Moved second reading of Bill S-220, An Act to amend the Languages Skills Act (Governor General).

He said: Honourable senators, I rise today to talk about Bill S-220, An Act to amend the Languages Skills Act (Governor General), whose sole purpose is to add the office of Governor General to the list of offices subject to the Language Skills Act. This bill would add the office of Governor General of Canada to the list of the 10 officers of Parliament who must be bilingual at the time of their appointment.

These officers of Parliament occupy very high-level positions. They are at the top of our administrative institutions. They are appointed by the House of Commons, or by the House and the Senate, as the case may be. They include the Auditor General of Canada, the Chief Electoral Officer, the Privacy Commissioner, the Commissioner of Official Languages, the Information Commissioner, the Senate Ethics Officer, the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, the Commissioner of Lobbying, the Parliamentary Budget Officer, the President of the Public Service Commission and the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner.

On July 6, 2021, the Prime Minister of Canada announced the appointment of Mary Simon to the position of Governor General of Canada. The new Governor General speaks English and Inuktitut but does not speak French, one of Canada’s two official languages. Following this appointment, the Commissioner of Official Languages received over 1,300 complaints on the inability of the Governor General to communicate in French.

The Official Languages Act requires federal institutions to take concrete and intentional positive measures to ensure English and French bilingualism in Canada. In addition, the Prime Minister, who is not a federal institution subject to the act, has the prerogative of appointing the Governor General and is not bound by the recommendations made by the Privy Council Office, unless that power is enshrined in a law, such as the Language Skills Act or the Official Languages Act.

Like the many Canadians who complained to the Commissioner of Official Languages, I was exceedingly surprised and disappointed to learn that a person who can’t speak both official languages was being appointed to the position of Governor General of Canada.

The new Governor General’s linguistic shortcomings do not diminish the prestige of her other professional skills or her remarkable career.

I absolutely agree that Mary Simon is a very fine person, and I am not calling that into question with this legislation.

However, honourable senators, for someone in the position of Governor General, a lack of proficiency in one of the two official languages is a serious problem. We’re not talking about a trivial or secondary position. We are talking about the head of state who represents our country and serves as commander-in-chief of our military. The Governor General performs these duties not only in Canada but also abroad. In this capacity, the Governor General performs several functions.

The Governor General’s official website sets out her responsibilities as follows.

The Governor General exercises the powers and responsibilities of the head of state, Her Majesty The Queen. As such, the Governor General is non-partisan and apolitical. As the Queen’s representative in Canada, the Governor General has a number of responsibilities, one of the most important being to ensure that Canada always has in place a Prime Minister and a government that have the confidence of the Parliament. The Governor General’s other constitutional duties include swearing into office the Prime Minister, cabinet ministers and the Chief Justice of Canada.

She also summons, prorogues and dissolves Parliament, delivers the Speech from the Throne and gives Royal Assent to acts of Parliament.

Her responsibilities also include appointing members of the Privy Council, lieutenant-governors and certain judges on the advice of the Prime Minister and signing into effect official documents such as orders-in-council.

You will agree, colleagues, that these are responsibilities of the highest order. In fact, the Governor General is at the top of our constitutional hierarchy.

As part of her duties, the current Governor General recently participated in the following events. On December 2, she presented letters of credence to diplomats. On November 23, as we all witnessed, she delivered the Speech from the Throne and also held a meeting with the President of the Republic of Kosovo. On November 18, she participated in the unveiling of a commemorative stamp. On November 11, she participated in the National Remembrance Day Ceremony. On November 8, she honoured members of the Canadian Armed Forces. On November 6, she attended the 2021 Sobey Art Award ceremony. On November 1, she invested 97 members of the Canadian Armed Forces into the Order of Military Merit. On October 8, she visited the Ottawa Mission.

As part of her duties, the Governor General is routinely called on to interact with Canadians who speak both of Canada’s official languages. Furthermore, as we have seen, she also represents Canada abroad.

The Governor General’s official website also states the following:

The governor general also plays an important role in international relations by travelling abroad on State and official visits. During State visits, the governor general is often accompanied by a delegation of prominent Canadians representing various areas of expertise. The goal in conducting international visits is to promote Canada, deepen people-to-people ties and strengthen Canada’s relationships with international partners.

What message does a unilingual anglophone Governor General send to other countries? The answer is obvious: Canada is a unilingual anglophone country.

Yet the richness of our country stems from the vitality of its two official languages, French and English, the languages of its founding peoples. We also have the benefit of cultural and linguistic diversity, which includes Indigenous languages and makes Canada unique in the world. Nevertheless, when a country’s head of state speaks only one of the country’s official languages, it creates a sort of anachronism or incongruity.

I will quote another passage from the official website:

As Commander-in-Chief of Canada, the governor general plays a major role in recognizing the importance of Canada’s military at home and abroad. The commander-in-chief offers support and encouragement to members of the Canadian Armed Forces and their families and loved ones, while helping Canadians recognize the military’s past and present contributions to our country.

How can the Governor General recognize the important role of francophone soldiers and offer support and encouragement to their families and loved ones if she cannot communicate with them in their language?

Our country was built on linguistic duality, and with Confederation, that linguistic duality was codified, including in the founding text of our country, the Constitution of Canada. Section 133, which is entitled “Use of English and French Languages,” states:

Either the English or the French Language may be used by any Person in the Debates of the Houses of the Parliament of Canada and of the Houses of the Legislature of Quebec; and both those Languages shall be used in the respective Records and Journals of those Houses; and either of those Languages may be used by any Person or in any Pleading or Process in or issuing from any Court of Canada established under this Act, and in or from all or any of the Courts of Quebec.

The Acts of the Parliament of Canada and of the Legislature of Quebec shall be printed and published in both those Languages.

Several decades later, in 1969, the Official Languages Act was voted on and passed on the recommendation of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism, established by Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson. It came into force on September 7, 1969, and established English and French as the official languages of Canada.

The act created the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages to oversee its implementation. Under the act, all federal institutions must provide services in English or French, based on demand.

Then, in 1982, we amended the Canadian Constitution by adopting the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which is enshrined in the Constitution. That gave the two official languages even more weight. In particular, sections 16 and 20 of the Charter read as follows:

16 (1) English and French are the official languages of Canada and have equality of status and equal rights and privileges as to their use in all institutions of the Parliament and government of Canada.

Section 20 reads as follows:

20 (1) Any member of the public in Canada has the right to communicate with, and to receive available services from, any head or central office of an institution of the Parliament or government of Canada in English or French, and has the same right with respect to any other office of any such institution where (a) there is a significant demand for communications with and services from that office in such language; or (b) due to the nature of the office, it is reasonable that communications with and services from that office be available in both English and French.

Also, section 96 of the Canadian Constitution states the following:

Appointment of Judges

The Governor General shall appoint the Judges of the Superior, District, and County Courts in each Province, except those of the Courts of Probate in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick.

Honourable senators, you are no doubt aware that Supreme Court judges are not required to be bilingual. Section 16 of the Official Languages Act states:

Every federal court, other than the Supreme Court of Canada, has the duty to ensure that (a) if English is the language chosen by the parties for proceedings conducted before it in any particular case, every judge or other officer who hears those proceedings is able to understand English without the assistance of an interpreter; (b) if French is the language chosen by the parties for proceedings conducted before it in any particular case, every judge or other officer who hears those proceedings is able to understand French without the assistance of an interpreter; and (c) if both English and French are the languages chosen by the parties for proceedings conducted before it in any particular case, every judge or other officer who hears those proceedings is able to understand both languages without the assistance of an interpreter.

The Trudeau government announced that it planned to amend this provision of the Official Languages Act and make it mandatory for Supreme Court judges to be bilingual. In June, right before Parliament adjourned for the summer, it introduced Bill C-32, An Act to amend the Official Languages Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts. Clause 11 of this bill states the following:

11 (1) The portion of subsection 16(1) of the Act before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

Duty to ensure understanding without interpreter

That subsection of section 16 would then read:

16 (1) Every federal court has the duty to ensure that

Essentially, this clause proposes to remove the exception so that the Supreme Court is also required to be bilingual. This bill died on the Order Paper following the prorogation of Parliament. However, in its Throne Speech, the government announced the following:

As Canadians, our two official languages are part of who we are. It is essential to support official language minority communities, and to protect and promote French outside and inside Quebec. The Government will reintroduce the proposed Act for the Substantive Equality of French and English and the Strengthening of the Official Languages Act.

Therefore, the government intends to make bilingualism mandatory for Supreme Court justices. In so doing, it will reaffirm the importance of bilingualism in the highest offices of the land.

Moreover, in the statement regarding the 1,300 complaints his office received following the appointment of Mary Simon as Governor General, the Commissioner of Official Languages said this, among other things:

Institutional bilingualism depends in large part on the bilingualism of those occupying positions at the highest levels of the public service. Our leaders must lead by example and must be able to represent all Canadians in both official languages.

In the passage from the Speech from the Throne that I just read, I would like to insist on the following sentence: “As Canadians, our two official languages are part of who we are.”

To illustrate and emphasize the importance of this statement, I have chosen the passage from the reference of language rights in Manitoba that was also taken up by the sovereign court in the Beaulac case:

Section 23 of the Manitoba Act, 1870 is a specific manifestation of the general right of Franco-Manitobans to use their own language. The importance of language rights is grounded in the essential role that language plays in human existence, development and dignity. It is through language that we are able to form concepts; to structure and order the world around us. Language bridges the gap between isolation and community, allowing humans to delineate the rights and duties they hold in respect of one another, and thus to live in society.

That is why constitutional protection to ensure the integrity and equality of Canada’s two official languages, English and French, by virtue of its minority status, not only in Canada but especially in North America, the French fact is threatened and losing ground across Canada.

Last winter, the government tabled a document outlining the Government of Canada’s intentions with respect to official language reform and the plan to modernize the Official Languages Act.

The report is entitled English and French: Towards a substantive equality of official languages in Canada. In it, Minister Joly, the then official languages minister, wrote:

Our official languages are part of our identity; our past, our present and our future. They are meeting points and links between our cultures. They are at the heart of our country’s social contract.

But the world is changing. The development of digital technology and international trade is favouring the use of English. As a result, the use of French is declining in Canada and its vitality is a cause for concern. We recognize that French is a minority language compared to English and that we have an increased duty to protect it. In order to achieve substantive equality between our two official languages, we must take concrete action. We must do this work together, with each other, in a climate of cooperation and acceptance. It is a matter of social cohesion.

I draw your attention to the following passage from the statement by Minister Joly that I just quoted:

 . . . the world is changing. The development of digital technology and international trade is favouring the use of English. As a result, the use of French is declining in Canada and its vitality is a cause for concern.

We recently saw a striking example of that decline. Everyone will remember the infamous speech delivered to the Chamber of Commerce of Metropolitan Montreal by Michael Rousseau, the CEO of Air Canada. Air Canada’s headquarters is in Montreal, the largest francophone city in North America, and this company is subject to the Official Languages Act. Mr. Rousseau gave his speech entirely in English. When questioned by reporters afterwards, the CEO said that he did not speak French, despite living in Quebec for more than 14 years, but that this had never stood in his way. On top of that, he said that he had more important priorities as CEO than learning French.

Two of Trudeau’s ministers joined the chorus of statements and condemnations that followed this regrettable incident. The Minister of Official Languages, Ginette Petitpas Taylor, said the following:

Our two official languages are our strength and our leaders must promote them. I invite you all to make the effort to learn the beautiful French language.

The Minister of Canadian Heritage made the following statement:

Air Canada must do its part to respect our two official languages, particularly French. Quebecers have the right to expect that an example will be set at the highest level.

Esteemed colleagues, I agree with the Minister of Canadian Heritage: Quebecers and francophones across the country have the right to expect that an example will be set at the highest level. When unilingual anglophones are appointed to high-level positions, they regularly commit to learning French while in the position. Apparently that commitment to learning French is seen as a magic wand that justifies the failure to uphold the bilingualism values present in our laws. That’s actually the justification Mr. Trudeau served up when he appointed Ms. Simon to the position of Governor General. The appointment of a unilingual anglophone Governor General sends a completely counterproductive message about how people who speak only one of the two official languages can still attain top positions even though we have two official languages in Canada.

I’m only talking about English because, quite honestly, although I never would have believed the Prime Minister would appoint a unilingual anglophone Governor General, I think it is even less likely he would appoint a unilingual francophone Governor General.

Personally, I believe that an individual stepping into such a major and important role, and representing Canadian values, must be bilingual from day one. For me, this is a must.

The other impact of appointing a unilingual anglophone to such a high-level position will be that the Governor General’s entourage and the various services associated with her office will operate in English only. During the study of Bill C-419 on the language skills of officers of Parliament, Stéphane Dion made what I consider to be a very fair point, saying:

Isn’t it true that if the head is not bilingual, the body is in danger of not being bilingual as well? If the commissioner doesn’t understand the French language, then the whole system, the whole apparatus will speak only English.

Along the same lines, Senator Joyal said the following in a meeting of the Committee of the Whole in the Senate in November 1, 2011 on the appointment of Mr. Ferguson as Auditor General:

There is a distinction between someone who is willing to learn languages and someone who must master the language when he or she holds the position.

Honourable senators, can you imagine a hospital hiring doctors who are in the early stages of their training, on the pretext that they are committed to continuing their studies? Yet this is what happens when a prime minister appoints a unilingual anglophone head of state for a country where French and English are the official languages, the foundation of our common identity and values, on the pretext that this person is committed to learning French.

In the document she released as a precursor to the upcoming modernization of the Official Languages Act, Minister Joly wrote the following:

The federal government must act in its areas of jurisdiction to respond to the concerns of Francophones in Quebec and across the country in order to protect and promote French and reinforce a sense of linguistic security. . . .

The federal government must play a leading role in bilingualism. The judges appointed to the Supreme Court must be bilingual, the role of the CBC/Radio-Canada as a cultural institution must be strengthened, and the powers of the Commissioner of Official Languages must be enhanced. The public service, as the main point of contact for Canadians with their federal government, must also lead by example.

It is so hard for me to reconcile this statement with the government’s decision to appoint a unilingual anglophone Governor General. That is why I have come to the conclusion that we must create rules for future appointments to the office of Governor General to ensure that we don’t end up with a head of state and commander-in-chief who can’t communicate with just over 8 million Canadians.

In my view, the Language Skills Act, which was passed in 2013, seemed to be the most promising way to achieve that objective. Allow me to give a little history on the introduction of this bill in the House of Commons, the ensuing debates and the bill’s passage.

In November 2011, Prime Minister Harper appointed Michael Ferguson as Auditor General of Canada. Mr. Ferguson was a unilingual anglophone but committed to learning French during his mandate. The opposition got so worked up about this appointment that the Liberal members expressed their outrage by leaving the House of Commons when it was time to vote on the appointment of the new Auditor General.

Then, on May 1, 2012, the member of Parliament for Louis-Saint-Laurent, Alexandrine Latendresse, introduced Bill C-419, which enacted the rule that officers of Parliament must be able to understand both official languages without the assistance of an interpreter. These public servants were identified as being at the highest level of the Canadian public service hierarchy, and their bilingualism was meant to send a strong message to the public service and to all Canadians. Some quotes from the bill’s consideration in committee at second reading and third reading are worth repeating here. Member of Parliament Jacques Gourde provided the government’s response to Bill C-419. He said:

We understand that linguistic duality is at the heart of our identity as a nation, and it contributes to our historical and cultural wealth. It empowers official language minority communities across the country and contributes to Canada’s economic vitality. It strengthens the resilience of our federation through the provision of services in both official languages.

Marc Garneau, the member for Westmount—Ville-Marie, stated:

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak about this bill. It seems that everyone supports it . . . It is quite obvious that officers of Parliament must be bilingual. In an ideal world, we would not need a law for this.

Stéphane Dion had this to say:

Mr. Speaker . . . I am saying that we are discussing a bill that we should normally not have to discuss, something that has been taken for granted and that Canadians thought was done already.

The obligation for officers of Parliament to be bilingual and to speak Canada’s two official languages is something that seemed self-evident until this Prime Minister appointed a unilingual Auditor General. That was a shock. The party to which I belong reacted so strongly that it refused to vote in favour of the appointment of that Auditor General. We left the House without even voting. . . .

It is insulting to tell Canadians that the incumbents of such crucially important positions will be asked to devote considerable time and effort to learning a language when they are over 40 or 50 years of age. They have better things to do. They must be able to understand both official languages at the time of their appointment. . . .

The other reason that the Auditor General and other officers of Parliament should be bilingual is to send the right message to the youth of our country. If they have ambition and want access to all the responsibilities of their country, they should learn the two official languages.

It is key for people to do that when they are 18 years old because it will be much more difficult when they are aged 48. When they will perhaps want access to these responsibilities, it may be too late. We need to send this message now, through this bill. It is key to shaping our country and the ability for Canada to pay tribute to its two official languages.

It is an incredible asset for us to have two official languages that are international languages. We need to be sure that it will be part of our future. We need to send a message that the most important responsibility, including yours, Mr. Speaker, is to be able to address fellow Canadians in the two official languages. . . .

A belief in bilingualism is a belief in making it more widespread.

Section 12 of the Constitution Act, 1867, reads as follows:

All Powers, Authorities, and Functions which . . . are . . . vested in . . . Governors or Lieutenant Governors . . . be vested in and exerciseable by the Governor General . . . subject nevertheless . . . to be abolished or altered by the Parliament of Canada.

Honourable senators, we therefore have the legitimacy required to set criteria for the appointment of future governors general.

Remember, honourable senators, that one of our constitutional roles is to protect minorities. Obviously, francophones in this country are one of the largest minorities and are part of our heritage.

While more than 1,300 Canadians filed complaints with the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages following Ms. Simon’s appointment, I can tell you, honourable senators, that after I introduced my bill, I received a record number of messages of support.

I firmly believe that this bill is important to Canadians. I urge you to support it without delay and pass it in second reading so it can be sent to committee and commended by the people of Canada.

Colleagues, thank you very much for your attention.

Senator Housakos, did you want to join debate or ask a question?

I would like to ask a question, if Senator Carignan will accept one.

Senator Carignan, some senators would like to ask you questions. Will you take some questions?

Yes, of course, Your Honour.

Senator Carignan, thank you for your commitment to Canada’s official languages. I would like you to comment on certain associated aspects.

Would you agree that Canada’s Official Languages Act is not like any other legislation, and that it is about more than just defining the country’s two official languages?

Do you not believe that the official languages of Canada are an element that is supposed to identify us as Canadians?

Are the official languages not a tool that unites Canadians from coast to coast to coast? Would you agree that, no matter where we come from, both official languages are used every day, in Canada and in all areas of the world?

It is also a way to recognize the two founding peoples of this country, including the Acadians, who opened their doors and provided people like me, the son of immigrants, with the opportunity to settle here. My mother tongue was neither French nor English.

As an institution and as a country, we have always celebrated the fact that all Canadians are free to use their mother tongue.

More specifically, do you agree with me that the official languages are undeniably an element that represents the Canadian identity?

Indeed, senator, you painted a fine picture of our country’s characteristic identity, with its two founding peoples and its two official languages.

It is also the role of the Governor General to represent that Canadian identity, and that is why it is important to prioritize selection criteria requiring the person to be able to address Canadians in both official languages. That is also the message we want to send the world, that Canada is a bilingual country, with two official languages, English and French. When the Governor General addresses people outside the country, he or she shows the world that Canada is a country that has two official languages.

Promoting that identity requires knowledge and use of both languages.

I very much appreciated the quote by Mr. Dion, who I believe is a man who is greatly respected by everyone. I thought it was especially important when he said that if we want the body to be bilingual, then the head needs to be bilingual. If the head is unilingual, then the body will be unilingual too.

I think that we need to take every opportunity to promote both our official languages. I believe that when we appoint people to positions as high as that of head of state and commander-in-chief, that person should be able to address people in our two official languages.

Senator Carignan, will you take a question?

Yes.

If you are talking about the Lieutenant-Governor position, I imagine so. Those high-level positions should be bilingual. I drafted my bill for the Governor General’s position. As you know, I introduced another bill about the Lieutenant-Governor of New Brunswick, which is a bilingual province under the Constitution.

In a perfect world, those high-level positions should be bilingual.

Today I heard a speech by someone who participated in a ceremony at the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts for the Riopelle celebration. This person, who was representing Canadian museums, spoke only English and delivered an English-only speech to celebrate a French painter in a francophone city, even though the event was attended by many francophones. That kind of thing always sends a negative message. We should be able to celebrate and promote our two official languages. All these high-level positions should be bilingual.

The problem with committing to learning the other language when you don’t have the required proficiency from the beginning is that these are five-year terms. So, if the individual can’t communicate for two, three or four years with people in both official languages, part of their duties remains unfulfilled. The person should therefore have this proficiency at the time of the appointment, rather than promising to learn the other language.

We saw the example of the Auditor General. Mr. Ferguson began giving interviews in French about three years after his appointment. There was a period of time during his tenure when he was unable to communicate with francophones when presenting his reports and taking journalists’ questions. Obviously, making an effort to learn French or English, as the case may be, sends a positive message. I think you’ve seen my English improve, too. You’ve seen the efforts I’ve made to learn English and speak it as well as I can. Many of you have witnessed this. That said, the proficiency required to fill these positions must be in place from the beginning, not gained along the way, so that appointees can fully perform their duties.

I’m very interested in the arguments that you make and very open to being supportive of this. I cherish this about our country, but my general approach to these things is, where possible, don’t try and fix it at the end. Let’s try and fix it at the beginning.

For me, that means maybe a group of us should get together and take a look at how we could build recommendations to influence provincial education systems to give appropriate language training in both official languages and bring our students through.

I certainly didn’t have access to quality training as a young person. I did in-place training in Quebec.

You said a number of times that we have a unilingual Governor General. I just want to point out that she’s not unilingual.

Yes, you are correct.

I know in terms of the two official languages yes, she is; but we have many people who occupied these lands before us who speak a variety of Indigenous languages, such as Innu.

I also think that we are in a moment when we both need to revitalize and build sustainability for the French language, but we need to recognize that we’re in a moment of reconciliation as well, and this is such a significant appointment.

I enter this discussion wanting to think of this as a special, significant and really important appointment, and I accept the commitment to learn English here. However, I pose to you — and this is not a criticism of your bill; you’re trying to deal with something now — that we probably would be better in the long run in this country if we dedicated more time for all Canadian students to be proficient in both official languages. Do you have comment about that or are you interested in pursuing those kinds of recommendations or intervention with provincial education systems?

Yes, definitely. Obviously, when I said she was unilingual, I meant that she was not bilingual in terms of our two official languages. I commend the Governor General’s ability to speak other languages, including Inuktitut.

We must promote the two official languages, and we should encourage the idea of sending the best messages possible and funding everything to do with education in both official languages across the country as much as possible. I have children who became francophones outside Quebec. I’m not a grandfather yet, but I hope that my grandchildren will have the opportunity to continue to speak French and that they will be able to learn French even if they are outside Quebec. I hope that enriching experience will be available to them. Obviously, I do agree with that.

I have a question for my colleague, Senator Carignan, if he would accept it.

Of course.

Senator Carignan, Senator Lankin has already covered part of my question. I share her concerns about language skills and protections for official languages. Senator Lankin obviously spoke about this objective in the context of education and encouraging more people. My question is a bit more specific, but it is along the same lines. I am wondering if you’ve identified what we need to do, and at what stage of the process, so that people don’t end up in this kind of situation.

Sometimes there are highly competent people who have the experience to be able to represent Canada here and abroad. One would assume that they genuinely want to learn the two official languages, since they know that they could one day end up in a role or job that requires bilingualism.

I’m wondering if you have thought about this question and whether you have identified at what stage in an individual’s career path this issue could be dealt with.

I haven’t looked into that aspect as much. For now, I would say that we expect a modernization of the Official Languages Act soon. As soon as it is introduced, I plan to start looking into this issue.

For now, I believe that we need to treat the position of Governor General as a powerful symbol, to ensure that this position is filled in future by people who speak both official languages. To me, that is a powerful message we are sending to all Canadians. It is probably the most powerful symbolic message that could be sent.

Senator Carignan, your time is up, but other senators would like to ask you some questions. Are you asking for five more minutes?

I am asking for five more minutes. If senators agree, I would be pleased to answer questions.

Senator Carignan, first of all, I want to congratulate you for introducing this bill, and especially for having the idea when the appointment happened. Like you, I was disappointed and surprised by the new Governor General’s limited proficiency in French, although it in no way detracts from her other bilingualism or her culture. As Senator Lankin said, the symbolic significance of her appointment is, of course, extraordinary. I would say that, unfortunately, this is an extremely delicate debate for francophones who want to take a stand on this issue, because there seems to be a total lack of sympathy when we call for these kinds of official positions in Canada to be held by people who can speak our language. However, the reality shows that that is often not the case.

You talked about your efforts to learn English, but the reverse does not always happen. I know Senator Lankin talked about it too, but there are courses offered in the public service for anyone who wants to learn French. In the public service, we have all the tools at our disposal to learn French if we want to, so it’s a question of willingness.

I have a sneaking suspicion that if a person who spoke only French and an Indigenous language had been appointed to the position of Governor General, that would have caused quite an uproar in our primarily anglophone country. I would encourage my anglophone colleagues to ponder this: How would they have reacted if our new Governor General spoke only French and an Indigenous language? I think people would be a little upset about that.

Well, that is kind of the point of the bill. I would have felt just as uncomfortable, understandably, if it were the other way around, because the idea is to represent Canadian identity, which is bilingual. That is exactly the purpose of this bill. I’m sure you understand that, if the bill is adopted, it will prevent the future appointment of a Governor General who speaks only French and one other language, but not English. I understand your question, and I share your opinion.

Would Senator Carignan take a question?

Yes.

Senator Carignan, I sincerely thank you for introducing this bill that prompts us to have a more transparent discussion on a sensitive topic. I think that we all recognize that Ms. Simon is a highly competent and talented individual, but we also recognize that we are at a crucial point in our history in which reconciliation must be reflected in symbolic and important decisions. That said, and I’d like to hear your thoughts on this, I think that this appointment has created some profound uneasiness in Canadian society because it pits Indigenous languages against French, when they can be compatible in a certain context.

You talked about education, which is a provincial jurisdiction, as we all know. We also know that, as Senator Miville-Dechêne pointed out, the federal public service offers language training.

How is this reflected in this bill, and what are your thoughts on the challenges facing the public service, which must provide training and conduct evaluations to ensure that senior federal public servants are able to speak both official languages?

I do know that there is training that is provided and that is available. We must promote the importance of speaking both languages. I believe that we should perhaps consider creating additional incentives in the public service so that people learn both languages. My interest in this matter is growing. I am currently working on certain files concerning services in English and French in the public service, and there is a discrepancy in the deadlines, the quality of the services provided, and the response times for certain calls based on whether they are made in French or English.

There is still much work to be done. Once again, I will cite former minister Stéphane Dion, who said that if the head of an office is a unilingual anglophone or francophone, the body is in danger of being unilingual as well. That’s why it’s important that we work on all fronts, but especially on the people at the top.

I have a follow-up question. Your bill refers to the Language Skills Act. You also talked about the Official Languages Act. Parts V and VI of the Official Languages Act, and Part IV also, deal with language of work and Canadians’ right to work in their language. Do you agree, Senator Carignan, that for this new version of the Official Languages Act that is coming down the pike, it will be extremely important for everyone to take into account any possible changes in these parts of the legislation?

Thank you for your question. I don’t want to start a debate on the future legislation, but we definitely need to make improvements to major parts of this legislation and also give the Commissioner of Official Languages more enforcement powers. There is important work to be done on this file.