Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Official Languages
Issue 14 - Evidence, April 23, 2007
OTTAWA, Monday, April 23, 2007
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages met this day at 4 p.m. to study, for the purpose of reporting from time to time on, the application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it, within those institutions subject to the act. Topic: the move of federal agency head offices, and the impact on the application of the act.
Senator Maria Chaput (Chairman) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chairman: Good morning everyone. I would like to welcome senators and guests to this meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages. My name is Maria Chaput.
[English]
I am chairman of this committee and I am from Manitoba.
Before we hear the witness presentations, I will introduce the members of the committee. We have Senator Wilbert Keon from Ontario.
[Translation]
Senator Gerald Comeau, from Nova Scotia.
[English]
We also have Senator Claudette Tardif from Alberta.
[Translation]
Before hearing from our witnesses, I want to let you know that Senator Champagne will be away, and we do not know for how long. She must be replaced temporarily as deputy chairman of the committee.
I am ready to receive a motion so that we can elect someone as acting deputy chairman of the committee.
Senator Comeau: I would like to nominate Senator Keon as deputy chairman while Senator Champagne is away. I think that he will be an excellent deputy chairman.
The Chairman: It is moved by Honourable Senator Comeau that Honourable Senator Keon be elected acting deputy chairman. Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Yes.
The Chairman: We continue our study on the application of the Official Languages Act, more specifically the move of federal agency head offices and the impact on the application of the act.
With us today are representatives from Farm Credit Canada which officially moved its head office to Regina in 1992.
[English]
I will start with the Senior Vice-President Human Resources, Mr. Greg Honey.
[Translation]
Mr. Michel Thibaudeau, Director, Corporate Audit, and Ms. Krista Kilback, Business Partner, Human Resources. Welcome to the committee. Madam, gentlemen, the floor is yours.
[English]
You have 15 minutes to make your presentation, followed by questions from the senators.
[Translation]
Greg Honey, Senior Vice President, Human Resources, Farm Credit Canada: Madam Chairman, thank you for inviting Farm Credit Canada to come before the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages. My name is Greg Honey, and I am Senior Vice-President, Human Resources. I am joined by two colleagues.
[English]
Krista Kilback was raised in Saskatchewan. She has worked at FCC for four years in human resources and will speak to you about her experience as an anglophone from Saskatchewan who works in a bilingual setting at Farm Credit Canada.
Michel Thibaudeau, Director of Corporate Audit, is an employee who was raised in Quebec. He moved to Regina to work at our corporate office one year ago. Michel will speak about the experience of being a francophone from Quebec working and living in Regina.
We would like to take this opportunity to share our perspectives on the impact of moving head offices outside the National Capital Region and its effects on the use of both official languages. Farm Credit Canada is a federal agency, whose head office has been in Regina since 1992.
We would like to address two elements of the Official Languages Act: Part V and its reach when head offices move outside the National Capital Region and our efforts under Part VII. In particular, we would like to address the question of whether or not to adopt new regulations concerning these two parts of the act.
I will start with Part V. Since moving to Regina, the recruitment of bilingual personnel in our head office remains a major issue for Farm Credit Canada. The number of qualified bilingual workers in Regina and in Saskatchewan is not sufficient to meet our needs. We must make up the difference by recruiting from across Canada or training internally, which can be a long process.
Farm Credit Canada is a commercial Crown corporation that must remain competitive in providing financing to Canadian agriculture. We have a competitive advantage in being headquartered in Regina for a number of reasons. We are an employer of choice in Regina's smaller labour market. We are situated in an agriculturally oriented community and we are close to an agricultural post-secondary school.
However, we are also at a competitive disadvantage in terms of our bilingual capacity. In our experience, when French ceases to be a language of work at head offices outside the National Capital Region, English eventually becomes the dominant language. This has no impact on our services to the public since we serve clients in the language of their choice. However, it does have an impact on internal services offered to the employees working in the head office. The language at work becomes primarily English at the head office, which then ceases to be bilingual in its nature and practice. It would be beneficial for federal agency head offices outside the National Capital Region to be beacons of linguistic duality in highly anglophone or francophone regions in order to support a truly bilingual Canada.
Farm Credit Canada would have an additional competitive advantage if we were truly bilingual in the nature and functioning of our head office. We would be a more attractive place for bilingual employees. We would enhance our reputation in all provinces and territories and we could then better embody one of Canada's fundamental characteristics. Additionally, we would support diversity and therefore support our employer-of-choice strategy.
Employees in head offices of all federal agencies should be able to use the official language of their choice in the workplace, regardless of the region in which they work. We also need to ensure that employees can be understood when they use the official language of their choice.
Since moving Farm Credit Canada's head office to Regina in 1992, we have shown goodwill and encouraged the use of French in the workplace, but goodwill is not enough to counteract the various factors of Regina's geographic and demographic context. The Government of Canada could adopt a regulation in accordance with Part V of the act. This regulation could affirm that French and English are workplace languages in all federal agency head offices regardless of the region.
To ensure efficient implementation of this regulation, two measures would need to accompany it to support its complete enforcement. First, the federal government should defray supplemental costs generated by such a regulation. From a practical perspective managers must become bilingual in order to lead their teams in both official languages in accordance with Part V. In our case, this applies to approximately 100 persons. Direct training costs and indirect staff replacement costs while employees attend language training add up to several millions of dollars. We have estimated that our cost could total around $7 million over a period of approximately five years.
Head offices in the National Capital Region have two advantages in terms of language training: The existence of a large pool of bilingual persons and easy access to language training schools. This is not the case in regions deemed unilingual under the act. As with all Crown corporations with commercial activities, our competitiveness is a key factor in our sustainability. Without federal government support to implement such a regulation, Farm Credit Canada would need to pass these costs along to our customers.
We are a sustainable, self-sustaining, commercial Crown corporation. Our market competitiveness would be affected. We believe that our official language obligations under the act should never be in conflict with our core business obligations. The reverse is also true. We strongly recommend that this committee find an approach that mutually reinforces both obligations, rather than placing them in conflict with each other. The Government of Canada could adopt a national strategy to support official languages in agency head offices in regions deemed unilingual under the act.
As Saskatchewan's francophone population represents around 5 per cent of the province's total population, it alone could not provide a pool of candidates to fill the 200 bilingual positions at Farm Credit Canada's head office. This number would be required under a new regulation. Today 102 Regina positions are designated bilingual and 33 are filled with staff working toward bilingualism. We must therefore recruit bilingual people from other regions and offer financial support for moving and training. Many people from Eastern Canada do not see Regina as a destination of choice. This is a Canadian reality. We wish to increase our recruitment of bilingual personnel from, amongst others, post-secondary institutions like Collège universitaire de Saint-Boniface, Faculté Saint-Jean of the University of Alberta and L'Institut français of the University of Regina.
Should the federal government adopt a regulation with significant support measures, all federal agencies could more readily comply and become beacons of linguistic duality in regions deemed unilingual under the act?
On the other hand, if such a regulation were adopted without support measures we believe agencies would adopt a minimalist approach in meeting their implementation obligations.
We would like to address Part VII of the act. We have always respected the requirements of article 41 since 1988, but amendments adopted in 2005 have focused more of our attention to this part of the act.
As stated in our written submission, we launched a strategic planning process in August 2006 dealing with Parts IV, V, VI and VII of the act. This process enabled us to better understand the requirements of Part VII. Within our mandate we must play a role in promoting the use of both French and English and we must contribute to enhancing the vitality of official language minority communities. Since we work with the agricultural community, our contributions towards youth and rural community development could be important and we believe they are. As such, we will consult with official language minority community organizations.
You asked whether we are implementing regulations in Part VII and here is my perspective. As you are well aware, federal agencies answer to Parliament by means of various annual reports. We are well aware of the reporting process under section 41 by which the Department of Canadian Heritage reports on implementation activities of 32 designated federal agencies. This process must continue for designated agencies. Such an elaborate approach would not serve Farm Credit Canada well because of our small size and narrow mandate. However, under section 48 of the Official Languages Act we do report annually to the Public Service Human Resource Management Agency of Canada on our obligations under Parts IV, V and VI. We would gladly comply with the regulation mandating the Public Service Human Resource Management Agency of Canada, to require reporting of all federal agencies' activities in accordance with Part VII within the same report. There are in fact inherent linkages between Parts IV, V, VI and VII of the act. Such an approach would be practical. It would permit all federal agencies to improve the level of awareness of their obligations under Part VII. Furthermore, this would highlight each of the federal agency's annual activities that support the vitality of official language minority communities within their specific mandate.
We propose a regulation accompanied by significant support measures affirming that French and English are workplace languages in all federal agency head officers regardless of where they are in Canada. Our second proposal is a regulation mandating the requirement of reporting of activities in accordance with Part VII under the annual report requested under section 48 for those federal agencies not designated by Heritage Canada.
This is how Farm Credit Canada can best improve linguistic duality in the country and support the vitality of official language communities. Ms. Kilback and Mr. Thibaudeau will speak briefly to their employment experience and it would then be our pleasure, honourable senators, to answer questions to the best of our abilities.
[Translation]
Krista Kilback, Business Partner, Human Resources, Farm Credit Canada: Madam Chairman, it is a pleasure to share with you my personal experience as a Saskatchewan anglophone. I was the first to take French when my parents registered me in a French immersion program at elementary school and high school.
At the time, I did not realize the importance of knowing French, or even of the possibilities it could give me. Studying French was hard for me, because only in school were the surroundings suitable for learning about and appreciating French language and culture. When I left class, I was surrounded by an anglophone community and a family where English was the language used.
Today, I am very proud and grateful that I took the immersion program because immense possibilities opened up. Because of my knowledge of French, I have been able to work for the francophone community in Regina; that allowed me to pay for university and to get my degree.
After finishing university, my goal was to find a job in Regina, my hometown, the city where most of my family members live and where I feel at home. Farm Credit Canada allowed me to stay in Regina, and to give back to a community which has given me so much. Farm Credit Canada allowed me not only to meet my career aspirations with a job in human resources, but also to continue using French.
For me and for many other anglophones, bilingualism is a significant asset at Farm Credit Canada. Great employment opportunities open up, and we can move forward in our careers. With an appreciation of both official languages, and by staying in Saskatchewan, it is now possible to enjoy the best of each culture. The lifestyle is one I adore.
Michel Thibaudeau, Director, Corporate Audit, Farm Credit Canada: Madam Chairman, it is my pleasure to be here today to speak to you about my personal experience. I have worked at Farm Credit Canada for about a year. Originally, I am from the Outaouais.
I spent the previous 15 years in the public service here in Ottawa. I am married and have four children from 8 to 14. My wife is anglophone, the children are bilingual, and the language we speak at home is French. When someone suggested that I take a job in Regina, I did not think that it would work out for various reasons. One was that I was told that it was a strictly anglophone community, and that transition and integration would be difficult.
Finally, I agreed. My wife and I like challenges, and we decided to try it in part to give our children an interesting life experience. We wanted to keep on living in French at home and it was important for us to find a francophone school. We did that, and the children have fit in very well.
Professionally, most of my daily work is done in English, of course, and while most of the people do not understand French, I sense that their minds are open. Socially, the francophone community in Regina is very strong. It is surprising to see how a minority can organize itself to protect, maintain, and promote its language.
In conclusion, I would say that I have not regretted my experience, and I have no plans to return to the Outaouais.
The Chairman: Thank you. We are now going to begin our question period.
Senator Comeau: I would like to know a little more about the situation in which you live. Is there a reasonably strong francophone community in Regina?
Mr. Thibaudeau: There are about 2,000 francophones in Regina. The community is relatively small, but it is very active. I felt it from the moment I arrived, I felt that we were welcome. You see people around town, for example, or at the school.
Senator Comeau: Are francophone communities in Saskatchewan scattered? Geographically, are a number of communities francophone, or just one big one?
Mr. Thibaudeau: I am still not too familiar with Saskatchewan geography. I know that there are a lot of small francophone towns. In Regina, I know that the community is concentrated and that francophones stay together. The French school is near where I live, and a lot of francophones live around there too.
Senator Comeau: The province itself seems to be a bit like Manitoba, with a number of small towns.
Mr. Thibaudeau: I think so, yes.
Senator Comeau: As I understand it, it is about 5 per cent of the population of Saskatchewan?
Mr. Thibaudeau: Yes, that was the figure that Mr. Honey mentioned earlier.
Senator Comeau: Some of us think that there are a number of advantages to having a federal government presence outside Ottawa. Agencies have been set up in regions like yours. We have had very positive comments from Franco- Saskatchewanians. We also had a very positive reaction from the people of Prince Edward Island after the Department of Veterans Affairs moved there. Francophones in British Columbia made similar comments about the Canadian Tourism Commission.
There is surely more than a question of language at play there. A federal presence in the regions becomes more than just going to the post office, which is a federal responsibility. I think a stronger bond with the federal government is created with this kind of presence. We should make recommendations to the government as to whether we want to extend this presence all over Canada.
I think that we should consider the advantages very carefully. Of course, Mr. Thibaudeau, you must have thought long and hard, and worried about the impact on families. Do you regret having moved?
Mr. Thibaudeau: Not at all. We started off a bit in the dark, I have to admit. We had lived in the same place forever. We were ready for the challenge, we wanted to explore, to see what was happening elsewhere. As regards the language, we were pleasantly surprised to see the strength of the francophone community there. We were really welcomed like guests. I feel that almost every day. It is a little less obvious at work because we work in English. But outside work, the feeling is very strong.
Senator Comeau: Mr. Honey made a very concrete suggestion about how we can make recommendations to the government, especially under Parts V and VII of the act.
The costs do not seem particularly high to me. We are talking about $7 million — not a huge amount — to get the number of supervisors up to an acceptable level. That could solve the challenge of being able to work in French. Do the proposals made under Parts V and VII make sense to you?
Mr. Thibaudeau: Yes. I am pleasantly surprised to see that, in conformity with the act aside, this is about instilling one culture that actually allows the two cultures to live together. Mr. Honey convinced me, I can see that it is sincere. It is not just him, there are others in Regina who think the same way. As a newly-arrived francophone, I was pleased to hear that they have the appetite and the intent to go further.
Senator Comeau: We received very positive comments from the community when they came to see us here. They really appreciated the fact that Farm Credit Canada moved there, and became a good citizen from the outset.
Senator Tardif: Thank you for your presentation. I found your brief very interesting. I also have to congratulate you for all your efforts in promoting linguistic duality in this department.
I would like to come back to Part V on the language of work. Mr. Thibaudeau, do I understand that you worked for the same department in Ottawa before moving to Regina?
Mr. Thibaudeau: No, I did not work for Farm Credit. I had a number of positions in various departments.
Senator Tardif: You told us that you worked in an anglophone milieu, but that efforts at bilingualism are being made. I recognize that, at the moment, nothing under the act requires you to work in French. Do you have occasion to do so?
Mr. Thibaudeau: Absolutely. I also have two francophone employees who report to me. The situation is unique: One works in an office here in Kanata, the other in Montreal. Of course I work and communicate with them in French. In Regina, there are a lot of francophones outside my sections, and I can talk to them in French.
Senator Tardif: Are meetings conducted in French?
Mr. Thibaudeau: Most, if not all, meetings are in English. There is always a majority of unilingual anglophones around the table which means that the meeting is conducted in English. That is a reality in Regina.
Senator Tardif: Do you have access to work tools in French?
Mr. Thibaudeau: Yes, I make a point of getting a French computer and software. A lot of resources are offered in both languages, like the IT help service. They provide excellent service in French.
Senator Tardif: Can employees be supervised and evaluated in French?
Mr. Thibaudeau: In my case, with my employees, yes.
Senator Tardif: How about you, Krista?
Ms. Kilback: Yes, I certainly have the opportunity to speak in French. The clients I work with come from Ontario. I talk to them in French each week. All my work tools are in French or English.
Senator Tardif: But that is to serve your clients.
Ms. Kilback: My clients are Farm Credit Canada employees.
Senator Tardif: So, just so that I understand, this situation is because the good will and the leadership exists to make it possible. Under the act, you could say that because you are in a designated unilingual area, you do not have to make any effort in that direction.
Your suggestions to bring in legislation that would help to cover some associated costs are very interesting. You mentioned a cost of $7 million. Do language training costs come out of your operating budget?
[English]
Mr. Honey: It comes from our operating budget.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: So if someone wants language training, this reduces the money that could be available for other initiatives.
[English]
Mr. Honey: That is correct. From our perspective, there is a cost to take the course, a cost to provide the instruction and the instructor, and a cost to back-filling that individual while he or she is away on language training. That is likely as great a cost as the training. As well, infrastructure is required to provide appropriate language training facilities for employees.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: Are there more requests for language training than funds available to pay for it?
[English]
Mr. Honey: No, we are willing to meet the demand that we have under the act within our operating budget. Perhaps I can clarify where I was coming from relative to the costs. If there are added costs as a result of new regulations, it impacts our competitive situation in the marketplace. We are a commercial Crown corporation. We are self-sustaining. We compete with the major banks across Canada. We would find the dollars to do what we need to do to comply with the regulations of the act.
My point is if those costs increase as a result of new regulations, typically what those businesses would do is pass those on to their customers through their general administrative costs and then the transfer pricing to our customers. I believe that might put us in a position of not being as competitive when compared to the people that we compete with, namely the major banks. That is where I was coming from. We would do what we need to do.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: Why do you think legislation would result in additional costs?
[English]
Mr. Honey: With respect to the additional regulations, to satisfy the ongoing and increased need for bilingual capability in unilingual areas, we would have to train many more people. I think potentially there would be multiples of the costs we currently have.
To be honest, I have not done any scenario planning around that, but we are anticipating that there would be multiples of the costs. We believe there could be a financial impact on the organization. I would suggest completing analysis of what that might be before we can put our finger on the exact costs.
[Translation]
Mr. Thibaudeau: Greg is trying to say that we are in competition with the big banks and they have no obligation to comply with the act. So the battle becomes a bit tougher.
Senator Tardif: Is it because you would need more staff to provide a work environment where you could work in French? Is that it?
Mr. Thibaudeau: The infrastructure is a bit bigger.
Senator Tardif: So you have to train more people to be able to work in French?
Mr. Thibaudeau: Exactly.
Senator Tardif: And there are not enough bilingual candidates at the moment?
Mr. Thibaudeau: Exactly.
[English]
Senator Keon: Mr. Honey, your organization is a pan-Canadian organization, correct?
Mr. Honey: That is correct.
Senator Keon: You must have a number of customers in New Brunswick, Quebec and Northern Ontario who are francophone; is that correct?
Mr. Honey: That is correct, yes.
Senator Keon: I cannot imagine why you have difficulty recruiting to your office other than people might not want to move from Sudbury to Regina or from Quebec City to Regina. It seems to me that it would be relatively straightforward to recruit francophone people into this organization.
The major banks do not have trouble recruiting francophone people, do they?
Mr. Honey: We do not have trouble recruiting francophone people into the regions in which we are providing service in French. We do have 102 offices across Canada. In those areas where we have to provide the services, when we must enhance, improve and grow our bilingual capability in Regina, there is a very small bilingual population in Regina and Saskatchewan from which to draw.
As Mr. Thibaudeau said, and is a living example, to recruit bilingual people where there is such a small population in Regina, the difficulty we see is in providing the head office services for those employees that are serving our customers on the front line.
Senator Keon: As people climb the corporate ladder from your 102 regional offices, would you not have a supply of bilingual people from those corporate offices to come into offices in Regina?
Mr. Honey: We would definitely have some; however, the biggest impediment we have is recruiting those people to the Prairies and to Saskatchewan.
Many of them have agricultural backgrounds. They have gone to agricultural schools and typically have a post- secondary education. We will employ them as account managers, which is our biggest job family. They would be out providing financing for the agricultural community. Those folks do not relocate easily. They have roots in their communities, and they love where their communities. That has been one of our biggest challenges, to be honest.
Senator Keon: Especially once the kids make their friends. I have lived through that myself.
Ms. Kilback, your French immersion, I assume, occurred in secondary education, correct?
Ms. Kilback: Right, in elementary and high school, yes.
Senator Keon: Did you have any exposure to French during your post-secondary education?
Ms. Kilback: I took a couple of classes in French, but my degree was in administration, so a very small amount.
Senator Keon: Did you have any difficulty maintaining fluency in your language?
Ms. Kilback: No, I was quite fortunate to obtain employment in the francophone community of Regina. I worked in an environment where I could speak French daily, and it allowed me to keep practicing my French and to use it on a daily basis.
Senator Keon: That is very interesting. Thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: You mentioned that you began the process of developing your official languages strategy in August 2006, and that you have tried to integrate Parts IV, V, VI and VII of the Official Languages Act. I think that it is important to see all the parts of the Official Languages Act as a whole, and I congratulate you. As well, it was a voluntary effort on your part.
Is there a link between what you are doing and the latest amendments to the Official Languages Act that deal with the need to take positive measures? Has your thinking gone in that direction?
[English]
Mr. Honey: Absolutely, I believe they will support our strategy. I also agree with you that we need to look at the Official Languages Act as a whole, not in pieces or in parts. Positive measures will help.
The general focus and thrust of our strategy is to ensure that, working backwards from the desired customer experience, we really improve the values we demonstrate to our employees. We must focus on values such as respect, trust and integrity that we demonstrate by being able to communicate with them in their official language. We must look for ways to do that organizationally while looking for positive measures ourselves.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: How do you feel about Part VII of the Official Languages Act as it pertains to the support of official language minority communities?
[English]
Mr. Honey: From the perspective of developing a strategy to enhance the vitality of minority communities, it is necessary for us in the communities we represent and in which we operate, to do whatever we can to support bilingualism and linguistic duality. We are looking at every opportunity to do that through things like our community investment program and through supporting, with our employees and volunteers, associations like the French community in Regina.
We also believe that in developing our strategy we need to consult the minority communities so that we understand and hear from them what is important. It is not only what we think but what they think from the perspective of what Farm Credit Canada can do for them. The confluence of all of that will give us a strong strategy. The other thing that is important is the ability to link that strategy to business, ensuring that we are making good business decisions. With all of that, we enhance the community through our economic efforts and through our vitality from an agricultural and economic standpoint, and support that from a linguistic standpoint.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: At the moment, do you have a mechanism by which to consult with francophone communities?
[English]
Mr. Honey: We do not have a formal one. We have done much consultation in Regina and throughout Saskatchewan. Although we have not yet thought it out, as the strategy proceeds we will put in place a consultation mechanism.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: Certainly. The positive measures involve, in part, community consultations, and I am happy to hear you mention that in your planning. Do you think that it would be useful for employees in a head office in Regina to have their rights to language of work officially guaranteed?
[English]
Mr. Honey: Yes.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: With support, according to what you have said. You also mentioned that you have helped other offices, I think, plan their work on official languages. On page 6, paragraph 14, you mentioned that Farm Credit Canada has also taken a leadership role in official languages in government circles over and above your main mandate. Your employees and your managers have helped other federal agencies in western Canada, and the Government of Saskatchewan, to design their services in French. Can you tell me which agencies they were?
[English]
Mr. Honey: I believe it was the Saskatchewan provincial government. I believe you heard from Ms. Marie-France Kenny who worked with the provincial government to recruit francophones to Saskatchewan.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: Your other suggestion to our committee was that you would like to submit an annual report about Part VII of the Official Languages Act to the Public Service Human Resources Management Agency of Canada. Could you give me some more information on that, such as why you think it would be a good way to address certain requirements?
[English]
Mr. Honey: Have I gone out on a limb by saying that?
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: No, it is an interesting suggestion.
[English]
Mr. Honey: I am just checking. I believe it is a question of accountability. We do work through reports. We have reports that give the Government of Canada an opportunity to view our activities on official languages, as an example, but also on things like the Employment Equity Act. We do live by reports and prepare them.
From my perspective, as long as it is not too onerous a report, as we are a small organization, it is a way to give the government information about how we are doing what we say we will do and what we are required to do under the act.
[Translation]
The Chairman: I have a question for you, sir. As I understand it, you are suggesting that the Government of Canada should make a regulation under Part V of the Official Languages Act. In order to be sure that the regulation is put in place effectively, additional costs would clearly have to be borne. My understanding is that the extra costs would mostly be for recruiting bilingual people from other regions, to get them to come, and to encourage them to work in your offices. Then there is always the matter of moving and training expenses. If this was the case, the extra costs associated with the regulation would be considerable.
It happened in your case, and everything is going well, but that is because there was really good will shown by yourself and by others. What I would like you to explain to us a little more, Mr. Honey, is how far do we go to consider implementation successful? From the experience you have gone through, are there other important factors that should be considered if we are going to go so far as to recommend a regulation?
[English]
Mr. Honey: I absolutely believe that there are. I will begin with leadership. You mentioned that leadership is critical. When an organization decentralizes from the National Capital Region to Regina, for example, active and visible sponsorship of the leadership is absolutely necessary. As you observed, we did that voluntarily because we believe it is good business. The federal government could assist in helping the understanding of that sort of impact on the transition. That would be a leadership-type program. I have not formulated the details of this yet.
There could also be support for organizations to link the benefits of linguistic duality to their business. I cannot anticipate what they would be because I do not know what the agencies are. For example, if there is a business case for improving the linguistic ability of FCC, and if the federal government could provide expertise to help us understand and to put a business case together, that would be very beneficial.
From an infrastructure standpoint, it would be very helpful to assist with the advance work prior to the decentralization by working with community associations in the recipient community. In Regina, it would be the communauté fransaskoise and other such organizations, as well as the city of Regina. It is important that they understand that the decentralization of an organization out of the National Capital Region to a unilingual region would be very much enhanced by a partnership with the local government. From an awareness standpoint, that means of support would be very beneficial to our organizations. It is also important to help organizations understand how to develop partnerships with schools at all levels, language institutions and the francophone community.
Those are my ideas and although they are not thought out in detail, they could be beneficial to organizations decentralizing from Ottawa.
The Chairman: This would require additional work on your part if it were to come into effect.
Mr. Honey: Yes, it would mean work on my part and on the part of other organizations like mine.
The Chairman: If I may ask, what is in it for Farm Credit Canada?
Mr. Honey: Are you asking about the benefits to Farm Credit Canada?
The Chairman: Yes.
Mr. Honey: We are very proud of the fact that we are an employer of choice. We are one of the 50 best companies to work for in Canada as outlined by the Hewitt Associates survey along with The Globe and Mail. We are proud of our accomplishment, and I am passionate about it. We became one of the 50 best employers in Canada by incorporating a culture of respect, integrity and trust. Our employees feel that culture.
Employees such as Mr. Thibaudeau feel respected, even in a unilingual community like Regina, because the infrastructure is in place for him. He feels respect and the payoff for us is that employees want to work for us in a very hot market, although I do not mean Regina specifically. The demographics of the world are such that there is a war for talent. We want to win the war for talent and that is how it is accomplished. That is my humble opinion.
[Translation]
The Chairman: Mr. Thibaudeau, do you have anything to add?
Mr. Thibaudeau: No.
The Chairman: Ms. Kilback?
[English]
Ms. Kilback: I will add that it also enhances the employee experience.
Senator Comeau: I read through your excellent presentation and found that the flow of it was good and the information detailed. That led me to think that if we are to look at relocation in the future, we must look at lessons learned from previous relocations.
The Farm Credit Corporation is one of the first to be relocated. It must have been close to the move of Veterans Affairs.
Mr. Honey: That is correct.
Senator Comeau: Have you been asked by officials in Ottawa to make a presentation of your expenses?
Mr. Honey: To my knowledge, we have not been asked, but I would be happy to make such a presentation.
Senator Comeau: In the great machinery of government in Ottawa, we have thousands of employees preparing all kinds of documents. You would think that one department would want to learn from the three or four government agencies that have moved. In that way, they could prepare a just-in-case scenario in case the government-of-the-day asks them to relocate. It would be good to be prepared to provide the advantages, disadvantages, negatives and positives and lessons learned so that mistakes could be avoided.
I find it odd that you have not been asked by someone somewhere to make that case.
Mr. Honey: I cannot say categorically that we have not been asked. I have been with FCC for seven years and, to my knowledge, we have not been asked.
Senator Comeau: If the request had been made during the past seven years, there would have been a request for an update. Perhaps the committee might look at why the House of Commons does not have a ministry of relocation.
Mr. Honey: Having a central agency to gather all of that intelligence to help with relocation, at least when the agency is decentralizing, would be a good idea.
Senator Comeau: It could be under Treasury Board or the Privy Council Office. We will do a bit of digging to see what we can find.
Senator Tardif: We will start the ball rolling.
Senator Comeau: Each case must be handled differently when a department is moved, regardless of where, and made to fit the circumstances.
The lessons that you have learned and the advice that you have given us today on leadership and the Official Languages Act have been positive feedback on decentralization and will be helpful to the committee for its report.
The question of leadership seems to arise time after time and because you are not being forced by the department or by the government, it is apparent that someone somewhere has made the right decision.
My last question concerns the board of directors of the FCC. How many directors do you have on the board? How many of them are bilingual?
Mr. Honey: I would have to research that information.
Senator Comeau: We could access it on the internet but perhaps you could obtain the information for the committee.
[Translation]
The Chairman: If my colleagues have no further questions, I would like to offer you my very sincere thanks, Ms. Kilback, gentlemen.
[English]
Your presentation was great, as was the document that you sent to the committee prior to today's meeting.
[Translation]
Thank you very much. Please be assured that we will be carefully considering any recommendations we may make to the government.
If you wish, you may now leave, but the committee must continue its work.
We now have to consider a draft budget prepared for the committee's general study. Do you all have in front of you the copy you received as you came in?
The budget was developed to match the work plan that we discussed at our last meeting. Are there any questions on the budget you have received?
Senator Tardif: I see that the Olympic Games project is broken down. How do we know which other projects are approved in the budget?
Josée Thérien, Clerk of the Committee: At the moment, the budget reflects what was discussed in committee.
Several other budgets were discussed.
Senator Tardif: Okay.
Ms. Thérien: Or they are specific topics like, for example, Bill S-3, which does not have specific expenses.
Senator Tardif: But, they could. . .
Ms. Thérien: We can always ask for a supplementary budget.
Senator Tardif: What happens if people come before the committee and ask for their expenses to be reimbursed?
Ms. Thérien: That is not part of the committee's budget. Witnesses' travel expenses are paid from another budget.
Senator Tardif: What happens if we go out to a community?
Ms. Thérien: We could ask for a supplementary budget.
The Chairman: This budget just contains travel expenses for the hearings in Whistler and Vancouver so that we can follow up on the work we have done on the Olympic Games.
Next week, we can discuss specific projects such as the study of culture. This will be a specific order of reference that will come with a specific budget. If we have to add more travel, we can always ask for a supplementary budget. So this budget has the funds necessary for us to conduct our regular meetings and discuss the matters that were brought to the committee's attention last week.
Senator Comeau: Madam Chairman, do we not have to submit a budget for the whole year at the beginning of the year? If we want to ask for a supplementary budget later, are we going to be in a good position? I only ask because budgets are now being reviewed.
Ms. Thérien: As much as possible, committees are asked to submit budgets for the entire year. But the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Admininstration completely understands that a committee's needs can change during the year.
Senator Tardif: Is there enough money available?
Ms. Thérien: We have never run out before.
[English]
Senator Keon: It seems straightforward to me unless there are other considerations. It is well prepared and a modest budget.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: I think I am happy with the explanations I have received, Madam Chairman.
The Chairman: Can I have a motion to adopt the budget?
Senator Comeau: I move to adopt the budget.
The Chairman: All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Thank you very much. We are now going to proceed in camera to discuss the committee's future work, but we will first adjourn the meeting for five minutes to give people time to leave the meeting room.
The committee continued in camera.