right now. We are very much in the middle.
[Translation]
We are reviewing current policies in order to improve them —
[English]
— and update them as well. That is our preferred approach. Our preferred approach is, as the minister said, to inspire best practices. Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat can be an excellent convenor of departments and organizations that are responsible for meeting the obligations of the Official Languages Act — an act that is quite detailed in its requirements to institutions. It is a question of means and how do you get the result that is intended through the act.
Our view, and we are having some success with it, I must say, is to be able to take notice of good practices as well as those that are not so good and to put those who are not performing so well together with those who are performing well to create a kind of competition for the top, a competition to be best in class.
It is a question of means. We would agree with some of the points made by others that leadership is important. As a convenor within the secretariat, bringing the leaders together to compare notes has been, we find, a motivating and, I think, productive experience. We want to do more of that.
The Chair: Would the present regulations make it possible to consider this new electronic world in which the Internet, new media and social media are getting more and more prominent? The present regulations would allow the team to consider that, too?
Ms. Meredith: That is very much part of our way of approach in departments. We are using it increasingly. It increases our outreach and our ability to look at practice in other departments.
Senator Dawson: The speed by which social media are developing and the speed by which the Internet has developed is such — and, it is mentioned in a few documents that the Official Languages Act was written when the Internet did not exist; God knows that the social media did not exist. I see that you have your iPad and my colleague is discreetly reading hers. The reality is that 99 per cent of the applications on an iPad are in English only.
[Translation]
The prevailing trend of using the Internet and social media is a challenge for you and your colleagues, because the reality is that the available tools — For another thing, it is all very well for you to have developed a bilingual tweeting policy in your department. But as soon as there is retweeting, bilingualism goes down. You send two bilingual tweets but, at the bottom of the pyramid, 90 per cent of tweets are in English and 10 per cent of tweets in French. It is probably even worse. So it is a challenge.
This is not criticism, but a reality you will have to face. Unfortunately, programs are being updated faster than you are able to keep up with them.
A digital policy is a must for Canada. One example of digital policies is digital literacy. It is important to be able to educate people on how to make the best use of the tools that are available. I am not sure whether, because of your cooperation with Industry Canada, you are at the forefront of what is coming out in terms of tools or if you are reacting after the fact?
Mr. Clement: Let me just say two things. First, it is not a failure. There is a lot of optimism. For example, a lot of conversations are in French when I use Twitter. I follow the Montreal Canadiens and the tweets are always in both official languages. That is just one example.
[English]
Let me track this to another initiative that I have. I am responsible for open government initiatives. One of the things that I am very interested in as part of those tools is open data. That is, getting rawer data out, from government agencies like Statistics Canada, to the public. One of the reasons I want to do that is because I think it will generate new applications as entrepreneurs and individuals find ways to use the data and create a market for themselves in Canada for that data. It is already happening.
The example that I have used on many occasions is municipalities throughout North America give their public transit schedules in the same format to the public. That created an application on Google maps. You can touch ``public transit'' as part of your route creation for your trip and you get the schedules. That is possible because of open data. This is the reality. The more data we can get out there, the more applications can be thought of by brilliant people, entrepreneurs.
[Translation]
In both official languages, I hope. I think so. I am sure.
[English]
That will help deal with this issue that you have raised, senator. It is an important issue, but I think we can be part of the solution. However, we cannot think of it all. Let us give the information to the entrepreneurs and to the bright new innovators and they can think of the solution.
[Translation]
Senator Dawson: I am as hopeful as you, Mr. Minister. Technology in this field is changing so rapidly that government regulations are often not as quick to change as the applications. By the way, I must tell you that even the Senate is on Twitter. So we can follow you.
[English]
Ms. Meredith, you talked about best practices. I know this is the least partisan committee of the Senate, but I have to comment that if you applied the rules that the government applied for recruiting the Auditor General of Canada, you would not have any bilingual recruits; the advertising was done for a bilingual candidate and what we have is a unilingual candidate. If you applied that rule at the Treasury Board, I think you would have a lot of trouble, I think.
Mr. Clement: Let me respond to that. Obviously, this is being noted. I do note that the candidate is coming before a Senate Committee of the Whole, I believe, next week.
Senator Tardif: Tuesday.
Mr. Clement: Yes, Tuesday. You will certainly have an opportunity to discuss with him his capabilities.
We had a range of qualifications that we sought to see in a successful candidate. We would then choose the best candidate available on the merits of that candidate. I can assure you that we were concerned about the lack of proficiency in the French language, had the conversation with the candidate, and he has committed to us and he will commit to you. He has already started his language training in the hopes of being ratified. His absolute rock-solid commitment is to be as proficient as possible at the start and that proficiency would grow very quickly.
I do not want to speak for him; he can speak for himself. This was an issue; it was a concern. We share that concern. Our obligation is to find the best candidate available. In any candidate, there are pluses and minuses. You find the best you can. He certainly fits that category. With this commitment that he will repeat to you, I think that should be taken seriously and respectfully.
Senator Dawson: I look forward to Tuesday.
[Translation]
The Chair: Let us go to the second round. We have just under 10 minutes. Senator Tardif and Senator Fortin- Duplessis have requested the floor.
Senator Tardif: Mr. Minister, my understanding is that, in 2009, the government eliminated the Canada Public Service Agency, reassigned those responsibilities and set up the Official Languages Centre of Excellence at the Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer of the Treasury Board Secretariat.
What is unfortunate about this decision is that it does not seem there were enough resources for this transfer. If I understand correctly, there was a decrease of about 60 per cent in number of employees between 2008 and 2009. And now we see that departments are left to themselves and often do not have the internal capacity to understand, interpret and analyze their obligations under the Official Languages Act.
I know you are going through budget cuts but could you reassure us that the Official Languages Centre of Excellence has the resources it needs to do an adequate — even more than adequate — job internally in order to ensure compliance with the Official Languages Act?
Mr. Clement: Thank you, senator. The government has made cuts to reduce the national deficit.
[English]
I was telling the official languages director that this process does not affect the delivery of official languages to the extent that we make decisions unwittingly and that the impact is disproportionately greater. I committed to him, and I commit to you publicly, that as we are doing our reviews, we will turn our minds to those obligations and ensure that we are being fair and equitable for the delivery of services in the official languages. That is all I can say now because decisions are being made for Budget 2012 and they will become evident at that time.
Perhaps Ms. Meredith would like to talk about the first part of the question. That would be helpful.
Ms. Meredith: We currently have a budget of some $3.4 million for the Official Languages Centre of Excellence. We have a complement of some 20 people, which we have increased in the past year or so as we prepare for doing the work on the regulations following the census.
We feel that we have excellent people in this centre, ones who are now working not just preparing for the regulations but also on renewal of the Treasury Board directives and initiatives on official languages. This is the team that now works in conjunction with the community to look at best practices, as I mentioned before. We very much consider an extension of our effort the network of official languages champions who reside in departments and who are championing the cause and showing leadership within departmental effort.
What we have reduced in the last five years has been the one-on-one calls, the capacity to respond to calls from analysts in departments on particular issues. We are taking those kinds of questions through more horizontal fora and interdepartmental fora where we can discuss the key questions and provide answers to groups rather than individually. We know that there is some concern about that new approach to service, but we think it can actually be a more effective means of providing support and advice over the longer term. We think that we have the right model in place to inspire excellence in departments.
[Translation]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: As you know, the Commissioner of Official Languages released an audit report on the delivery of bilingual services to Air Canada passengers in September 2011.
I was very surprised to read in the report that, year after year, Air Canada has been in the top three institutions with the most complaints about the service in French.
I will quickly go over something that happened to me. I was recently at the Vancouver airport and I was short of time, so I had to go through customs quickly. But I had to get my boarding pass first. I had already waited for 20 minutes. At the counter, there were only two unilingual anglophones. They offered to get an officer who spoke French. But if I had insisted on having service in French, I would have missed my plane to come here to Ottawa, since I only had 10 minutes.
What do you do to assess Air Canada's performance in terms of implementing the Official Languages Act? And Mr. Clement, what concrete measures do you think should be taken so that the Air Canada situation finally improves? Because the system of fetching a francophone officer when needed does not work.
I have francophone friends in Quebec who are not really satisfied. I am not sure what you can do about it, but it is a big problem for Canadians who speak French only.
Mr. Clement: The Canadian government clearly supports linguistic duality. It is important to clarify Air Canada's linguistic obligations. Air Canada continues to be subject to the Official Languages Act. It has an obligation to provide bilingual services to the public at large.
[English]
I know that they have been subject to about a dozen recommendations that address Air Canada. I can tell you that we have these under review and certainly we are committed to points of service that continue to be bilingual. That is all I can say at this time because, obviously, we are reviewing these recommendations and we will be responding at the appropriate time.
[Translation]
The Chair: Thank you. I had another question but, as time is running out, I will ask it on Monday, since your officials are coming back before the committee. We will then talk about page 2 of the report, the positions designated as bilingual, positions that are English essential or French essential.
Once again, thank you and good luck. I am sure that you will not forget the comments and recommendations shared by the honourable senators with you.
On that note, honourable senators, I adjourn the meeting.
(The committee adjourned.)