On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Chaput, seconded by the Honourable Senator Moore, for the second reading of Bill S-209, An Act to amend the Official Languages Act (communications with and services to the public).

Hon. Raymonde Gagné: Honourable senators, since the debate was adjourned in Senator MacDonald's name, I ask that it remain adjourned in his name when I have finished my speech.

Honourable senators, I rise today to support Bill S-209, which was introduced by the Honourable Maria Chaput, who represented Manitoba in the Senate for a long time and who is now retired.

This is the first time I rise to speak to a bill in the upper house. It provides the perfect opportunity me to introduce myself because this topic is closely connected to my career and my identity.

My story begins in St-Pierre-Jolys and St. Joseph, Manitoba, where my ancestors, the Gagné-Hirbour, Joubert, Delorme and Fontaine families settled in the 19th century. I am a descendant of those valiant pioneer families from a community that tilled the earth and made French Manitoba flourish through hard work, unwavering commitment and fierce struggles. It is only natural that I inherited that commitment, and it has been a common thread in my personal and professional life. This is the family and personal history that I have brought with me to the Senate.

The upper chamber's strength lies in the diversity of its voices, and that diversity makes our studies and recommendations more meaningful because it reflects the diversity of the country and brings forward perspectives that might not otherwise be heard in Parliament. We do not represent voters from a well-defined riding. Each of us, through our individual history and life experience, represents a diverse and complex part of Canada.

The principle of a Canada united in its diversity is the foundation of the Official Languages Act. The fact that such an act exists is evidence that Canada, as a country, accepts this diversity. To show that it is truly committed to this diversity, Canada must also sincerely examine, review and improve this act, without fear or inhibitions.

Legislation in a country as beautiful, complex and vibrant as ours cannot remain static. Our country is constantly evolving, and we see that all around us. I experienced this new, inclusive francophonie at the Université de Saint-Boniface and within Manitoba's francophone community. We must acknowledge this evolution, as proposed in Bill S-209. We must take advantage of every new opportunity.

We are too often afraid of talking about language. In her great autobiographical book entitled Enchantment and Sorrow, Gabrielle Roy tells the story of her school principal, a Scottish immigrant who truly understood the cause of francophones and who said, and I quote:

Language which is the road to communicate has created more misunderstanding in the world than any other cause, except perhaps faith.

In Canada, language has indeed been a hot topic. The history of Manitoba is one of the most telling examples of that. French Manitoba has a storied past marked by claims and struggles. However, Franco-Manitobans never fought to conquer or subjugate. They fought to defend the rights and language of their people and to protect Canada's rich diversity.

The once controversial legacy of Louis Riel, the father of Manitoba, is another example. Louis Riel was first regarded as a rebel and was charged with high treason. With the perspective that comes with time, however, he has regained his rightful legacy as a figure who defended the rights of his people and, above all, as a unifying force, because for Riel, Canadian Confederation could only occur if it brought people together and respected the different voices and identities that made up Canada.

This is the legacy that Manitoba's francophones carried with them in their battles to defend and restore their rights. The purpose of these battles was to defend the French language, as well as the idea of a Canada that unites and brings its citizens together, while fully respecting their differences and their rights.

The Manitoba Act, 1870, which created the province of Manitoba, recognized the existence of the province's two founding peoples and two languages. I would like to add that the act also should have recognized the presence and role of the First Nations communities on that same land, but this topic will come up again in other debates.

The ideology underlying the Manitoba Act, 1870 didn't last long. The vision that recognized the existence and equality of the two official languages within the country was soon replaced by another ideology in Manitoba, one that was one-dimensional, whereby only one nation, one language and one culture were officially recognized.

The dualist model was repudiated in Manitoba beginning in 1890 with the abolition of state-subsidized denominational schools and the creation of a school system in which English was the only language of instruction allowed.

Then there was the passage of an unconstitutional provincial law, The Official Languages Act, which abolished the official status of French within legislative and judicial institutions despite the guarantees in section 23 of the Manitoba Act, 1870. In 1896, after a thaw and some compromise between Prime Minister Laurier and Premier Greenway, bilingual instruction was authorized for a few years before French schools were definitively abolished in 1916.

This was the sad legacy that Franco-Manitobans fought against, winning their first victories in the second half of the 20th century. In 1979, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in Forest that the 1890 legislation that abolished the official status of French within legislative and judicial institutions was unconstitutional. It was a resounding victory for the francophone population of Manitoba, whose mother tongue officially regained its legitimacy. Later, in the 1980s, the Bilodeau case eventually led the Supreme Court of Canada to recognize all the unilingual English laws in Manitoba as invalid. The court also ruled that the Manitoba Act, 1870 included a specific manifestation of the general right of Franco-Manitobans to express themselves in their own language.

These legal victories brought Franco-Manitobans back to square one in 1870. A century of battles were waged not to dominate or conquer, but to restore balance and what the founders of the province intended.

Language and Canada's linguistic duality are not values we can take for granted.

We are proud of our linguistic duality, and rightly so, but we have to recognize that maintaining that duality requires ongoing dialogue and sustained efforts.

It was this conversation that led to Bill S-209, which recognizes the evolution of francophone communities and very accurately reflects what we can see and hear in Manitoba's francophone community.

The debates on this bill and the study of its previous version, Bill S-205, by the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages also coincided with the 2015 États généraux de la francophonie manitobaine, a major process of reflection undertaken by the francophone community in order to outline the existing situation and determine the way of the future.

What struck me was the high degree of correlation and alignment between the objectives of Bill S-209 and those set by Manitoba's francophone community.

Bill S-209 seeks to broaden the definitions used under the Official Languages Act when calculating the demand for service in the minority official language. In cases where the Official Languages Act uses a restrictive criterion known as the "first official language spoken," Bill S-209 proposes a more inclusive criterion: taking into account all those who communicate in French.

This amendment is required because francophone communities have evolved. It is no coincidence that the final report of the États généraux de la francophonie manitobaine is called Voices United. The report recognizes the existence of a pluralistic francophonie, one that is multi-faceted and ever-changing. The federal government guarantees Canada's linguistic duality. Therefore, should it not follow suit?

The second important element proposed by the bill is that the demand for services in the minority official language be assessed by also considering the institutional vitality of the communities served. At present, the federal government uses arbitrary statistical thresholds. Services in French are cut, for example, when the percentage of people with French as their first official language spoken falls below the threshold of 5 per cent of the general population. No weight is given to the presence of a French-language school, for example, in the calculation. The community uses such tools to survive and expand, but under the current legislation the federal government ignores these factors.

In his latest annual report, the Commissioner of Official Languages eloquently explained this situation, and I quote:

. . . the current methods of determining whether services should be available—including measuring whether the minority community represents 5% of the population—contribute to the insecurity of these communities. It means that the right to service in the minority is defined by the growth of the majority. That is why I have endorsed the bill proposed by Senator Maria Chaput that calls for the use of indices of community vitality, such as schools and community centres, for the purpose of designating offices to provide services in both official languages.

What I want to point out at second reading is that the spirit of this bill is completely in line with what francophone minority communities want and are calling for. In Manitoba, the community's strategy is to expand the francophone space: to recognize the diversity of the francophonie; to include, without discrimination, all those who want to participate in the French fact; and to increase opportunities to use French on a daily basis.

In light of this, shouldn't the Official Languages Act move us towards those same objectives? After all, its preamble states that the federal government:

. . . is committed to enhancing the vitality and supporting the development of English and French linguistic minority communities, as an integral part of the two official language communities of Canada, and to fostering full recognition and use of English and French in Canadian society.

The Hon. the Speaker: Excuse me, senator, but your time is up. Would you like five more minutes?

Senator Gagné: Yes, please. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Société franco-manitobaine is challenging the constitutionality of some aspects of the Official Languages Regulations before the Federal Court because they are at odds with section 20 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and some provisions of the Official Languages Act.

However, I believe that a review of the Official Languages Regulations must be done in conjunction with the modernization of the Official Languages Act itself. It is time that the OLA clearly expressed Canada's adherence to the spirit of linguistic inclusiveness. It would then be up to the government to adopt supporting regulations.

I believe that we have an opportunity to study and approve a bill that originated in the Senate and that, after years of work and efforts to raise awareness, has garnered support across the country and in both chambers of Parliament.

As the 150th anniversary of Confederation draws near, it is up to us, honourable senators, to seize this opportunity to reiterate our commitment to the vitality of linguistic duality in Canada.

Thank you.

Hon. Claudette Tardif: Would the senator take a question?

Senator Gagné: Certainly.

Senator Tardif: I would like to begin by congratulating you on your excellent speech, Senator Gagné.

Do you think that the existing regulations penalize the francophone community, which is not growing at the same rate as the general population?

Senator Gagné: Thank you for your question. It is an established fact that when demand for certain services is being calculated, people who do not declare French as their mother tongue are excluded. The results therefore do not paint an accurate picture of minority francophone communities. The proportion is shrinking because Canada's overall population is growing.

Hon. Serge Joyal: Would the honourable senator take another question?

Senator Gagné: Certainly.

Senator Joyal: I listened carefully to your remarks, Senator Gagné, and I was watching Senator Sinclair behind you as you recounted the history of the recognition of Franco-Manitobans' rights. Obviously, we deplore the fact that, as you pointed out, the Manitoba government's language policies over a period of about 100 years, from 1870 to 1970—80, ended up reducing the number of francophones in Manitoba who are entitled to the same language rights as any other Canadian citizen. Government policies in Manitoba were designed to reduce the use of French.

As I was saying, I was watching Senator Sinclair and I couldn't help but draw a parallel with Canada's indigenous communities, given that, for 150 years, Canada also restricted the use of Aboriginal languages. Thanks to the report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, we now realize that the discrimination was systematic; in other words, it was fully ingrained in our institutions. Steps are being taken today to put an end to that systematic discrimination.

Don't you think it would be appropriate to use this argument in the proceedings currently before the Federal Court? Hasn't the situation facing Franco-Manitobans resulted in outcomes comparable to the ones we deplore with regard to the indigenous communities in this country?

The Hon. the Speaker: I'm sorry, Senator Gagné, but are you asking for more time to answer the question?

Senator Gagné: Yes, please. Thank you for your question, Senator Joyal. Francophone minority communities have been bringing these issues before the courts for many years now. We have made some progress, specifically regarding the interpretation of section 23 of the Charter. I would point out that some essential remedial steps have been taken, which have allowed us to recover lost ground in terms of the vitality and vibrancy of francophone minority communities.

(On motion of Senator Gagné, for Senator MacDonald, debate adjourned.)