CHAPTER TWO: HORIZONTAL GOVERNANCE
Previous Page | Table of Contents | Next Page
Towards enhanced co-operation in the area of official languages
Certain terms are often heard today in political and administrative circles, both in Canada and abroad. "Governance," for example, is as timely a topic in public affairs as it is among community groups and in the private sector.5
In a governmental context, governance is used specifically to describe interdepartmental co-operation. Canada's federal government is developing governance mechanisms described as "horizontal" in order to achieve complex objectives that span various departments. From this point of view, horizontal governance concerns the internal workings of the federal government and refers to coordinated government action.
Horizontal governance can also describe new mechanisms that govern the relationships between the federal government and civil society's stakeholders. It is called for when considering citizens' points of view in developing government policies and programs. Thus, the term also has an external dimension.
No matter how it is defined, horizontal governance is based on the idea that stakeholders from various environments work together to achieve common goals, making the most of each stakeholder's particular expertise, experience and knowledge.
With respect to official languages, horizontal governance takes on a broad meaning, as it now applies to the program as a whole. For federal institutions, horizontal governance must apply to communication with and services to the public as it does to language of work, equitable participation, and promotion of official languages.
That being said, this chapter is primarily limited to governance involving the promotion of official languages, that is, Part VII of the Official Languages Act (the Act), and in particular the commitment to official languages communities. What assessment can be made of horizontal governance in this area since its emergence barely a decade ago? Has the government implemented consistent internal mechanisms to deal with issues concerning official language minority communities? Has it established advisory mechanisms that enable these communities to have a real influence on the policies that affect them?
This, in short, is the topic of this chapter. It begins with the benefits of horizontal governance and reasons that ought to motivate the government to broaden its practice. Next follows a short description of the main mechanisms of horizontal governance and some observations on results achieved with regard to internal horizontality. This chapter then deals with some of the challenges of horizontal governance, followed by a discussion of its underlying principles. To conclude, we suggest some ways to deal more effectively with horizontal issues in the area of official languages.
The benefits of horizontal governance
What benefits does the government derive from horizontal governance, and why should the government continue to broaden and improve its practice in the area of official languages?
STRENGTHENING PUBLIC POLICIES BEST SUITED TO COMMUNITIES' NEEDS
The government can properly understand and serve the public only if it is tuned in. By promoting active and sustained participation on the part of citizens, government officials build public policies on a firmer foundation. As a participatory approach, horizontal governance enables the government to better integrate the community's perspective into its policies before they are finalized.
| No matter how it is defined, horizontal governance is based on the idea that stakeholders from various environments work together to achieve common goals, making the most of each stakeholder's particular expertise, experience and knowledge. |
FULFILLING THE PRINCIPLES OF THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGES ACT
Horizontal governance is a good way to translate the general objectives of the Act into concrete and lasting actions—objectives that include community development and the advancement of linguistic duality.
The growing pressure to achieve results with respect to official languages is obvious. The Action Plan for Official Languages rightly represents the government's will to respond to this pressure. Federal institutions must take positive action in support of the growth and development of the official language communities and the promotion of linguistic duality. This cannot take place in a vacuum; departments involved must build relationships with each other as well as with stakeholders and work in co-operation with them.
PROMOTION OF MUTUAL UNDERSTANDING
"Truth emerges from the clash of ideas." This proverb illustrates well how dialogue between partners promotes understanding and co-operation.
The give-and-take involved in implementing horizontal governance tends to generate more harmonious relationships. It does not eliminate conflict, but the permanent link and the sharing of knowledge give stakeholders a better appreciation for each others' points of view and constraints. This means that public officials are more likely to understand the communities' needs, while the communities are more likely to appreciate the limitations and constraints on administrative authority.
The main mechanisms and examples of horizontal governance
Apart from some sectoral initiatives in the 1980s,6 the first significant attempt at horizontal governance goes back to 1994. At that time, the government adopted the new Accountability Framework for the implementation of sections 41 and 42, Part VII, of the Act. This framework specified that 27 federal institutions (now 33), including the Department of Canadian Heritage, would be required to consult official language communities and establish an action plan for their growth and development.
Later, in 1999, the government established the Committee of Deputy Ministers of Official Languages (CDMOL). This group was given the responsibility of providing integrated leadership at the highest administrative level of government.
Then came the Action Plan for Official Languages. Announced in March 2003, this plan was a significant collaborative effort by all federal departments in the implementation of the Official Languages Act. It was accompanied by an accountability and coordination framework, which affirmed and specified the responsibilities of institutions and the government with regard to official languages. This framework confirms the coordinating role that has been played by the minister responsible for the official languages portfolio since 2001. This role thus promotes a comprehensive approach to the measures federal institutions must take in implementing the Act. In addition, the minister responsible for official languages is supported by a group of ministers having significant responsibilities with regard to the official languages program. The framework accompanying the Action Plan also stipulates that departments must consult with official language communities and demonstrate that they have taken their needs into consideration in developing and implementing policies and programs.
Although it focuses solely on the Canadian Francophonie, the Ministerial Conference on the Canadian Francophonie should also be mentioned. This co-operative mechanism brings together provincial and territorial ministers responsible for Francophone affairs. Its purpose is to stimulate interprovincial co-operation with regard to the delivery of services in French and the development of Francophone communities.
Finally, although they are not, strictly speaking, true examples of horizontal governance, federal councils of senior public officials are increasingly taking an interest in the official languages issue at the regional level. In this regard, the Commissioner singles out the work the federal councils have accomplished in advancing the issue of official languages throughout the country (see Chapter 7, "Success Stories").
Internal horizontality: interdepartmental co-operation is growing
For some time, the federal government has been building a more consistent approach to official languages, particularly with regard to the growth and development of official language minority communities. What are the results of this approach to date?
In fact, it would be impossible to give a final verdict. The Official Languages Accountability and Coordination Framework, the government's most important mechanism on the subject, is still too new. In addition, the tool for evaluating the results, the Horizontal Results-based Management and Accountability Framework, has been in place only since 2005. Nonetheless, we can still make some observations.
The Action Plan for Official Languages is an interesting example of co-operation, both within the government administration and between government and the communities. It is the result of co-operation between a number of key departments in the official languages area. As the Action Plan was developed, the government took into account the communities' points of view.
Thanks to this co-operation, both internal and external, the government equipped itself for the first time with a strategic plan that aimed for concerted action in the implementation of federal language policy.
As well, the very existence of a minister responsible for official languages, in charge of coordinating the language portfolio, gives the communities a significant access point to voice their needs and concerns. According to community representatives, the consultation process has improved over the past few years. The participation of key ministers in annual formal consultation sessions, under the stewardship of the Minister responsible for Official Languages, lends greater legitimacy to the dialogue. However, community representatives have indicated that consultation ought to further focus on future proposals, rather than solely on what has been accomplished. The fall 2005 meeting between ministers and the communities allowed for progress in this direction. These efforts must continue in order to move from the consultation phase toward co-operation, which implies specific actions to enable communities to have a real influence on the policies that affect them.
Moreover, representatives of the communities perceive the function of the Minister responsible for Official Languages to be that of catalyst and champion, particularly with regard to interdepartmental co-operation.
Thanks to the Minister's role, and the administrative support of the Privy Council Office,7 there has been noticeable progress on a number of issues. Among these are agreements in principle negotiated with the provinces in the context of the Early Learning and Child Care Initiative. These agreements, produced through the concerted action of the Privy Council Office and the Department of Social Development, include provisions establishing daycare spaces for official language communities. Enabling Funds were also created in March 2005.8 Their goal: to strengthen the community's ability to act in the area of human resources and economic development. Once again, this is the result of close co-operation between the Privy Council Office and the Department of Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (now known as Human Resources and Social Development Canada), in consultation with the communities.
| "Catalysts and champions: Both in the implementation and the management of horizontal initiatives, the role of specific individuals in championing the project, in finding innovative solutions and in finding resources, appeared to be the more important determinants of success." Bakvis and Juillet, p. 2. |
There is another positive point to note: the group of ministers of official languages and the CDMOL are also interested in a number of horizontal language issues, and, in recent years, they have expanded their coordination capacity. By way of example, the CDMOL played a significant coordination role, with the participation of other key departments—including Canadian Heritage—in advancing the important issue of the Internet. This coordinated action made possible, among other things, the creation of the Languages Technologies Research Centre and the Language Industry Association, as well as an increase in French content in the Canadian Culture Online Program. The CDMOL must, however, revisit the file in response to new issues related to the Internet. It must also be acknowledged that the separate mandates of each institution and the distinct perspectives that accompany them somewhat restrict the action of these groups. As well, rotation of members and their replacement by subordinates have an impact on group synergy and disrupt the continuity of their initiatives.
While there have been positive results, the action plans required of some thirty institutions under the 1994 corporate accountability framework remain the weak link among the examples of horizontal governance. Often, the plans are limited to a listing of activities undertaken by the institutions and contain little information on results or impact. The government would undoubtedly do well to equip itself with better tools and strategies for measuring such results.
With the passage of Bill S-3, the government must review, in depth, its role as a catalyst in guiding and accelerating implementation of the Act. For its part, Canadian Heritage must fully assume its role as coordinator, which implies more rigorous supervision of federal institutions in the effective implementation of Part VII of the Act. Moreover, Canadian Heritage's annual report should be especially focussed on providing an overall assessment of results stemming from the implementation of sections 41 and 42 of the Act.
In February 2006, the new government introduced a significant change to the horizontal governance of federal linguistic policy. The Official Languages Branch of the Privy Council Office has been integrated with Canadian Heritage.9 It will serve as the administrative unit of the Minister of Official Languages, who is responsible for horizontal governance in the area of official languages. The Minister of Official Languages will also be responsible for programs involving official languages headed by Canadian Heritage. These include programs that support official language communities as well as provinces and territories in their minority-language and secondlanguage education activities. OCOL will closely monitor the results of the application of this dual responsibility to ensure that the role of horizontal coordination is carried out independently from that of program delivery.
The challenges of horizontal governance
Horizontal governance implies new ways of managing issues concerning official languages. Accustomed to operating vertically within their respective mandates, the departmental officials involved must agree to set common objectives and co-operate fully to achieve them. Studies show that horizontal coordination can become a source of tension between departments, especially because it often gives rise to situations of encroachment. To overcome these challenges, it would help to define the departments' shared responsibilities clearly. Once again, a cultural change within the workings of government must be seriously contemplated, so that emphasis is placed on the will to work together rather than the absolute preservation of one's own area of activity.
Furthermore, as horizontal governance requires more dialogue and discussions among several players, understandably achieving it will take more time. In this context, planning and management of stakeholder expectations is of prime importance. Also, adequate resources must be provided and accountability mechanisms must be introduced—in particular, suitable performance evaluation criteria for senior public officials.
Another challenge is to extend the practices of horizontal governance to Canadian society as a whole with regard to the promotion of linguistic duality. This aspect seems to be neglected in action plans and discussions with stakeholders. With regard to second language instruction, for example, wouldn't the government benefit by taking into account the needs of the majority and establishing stronger ties with groups in Canadian society that promote linguistic duality?10 There is a good chance that this would give rise to better support for Canada's language policy from the population as a whole.
Under the circumstances, it is impossible to overstate the need for change in organizational culture within the workings of the federal government. Horizontal work requires staff to develop horizontal skills: the desire to work on common objectives that transcend individual mandates; mediation and negotiation skills; and a certain amount of creativity to design new management styles. According to most of the authors quoted in this chapter, this change requires committed administrative leadership within central organizations.
THE DESIRE TO WORK ON COMMON OBJECTIVES THAT TRANSCEND INDIVIDUAL MANDATES
Governance with communities: the basic principles
In fact, how does the relationship between federal institutions and official language minority communities function? What principles should we build on to create areas of genuine co-operation and sharing? For the purposes of this chapter, we have chosen to closely examine governance practices in four areas of activity: economic development and employability, immigration, justice, and health. These areas are significant for the development and growth of official language minority communities and also, in the opinion of participants, present generally positive perspectives and results.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND EMPLOYABILITY
In this area, the National Committee for Canadian Francophone Human Resources Development, established in 1996, is an example to consider. It is made up of equal numbers of representatives from several federal institutions and official language communities. A similar model was followed in 1998 for the benefit of the Anglophone minority community. These committees share a mandate to manage funds with a view to stimulating economic initiatives in the communities, establishing the commitment of participating departments, and promoting co-operative action among the various participants. The two committees support one another in representing the communities on the Coordinating Group on Economic Development and Employability (RDÉE) and the Community Economic Development and Employability Committees (CEDEC). The committees also enable a number of federal institutions working in the economic area to pool their expertise. The RDÉE and the CEDEC have also contributed to the development of expertise in the communities. The communities, however, are hoping for the adoption of a more global government strategy on community economic development and employability.
IMMIGRATION
Throughout her mandate, the Commissioner has seen immigration as a means of replenishing the communities.11 While few approached immigration from this point of view five or six years ago, it is a common subject of discussion today. There is now a steering committee on citizenship and immigration, as well as a number of committees at the provincial level. These groups seek to create better intake infrastructure in the community environment. The national committee is co-chaired by the Citizenship and Immigration Canada's associate deputy minister and a representative from the community environment. The committee seems to have hit its stride and has developed a strategic framework for national, provincial and territorial participants from government and community sectors. It has also developed a complete and integrated action plan. Equipped with this road map, the committee is currently working towards fulfilling its plans to increase the immigration of Francophones in the communities. This committee's success is attributed to the leadership of individuals in positions of authority within the department, and to the clear mandates of the committees.
| "It is only through working and learning together, sharing our resources and energy, and establishing common goals that we have succeeded in setting a new direction. Future success continues to hinge on strong community involvement supported by a highly visible government commitment and departmental leadership. I am proud of my involvement in launching the committee." Excerpt of an interview with Mr. Michel Dorais, former deputy minister, Citizenship and Immigration (2001-2004) |
JUSTICE
The Department of Justice has also implemented a horizontal approach for consultation with various lawyers' associations, official language communities, universities, and legal translation centres in order to develop a blueprint for facilitating access to justice in both official languages across Canada. In addition, Justice Canada has established a federal-provincialterritorial working group for the same purpose. The work done by these groups is characterized by the smooth sharing of information from the Department of Justice, adequate funding of the associations representing the communities and clear horizontal mandates.
| "[A] condition of effectiveness rests on the possibility of ongoing interaction among the players, based on collective learning resulting from the pooling of knowledge and expertise." Cardinal and Hudon, p. 11 |
HEALTH
A number of governance mechanisms have been established in the health sector in the past several years. Among them are the Société santé en français and its 17 networks, the Consortium national de formation en français, the Community Health and Social Services Network for Quebec, and two advisory committees12 attached to the Minister of Health. These organizations are dedicated above all to promoting and facilitating access for official language communities to quality health care services in the language of their choice. These committees stand out due to their community representation made up largely of experts, significant support structures provided by Health Canada, and the mobilization of community networks. The commitment of provincial health ministers is also a factor in the success of these networks.
| "The style of partnership between the department and the organizations was also crucial. The department adopted a non-paternalistic approach in allowing the communities to manage their destiny."[Translation] Interview with Marcel Nouvet, Assistant Deputy Minister of Health Canada. |
Basic principles of effective co-operation
In light of the above, the success of effective co-operation between the government and the communities seems to be based on certain fundamental principles, described below.
SHARING KNOWLEDGE
The sharing of information and knowledge among partners is an essential component of genuine co-operation, especially in a constantly evolving social, economic and political context. Community participants must be able to count on the information necessary to effectively participate in, and contribute to, governance. The sharing of knowledge can also imply a common quest for information through research. This matter is discussed at length in Chapter 4, which deals with measuring community vitality.
SHARING RESOURCES
Financial and material support from the institutions involved promotes the active participation of community representatives. It goes without saying that the complexity of the issues and the participation of community representatives on numerous committees demand time and resources. Unfortunately, the resources granted are often inadequate. Consider, for example, the consultations resulting from the Accountability and Coordination Framework. Community stakeholders' ability to participate in governance is too frequently limited. Public officials must demonstrate that they are sensitive to the special situations of community institutions and groups, and promote the acquisition of new skills within the group as required. Horizontal governance cannot become reality with the means currently at hand; the necessary resources must be devoted to it.
| "Success in this area will require a more substantial investment so the English-speaking communities can develop the knowledge and competencies needed to design and implement more sophisticated, coherent and successful community vitality strategies, including those identified under the different components of the Action Plan." Excerpt from the Midterm Report on the Action Plan for Official Languages prepared by the Quebec Community Groups Network, 2005. |
Bearing in mind the endlessly growing demands brought about by the mechanisms of co-operation, the government and the communities could further explore the possibility of having recourse to sectoral tables that bring together institutions and community networks operating in the same area.
MUTUAL TRUST BETWEEN STAKEHOLDERS
The search for common solutions that make the most of each stakeholder's contribution must come by way of mutual trust. The government must ensure that conditions are conducive to such a climate. Studies and consultations show that public officials' openness and attention to community needs make a good starting point. For their part, the communities need to reassure public officials that they are truly committed to this co-operation as partners and not simply as beneficiaries. Trust between stakeholders facilitates and accelerates the process of exchange and ensures results. In short, mutual trust between stakeholders will grow on the basis of key stakeholders' skills in horizontality.
BASIC PRINCIPLES OF EFFECTIVE CO-OPERATION
SOUND MANAGEMENT
Effective horizontal governance mechanisms are supported by clear mandates defined in agreement with the communities. These mandates specify the objectives and roles that each partner is called upon to fulfill. They must build upon a common understanding of how the work is to be shared, drawing on each stakeholder's strengths. Previous success in the areas of health and justice, where experts utilize their respective fields of knowledge, illustrates the benefits of this complementarity. As well, on the government side, horizontal governance requires strong leadership from senior management. The mechanisms of shared governance lose their importance and vitality if they are not established by individuals working at these levels of government administration.
| "Establish permanent consultation mechanisms between communities and associated departments in all sectors targeted by the Action Plan, with the primary objective of developing and implementing multi-year sectoral action plans that take community needs into consideration." Excerpt from the Midterm Report, FCFA recommendation, 2005. |
Moreover, since horizontal governance consists of complementary actions within common objectives and processes, there must be provision for an assessment of the results in which each stakeholder's evaluation is taken into account. The evaluation can help finetune the methods of governance or the objectives to be achieved.
Finally, to establish lasting ties between the community and federal institutions, horizontal governance must be seen from a long-term perspective. Preference must be given to permanent co-operation mechanisms rather than single, sporadic and intermittent contacts.
PREFERENCE MUST BE GIVEN TO PERMANENT CO-OPERATION MECHANISMS
This chapter reveals the need to review federal organizational culture and the coordination of government action in the area of official languages. The Accountability and Coordination Framework in the Action Plan for Official Languages sets out the responsibilities of each institution in this area. The important thing is to implement it. As well, wiser use should be made of certain mechanisms, like the CDMOL and the network of Federal Councils. The latter could take more of a leadership role in regional coordination, not only in relationships with official language communities but also with regard to services to the public and language of work.
In addition, the government must extend consultation on the promotion of linguistic duality to all stakeholders in Canadian society.
Finally, the government should increase its knowledge of community consultation mechanisms, drawing on best practices and successful models. In short, the challenge is to go beyond mere consultation to arrive at true co-operation so communities can fully contribute to the development of policies and programs that affect them.
| Therefore, the Commissioner recommends: That the Minister of Official Languages ensure the efficiency of the horizontal governance mechanisms by drawing on basic proven principles such as the sharing of knowledge and resources, mutual trust between stakeholders, and sound management. |
