Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Official Languages
Issue No. 34 - Evidence - Meeting of December 3, 2018
OTTAWA, Monday, December 3, 2018
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages met in camera this day at 4:08 p.m., to discuss a draft agenda; and, in public, to continue its study on the application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it, within those institutions subject to the act, as well as its study on Canadians’ views about modernizing the Official Languages Act.
Senator René Cormier (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
(The committee continued in camera.)
(The committee resumed in public.)
The Chair: Honourable Senators, we are resuming the meeting in public. My name is René Cormier, I am a senator from New Brunswick, and I have the pleasure of presiding over today’s meeting.
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages is continuing its study on the modernization of official languages. Today, we are beginning the fifth component of that study, which concerns federal institutions. In addition, the committee is continuing its study on the application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it, within those institutions subject to the act.
We are pleased to welcome the Honourable Mélanie Joly, Minister of Tourism, Official Languages and La Francophonie. She is joined by Guylaine F. Roy, Deputy Minister of Tourism, Official Languages and La Francophonie at Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, as well as Denis Racine, Director General, Official Languages Branch at Canadian Heritage, and Yvan Déry, Senior Director, Policy and Research, Official Languages Branch at Canadian Heritage.
Before I give the floor to the minister, I invite the committee members to introduce themselves, starting on my left, with the committee’s deputy chair.
Senator Poirier: Welcome. Rose-May Poirier from New Brunswick.
Senator Smith: Good evening. Larry W. Smith from Quebec.
Senator Mégie: Good evening. Marie-Françoise Mégie from Quebec.
Senator Maltais: Good evening and welcome. Ghislain Maltais from Quebec.
Senator Gagné: Good evening. Raymonde Gagné from Manitoba.
Senator Moncion: Good evening. Lucie Moncion from Ontario.
Senator Miville-Dechêne: Good evening. Julie Miville-Dechêne from Quebec. I am not a member of the committee, but I wanted to attend today’s meeting.
Senator McIntyre: Good evening, minister. Paul McIntyre from New Brunswick.
The Chair: Thank you, respected colleagues.
Minister, welcome. The floor is yours, and we will then have a question and answer period with you.
Hon. Mélanie Joly, P.C., M.P., Minister of Tourism, Official Languages and La Francophonie: Members of the committee, thank you for the invitation.
[English]
It’s really a pleasure for me to be with you today.
[Translation]
I am happy to see so many familiar faces again. I think this is the third time I have had an opportunity to appear before this committee over the past three years, so I have had the pleasure previously. I am of course appearing this evening as Minister of Tourism, Official Languages and La Francophonie. The Prime Minister has given me a strong mandate for our official languages that enables me to continue to meet our commitments while supporting our francophonie, be it nationally or internationally.
From the outset, I want to recognize the important work being done by this committee in terms of promoting our two official languages. You hear the concerns of many organizations that serve our communities, as well as stakeholders from the official languages community. Your work contributes to our reflection and our work within government, and I want to thank you for it.
[English]
I would like to introduce the members from my department’s senior management team who are joining me today. You had the chance to do that already, but Guylaine Roy, my deputy minister, Denis Racine, Yvan Déry and other members of my team are also here.
[Translation]
Before I talk to you about matters of concern to your committee, I would like to go over an important issue in Ontario, which has not only caught the attention of Franco-Ontarians and parliamentarians, but also of francophones across the country and has resonated beyond our borders. Eighteen days have passed since “Black Thursday,” when the Government of Ontario announced that it was scrapping a project to create a francophone university administered by and for Franco-Ontarians, a promising project that was highly anticipated by the Franco-Ontarian community. We also learned about the Ford government’s decision to scrap the Office of the French Language Services Commissioner, a vital and independent organization that helped ensure the respect of Franco-Ontarians’ language rights.
Franco-Ontarians mobilized quickly and had their voices heard. This weekend, we witnessed a historic moment, when thousands of francophones and francophiles from all over came together and showed their solidarity with Franco-Ontarians.
On behalf of all francophones, I want to thank all those who stood up with Franco-Ontarians to have their rights respected, as that is what this is about. I especially want to commend my fellow members, senators, minority communities from the four corners of the country, but also Quebecers and the anglophone community, who recognized and denounced that injustice.
What should this event mean for us? What should we explore in the wake of the protest? First, we must remember the fact that, when the rights of everyone are respected, the rights of everyone are protected.
As minister in charge of official languages, it was my duty and that of our government to stand with Franco-Ontarians to ensure the respect and the full exercise of their language rights. That is a matter of principle.
[English]
When facing unacceptable situations, we must openly denounce it. It’s a matter of principle and leadership. This is what I did and will always do.
When members of our community see their rights and services removed or diluted, we must stand together arm in arm to denounce it loud and clear. It’s the Canadian thing to do.
It has been a difficult 18 days of uncertainty for Franco-Ontarians, and it has been incredible to see francophones, francophiles and Canadians from across our great country join in the conversation and support the needs and the rights of Franco-Ontarians all across Ontario.
[Translation]
I would also like to highlight senators’ important contribution to this conversation. More than ever, all the voices matter. Following the Ford government’s decision to amend the French Language Services Act, the President of the Assemblée de la francophonie de l’Ontario, Carol Jolin, said it well: The only justification a government can have for amending a piece of legislation on services in French is to strengthen it, and not to weaken it.
As you can see, the official languages issue is very close to my heart. It is a serious issue that I am passionate about and our Prime Minister is passionate about, and it is at the heart of our identity. So I’m happy to be able to discuss with you today the different measures taken by our government concerning official languages since our action plan was announced last March.
Under my mandate, the Prime Minister has asked me to continue the implementation of the Official Languages Action Plan. That plan proposes historic investments valued at $2.7 billion over five years, with nearly $500 million in new money.
This is the largest investment for official languages in our history. That is clear evidence of the Trudeau government’s commitment to our communities and our two official languages. It is also a reflection of our vision, as we believe in the importance of our linguistic duality. We see it as one of the pillars of the social contract that unites us, and we feel that it cannot be ensured unless it is rooted in the vitality of dynamic communities and spread by millions of people across the country.
How can we do that? By allocating new resources, by developing clear measures to meet official language minority communities’ needs while ensuring their vitality and by fostering the promotion of French and English from coast to coast to coast, all with a “by, for and with” communities approach.
That is achieved through significant support starting in early childhood, so that our youth can then be educated in the language of the minority and develop a strong feeling of belonging related to their identity. Of course, that contributes to identity building in our young people. Therefore, I announced in September that we would double the Community Cultural Action Fund, for a total envelope of $21 million to provide more artistic and cultural activities for our students. We are talking about 4,000 cultural activities that could be provided over the next four years in 1,000 schools in minority settings.
Across the country, I have also been told how important it is to be able to read community news and stories in your own language, as well as to hear you own accent on the radio. That contributes to the sense of linguistic security. Our government also knows that minority community media that play a role in that area are facing significant challenges. That is why I announced, in October, the Community Media Strategic Support Fund in the amount of $14.5 million over five years, to help those media continue to play a key role for our outlying communities. That also includes a $4.5-million agreement over five years with the Fédération de la jeunesse canadienne-française that will help provide young people with internships at newspapers in minority francophone and anglophone communities. There is also the support to media announced by our government in the economic update, specifically through a tax credit on subscriptions and one on the workforce.
This fall, my colleague Scott Brison, President of the Treasury Board, and I, revealed the amendments proposed to the Official Languages Regulations, which are related to Part IV of the act. In concrete terms, those changes will make it possible for nearly 1 million Canadians across the country to be better served in the language of their choice by the government. More than 600 offices will be newly designated bilingual, increasing the percentage of federal bilingual points of service from 34 per cent to 40 per cent. The protection of certain offices’ bilingual designation is also included in our amendments, and that designation, which used to depend on the proportion of the local population, has been modified.
Early in our mandate, community organizations launched a heartfelt appeal to us when they told us about their lack of resources, and we heard them. We have increased their core funding by 20 per cent. They are important partners, and we will continue to work closely with them, so that the action plan will have concrete and meaningful benefits for their communities.
I am sure you have also heard this complaint. After 10 years of inaction by the Conservatives, and following recent decisions made by Ontario’s Conservative government, it was and continues to be more critical than ever to be vigilant and take action for our minority language communities. That is why, in line with our commitment, I was happy to announce two weeks ago the reinstatement of the Court Challenges Program, which had been scrapped by the previous administration. We are now talking about $5 million set aside for the defence of language rights and fundamental rights.
We cannot claim to be a bilingual country if communities cannot exist in the official language of their choice on a daily basis. The bilingualism of our population and the strength of our linguistic duality depend on the vitality and sustainability of our minority language communities, and that is what we want to defend and promote.
[English]
This is why our action plan sets ambitious targets.
[Translation]
We want a strong Canadian francophonie and a Canada where the efforts made by citizens to learn their second official language produce results.
[English]
We want to support the unique needs of the English-speaking community in Quebec, particularly those in rural areas. To help achieve this, significant investments are required, and this is exactly what we have announced through our action plan.
[Translation]
Mr. Chair, we are preparing to mark the fiftieth anniversary of the Official Languages Act next year, and I have the mandate to begin examining that important piece of legislation in order to modernize it. This is a necessary exercise that will be conducted with rigour.
[English]
We will work in synergy with partners from the official languages community and the public as well as with parliamentarians.
[Translation]
I want to underline the important consultation work you have done and continue to do for your first two reports on the act’s modernization. As I have already said, your work contributes to our reflection and our work. I have read your reports, and I will carefully follow the publication of the complete series of your reports on this issue.
Language rights are part of our Constitution and our Official Languages Act, and we will continue to protect and promote them. Our government has committed to support them, and an important part of that support is the deployment of our action plan. Our government is working diligently on its implementation.
This is about standing together to defend our vision of the country, a country where our francophone community has rights and is entitled to respect. Over the past 151 years, francophone and anglophone communities have coexisted across the country. For nearly 50 years, we have had two official languages that are enshrined in our Constitution and give rise to constitutional rights that are protected and necessary to our country’s cohesiveness.
I am now ready to answer your questions.
The Chair: Thank you, minister. We will begin our questions and answers with Senator Poirier.
Senator Poirier: Minister, thank you for being here this evening to answer our questions
At the committee’s meeting on October 22, we heard from Ronald Bisson, Director of the Réseau national de formation en justice. I asked him whether he thought that your action plan’s funding to improve access to justice was sufficient. After thanking the government for the funding allocated to the network, he answered as follows:
To improve equal access to justice, the funding is clearly inadequate.
He added that the network has completed a very detailed exercise on that issue and that, based on 16 different initiatives, the network would need $75 million over five years to achieve its objective of providing access to justice across the country.
Minister, can you commit to adequately support access to justice by providing the funding the Réseau national de formation en justice needs?
Ms. Joly: Thank you, Senator Poirier, your question is very relevant. For us, access to justice in our two official languages is very important, and that is why we have set aside $10 million in our action plan to support it.
We have also increased by 20 per cent the budget of all organizations that are currently involved in official languages, including organizations in the justice sector. So that is definitely good news for those organizations. In addition, we have reinstated the Court Challenges Program, which is necessary to the defence of language rights and had been abolished. Its reinstatement has been commended by many groups across the country.
Senator Poirier: As I said, the Réseau national de formation en justice thanked the government for the money received, but it stated that the funding was insufficient. Is your department prepared to commit to responding to its demand and its needs?
Ms. Joly: I would be happy to have good discussions with the network’s representatives. The action plan already provides for more funding — $10 million — in addition to the extra 20 per cent I talked about.
Discussions are currently being held between my department’s officials and various groups across the country to determine how to help more groups that may not have been supported in the past. If there are groups involved in access to justice that have never received funding, that is something I am certainly prepared to look into.
Senator Poirier: Thank you.
Senator Gagné: Welcome, Madam Minister. First I would like to thank you and your government for the investments that were announced in the action plan.
I would also like to congratulate you for having set specific intervention targets, which I find very ambitious, to bolster the demography of minority francophone communities and to increase the bilingualism of anglophones outside Quebec.
There is one important activity sector that may have been forgotten in this announcement — and perhaps it will be studied next — and that is the Official Languages in Education Program.
Can you update me as to the negotiations on that program? Correct me if I am mistaken, but I believe I understood that funds for the school boards of minority post-secondary institutions would be frozen. If that is true, it means that funds will have been frozen since 2003, when I was at the University of Saint-Boniface. I must admit that when I heard that that the Government of Ontario would not be funding the Université de l’Ontario français, and knowing that I was quoted more than once on that topic, it made me sick to my stomach. Francophone communities are often used as hostages in negotiations between the provinces and the federal government. All through my career, I have seen these situations where investments are made and then withdrawn, no matter what government is involved.
Since we began our study on the modernization of the Official Languages Act, witnesses have told us that education is key to the development of communities, from pre-school to post-secondary education. I must say that I find this situation worrying. Can you update us on the status of the negotiations?
Ms. Joly: We are doing several things at the moment. First, regarding early childhood education, for the first time, the Action Plan for Official Languages includes investments in the early childhood sector. But generally speaking, as you know, we have invested millions in early childhood education in federal-provincial agreements, which will favour the integration of the children of exogamous couples as well as those of minority official language communities.
Secondly, in the context of our negotiations, I have begun preliminary discussions with school boards. French-language school boards in particular have requested that federal funds invested by the provinces in their minority language school systems be traced. We decided to accede to the school boards’ wishes and include them in our meetings with the provinces so as to obtain better accountability and traceability of funds, it being understood at the same time that the provinces act in good faith. We are negotiating on this issue to improve communication and improve the relationship between the provinces, school boards and the federal government. We are putting a lot of effort into that file at the moment.
In the Action Plan for Official Languages, I announced new investments, in infrastructure, notably. You mentioned the Université de l’Ontario français. I can answer any questions on that matter, but there are most certainly solutions the federal government can provide, given its investments in infrastructure.
Financial assistance will also be granted for teacher training, because all of the ministers of the Canadian francophonie have agreed to make the shortage of teachers a priority. The federal government wants to do its share. That is why funds will be allocated to the provinces in these various categories. Discussions and negotiations are ongoing.
Senator Gagné: The agreement has not yet been signed with the CMEC.
Ms. Joly: The agreement has not yet been signed, but the negotiations are ongoing.
Senator Gagné: Slowly.
Ms. Joly: The negotiations are following their course.
Senator Moncion: Thank you for being here, Madam Minister. My question is about the Bilingual Ottawa initiative. One of the concerns we have had since “Black Thursday” is that the Université de l’Ontario français was included in Bill 177, which established, among other things, the bilingual character of the services offered by the City of Ottawa, and created that university. What concerns us is that the Government of Ontario could adopt a new bill to amend that section. I know this is a battle that is being waged by many people.
With regard to the Official Languages Act, would there be some way of adding a clarification mentioning the unique character of the city of Ottawa, given that it is the capital of Canada and must, according to Ms. Cardinal, rise to the level of its ambitions and its specificity? I’d like to hear your viewpoint on that subject.
Ms. Joly: That is a request we often hear in preparing our Action Plan for Official Languages. The former minister responsible for the NCC is very involved in all discussions on the development of our national capital. It was certainly one of my objectives to improve the bilingual character of this city. That is why in the Action Plan for Official Languages, I agreed with the need to invest directly to support the bilingual character of the city of Ottawa. We earmarked $2.5 million to support that initiative. We will again, and always, continue to exert pressure on the province to maintain the bilingual character of the city. Municipalities receive authority from the provincial jurisdiction. At the federal level, we can intervene by supporting the groups that can defend the bilingual aspect of our national capital.
Senator Moncion: You can’t see a small slot in the Official Languages Act where you could include that component?
Ms. Joly: I’m willing to hold discussions on this, but we also have to recognize the jurisdictions involved. I’m not opposed to the idea of recognizing the need to support Ottawa’s bilingual nature. In fact, this was already included in the action plan I announced last March.
Senator McIntyre: Thank you, Madam Minister, for being here tonight and for answering our questions. My question is about the Federal Court decision in the case related to the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique. The case was about the interpretation of Parts IV and VII of the act regarding a transfer payment agreement between the federal government and the province. Does that court decision worry you? Did you intervene with federal institutions since that decision was handed down? I would like you to explain the impact of that decision on the application of Part VII of the act.
Ms. Joly: I respect the decision handed down by the court. I sent a letter to all of the members of the cabinet to remind them of the importance of encouraging a broad interpretation of positive measures under Part VII of the act, and to let them know that there is a guide that can give them a better overview of positive measures, among other things. I acted downstream. I also began discussions with the Commissioner of Official Languages, while respecting his independence, to remind him that our government wants positive measures to be interpreted very broadly. I would be happy to continue that discussion in the context of the modernization of the Official Languages Act.
I also want to remind you that to support the vitality of linguistic communities — while being aware that sometimes, unfortunately, jurisprudence is a good way to get the country’s laws respected — I broadened the definition of the Court Challenges Program so that it now includes Part VII. In future, cases of potential non-compliance with positive measures under Part VII could be funded through the Court Challenges Program.
Senator McIntyre: When will the Court Challenges Program be fully implemented, now that the members of the expert panels have been appointed?
Ms. Joly: According to the latest information I obtained from the University of Ottawa, this would be at the beginning of January.
Senator McIntyre: Thank you.
Senator Maltais: Thank you, Madam Minister, for your visit. Before getting to the heart of the matter, I saw that your program had earmarked a few thousand dollars for early childhood. Could you allocate a few credits from that envelope to help government departments revise their websites? They’re a real disaster. Kindergarten children write better than that. If the language of Shakespeare were at stake, Parliament would have jumped in long ago. I am asking you to allocate a few dollars to correcting that situation.
Ms. Joly: I have taken note of this.
Senator Maltais: You spoke about “Black Thursday” in Ontario, and about the many declarations that followed that decision. You indicated that you had accompanied Franco-Ontarians and were ready to intervene in favour of the university, which is part of your role, one which you perform well.
However, we know that education falls under provincial jurisdiction, and that Canadian Heritage may intervene by investing funds, but financing a university — Education transfers are done through global federal transfer payments. The premier of a province decides how to use that funding. I believe that is how that works.
Now, the infrastructure program could be used for this; however, in order to access it, the provinces have to make a specific request. Consequently, where will the funding come from? From Canadian Heritage, or from the infrastructure program? The infrastructure program is already closed, to my knowledge, and so, if I understand correctly, this funding will have to come from Canadian Heritage.
Ms. Joly: Let me enlighten you. If there is one issue where we are certainly in a position to co-operate with the provinces, it is in the funding of school infrastructure. The Official Languages Branch has increased its funding envelopes considerably under the action plan. Whenever a province submits a project to us, whether it concerns early childhood, the primary, secondary or even the university level, that can be funded up to a 50 per cent ceiling by the federal government.
As an example, we provided funding to Bishop’s University in Quebec, and to the high schools that had been waiting for years in Whitehorse, in the Yukon. We also provided support to a primary school in Nunavut. Every year, the federal government funds infrastructure, above and beyond the federal-provincial agreements on infrastructure, when the envelopes are closed. It’s part of my duties to approve this.
Senator Maltais: If you were to agree to fund 50 per cent of the Université de l’Ontario français, where would the funds come from?
Ms. Joly: From our envelope. As I have said before, I hope the Government of Ontario will submit that funding request to us. We are willing to fund up to 50 per cent of that university.
Senator Maltais: And what if the Province of New Brunswick submitted the same request to you?
Ms. Joly: Projects for New Brunswick are already being studied at this time.
Senator Maltais: And what if the École Rose-des-Vents of Vancouver made the same request?
Ms. Joly: With regard to the École Rose-des-Vents, my colleague Carla Qualtrough is having discussions with the Canada Lands Company these days. In that sense, this is more about the use of certain federal lands. As I said, when a province submits a provincial infrastructure project to us, we answer “present.”
Senator Maltais: Could it be that you have found a solution to a problem no one has been able to define: “where the environment warrants it”?
Ms. Joly: Could you repeat your question?
Senator Maltais: With regard to services provided to francophones, judges have never expressed an opinion on the famous “where the environment warrants it” criterion. We’re talking about services in French in minority communities. Is your program addressed in part to those people?
Ms. Joly: The definition of “where the environment warrants it” applies generally to various parts of the act. When I talk about infrastructures, this is more closely related to Part VII of the act, which deals with supporting the vitality of minority language communities and so on.
For our part, we made the decision to broaden the definition of “where the environment warrants it”. We decided to broaden the very definition of the regulations in Part IV of the Official Languages Act. In future, if a school offers education in the language of the minority in a given area, the government will be obliged to provide services in the language of the minority also. I know I am conflating two files, but the definition involves several parts of the act.
Senator Maltais: Aside from the Université de l’Ontario français project, how are you going to support the Ontario francophone community?
Ms. Joly: In fact, we increased the budgets of the country’s organizations by 20 per cent, including that of the AFO, the Assemblée de la francophonie de l’Ontario. We provided more funding to that organization to support its mobilization efforts.
Senator Maltais: That can be interpreted as an opening for the other communities.
Ms. Joly: Yes. As I said earlier, the first thing we did was to increase all of the budgets of organizations by 20 per cent. Afterwards, since we still had money on the table, we asked the various organizations how we should distribute it. Should we include new organizations that had never had access to funding, or should we increase the existing envelopes? Those are conversations we had.
The Chair: I believe we were talking about “where the environment justifies it”?
Senator Maltais: Yes.
Senator Poirier: Does your mandate give you the power to conclude agreements under the official languages program, or is that the prerogative of your Canadian Heritage colleague?
Ms. Joly: It is my responsibility.
Senator Mégie: Thank you, Madam Minister. Following the changes to your mandate, how are the responsibilities divided between Canadian Heritage and Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada?
Ms. Joly: All matters regarding official languages at Canadian Heritage are my responsibility. So, pursuant to the Statute of Westminster, I am the minister accountable for the decisions taken by the public service and by the department on these matters. Everything that concerns tourism and falls under Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, is also my responsibility. Everything that concerns the International Francophonie at Global Affairs falls under my responsibility. To help us coordinate those three portfolios in three different departments, Treasury Board has given us the services of an excellent deputy minister; she does the follow-up and works with the deputy ministers who are responsible for those files.
Senator Mégie: Since you work on the action plan and we work on the modernization, have you thought of taking into account the evolution of the socio-demographic context due to the arrival of new immigrants? If so, what advice would you give the committee concerning its work on modernizing the act?
Ms. Joly: There are various things. When we developed the Action Plan for Official Languages, we received an additional amount of $100 million a year, or $500 million over five years. We began to develop those programs thanks to those funds. The department was very busy. Denis and Yvan were very busy, and were very well supported by Guylaine. When I talk about implementing the plan, I’m talking about all of the new programs created to eventually fund the organizations and individuals who will have access to those funds. That is the first thing.
In addition, we had recognized the need to adapt to the socio-demographic context, and since we are aware of the impact of francophone immigration, we created a new francophone immigration strategy in the context of the action plan.
Moreover, we know that the impact is of such scope that we have to generally examine the systemic aspect of the weight of our communities, both inside and outside of Quebec. That is why we decided to study the possibility of modernizing the Official Languages Act.
I will have the opportunity of making some announcements over the coming weeks on this matter, but the work you are doing is really going to help us in our own work on modernizing the act. It’s important to maintain the demographic weight of our linguistic communities, while being aware that the reality is that our francophonie has different faces and different accents, and we must adjust to that.
Our challenge, as parliamentarians, is not just related to the voices we hear, but also to the voices we don’t hear. That is why when we examine the groups we can fund, we try to find existing groups that have never received funding, so that we can gather the perspective of francophones and francophiles as well as that of anglophones from newcomers’ communities. It’s important, as you said, to have a relevant socio-demographic picture.
Senator Smith: Many witnesses have told us they wanted to launch various initiatives but did not have the funds needed to do so. I understand that. My question is very simple. The amounts of money spent are significant, but I’m trying to understand this: Do you have a tool to measure your investments? What are those tools and those measurements? Give me an example of a measure and of your expectations with regard to that measure. I did take a look at your 2015 mandate letter, and more recently, at the August mandate letter.
[English]
Develop a new multi-year official language plan, that was 2015, which is great, and a follow-up plan in your new letter.
I’m interested in measurements because measurements lead to success and change; money doesn’t. Money is a starter. What are you trying to get out of it? What is your measurement system? Give me some examples so we can see what you’re investing in — yields and return.
Ms. Joly: When we look at the objectives, I decided to work with my team to clearly set ambitious objectives, as mentioned by Senator Gagné. There are three of them.
The first is to restore and maintain the demographic weight of francophones outside of Quebec at 4 per cent of the population by 2036, which is in itself a very ambitious target.
The second one is to support access to services for English-speaking communities in Quebec, particularly in the regions.
The third one is to establish the bilingualism rate of Canadians at 20 per cent by 2036 by increasing the bilingualism of English speakers outside of Quebec from 6.8 per cent to 9 per cent.
We’ve restored the long-form census. That will help us to track the data, and we’ll be working with Statistics Canada.
We’ve increased the support to Statistics Canada’s linguistic data analysis capacity to do what you’re saying — to measure the impacts.
Clearly setting objectives and having the right data is what we’re working on.
Now, what I’ve learned as minister, being three years in this role, is that it’s one thing to announce the money; it’s another that people feel it on the ground. So when I say we’re deploying the plan, that’s what we’re doing in the sense that since September, all the organizations in Canada that are in the official languages field have 20 per cent more budget. They’ve received the funding; that’s done.
We have announced money for a thousand new schools. Well, schools that are working in minority settings will get funding. It’s up to them to work with the organization in charge to get that money. But until the money goes into the field, it can take eight to 10 to 12 months. By March, I think we will see the results because the money will have funnelled to the different levels.
[Translation]
Senator Smith: Have you identified the type of feedback you’re looking for with respect to results measures? In my opinion, the change in culture is always the most important thing, whether it involves English, French and the other languages that exist. How will you gauge success, other than based on the amount of money invested? Is this one of your objectives for 2036, or do you have shorter-term objectives? You need short-term objectives to meet long-term objectives. Otherwise, it looks like just an expense and not something that will achieve results.
Ms. Joly: The next census results will be available in 2021. Based on the results available in 2021, we’ll be able to conduct a follow-up. Each time we hold a census, we’ll be able to conduct a follow-up. The issue with the census was whether we were asking the right questions. Are we able to obtain the right information? That’s why we allocated an additional $3 million to Statistics Canada, in order to create a unit within the department that will have the specific expertise needed to collect and then analyze the right data.
Senator Miville-Dechêne: I have two quick questions for you. Have you received a formal request from the Ford government to fund the Université de l’Ontario français?
Ms. Joly: No, absolutely not. However, as I said, we’re prepared to explore this option.
Senator Miville-Dechêne: I heard Ms. Adam talk about an $84 million budget for the university. In addition to contributing to infrastructure, is the federal government, by virtue of regulations or its willingness, prepared to fund more than infrastructure?
Ms. Joly: We respect the province’s jurisdiction.
Senator Miville-Dechêne: I understand. However, if you were asked to pay half the bill, for example, would you consider doing so?
Ms. Joly: Different Canadian Heritage programs may apply, but in general, we respect the provincial jurisdictions. Support is provided through government transfers for education. It’s the whole school system. It’s really about infrastructure. The current issue is specifically related to the university’s infrastructure. In general, funding is available for teacher training, and this can also help.
We’re acting in good faith in this project. Requests for help with projects come from across the country. However, the particular issue with this project is as follows. During the development of the Action Plan for Official Languages, I went to Ontario, and all the groups representing youth talked to me about the project. As a result, we included funding for the project in our action plan. That’s why I’m saying that the funding is available.
The Chair: I’ll conclude with a question that may be difficult to answer. Based on what I’ve heard from the witnesses, I’m very concerned about the whole issue of governance and the implementation of the act within the government. We’re talking about a central agency. Almost every witness has told us that it’s all well and good to have an act, but that if there aren’t any internal mechanisms to implement the act, then this presents a challenge.
Earlier, you provided the example of a letter that you sent to the cabinet members inviting them to ensure a broader interpretation of Part VII. In the committee, we’re thinking about will happen after the act is implemented. What structural tools and mechanisms are available? I want to hear what you have to say about this matter. Since you’ve been in your position for three years, what tools are available to reach out to the other departments? For example, if a department creates a new official languages program, can you support the program? If a department isn’t doing its job in this area, what are you able to do? If the answer to all these questions was “no,” what type of structure could ensure that the act is implemented and upheld by all the departments?
Ms. Joly: My goal isn’t to be partisan. I’m giving you my perspective based on what I noticed when I was appointed. I saw how much official languages considerations were set aside for 10 years in the public service, and in general, in what was being proposed to the government. The challenge is to recreate this leadership in the public service, as stated in the Borbey-Mendelsohn report. The Clerk of the Privy Council commissioned the report, and two public servants carried out the study. I invite you to read the report and take it into account, because the report highlights this issue, which has existed for a number of years.
As a minister, I’ve now been given the responsibility to champion the official languages issue and provide government-wide leadership. I think that we’ve been able to demonstrate this in a number of cases, such as the National Defence case concerning the Royal Military College Saint-Jean, all the way to the President of the Treasury Board. We’ve even amended a regulation.
In reality, we must ensure the governance of the act in the public service and not at the political level. This issue must be debated in the context of the modernization of the Official Languages Act. In practice, each time a brief is submitted to cabinet for decision-making purposes, we must ensure that the impact on language minority communities is taken into consideration. This is an obligation for the government, but it could be strengthened. I think that the matter is worth discussing.
The Chair: When we look at the previous action plans and roadmaps, the first action plan included a very clear statement regarding the horizontal coordination of the implementation of the act or the action plan itself. However, the 2018-23 Action Plan for Official Languages contains investments, but nothing to show how you’ll work to ensure the horizontal coordination of the implementation of the plan.
Ms. Joly: Our mandate letters state this, however, and they state that I’m responsible, with the President of the Treasury Board, for providing this government-wide leadership. That’s how we planned it. The mandate letters have been released to the public for the first time. Previously, this wasn’t the case. It’s a way of sending the message to parliamentarians, Canadians and communities. I think that, in general, this makes it possible to better monitor all government decisions on official languages in order to strengthen the Official Languages Act. I think that it would be worthwhile for you to study the issue. We’ll most certainly have this conversation on our side, because the groups have often mentioned it to us.
The Chair: Minister Joly, on behalf of the committee members, I want to thank you for being here this evening.
Ms. Joly: Thank you.
The Chair: We’ll continue our study and we’ll submit a final report to you, probably in early June. We know that you’ll find it useful. Thank you.
(The committee adjourned.)