ENSURING COMPLIANCE
Previous Page | Table of Contents | Next Page
This part of the Annual Report deals with progress and setbacks in official languages as witnessed throughout 2005-2006. It provides detailed information ensuing from the roles of the Commissioner as linguistic ombudsman and as auditor.
As ombudsman, the Commissioner is responsible for dealing with complaints concerning official languages matters and providing independent feedback on the linguistic performance of institutions subject to the Official Languages Act (the Act). In her role as auditor, the Commissioner provides in-depth assessments of compliance with the Act and suggests courses of action to improve its implementation.
The Commissioner uses a number of tools to fulfill these responsibilities. She conducts evaluations, audits and follow-ups, leads investigations and prepares performance report cards. Only by using the full range of tools at her disposal can she determine whether federal institutions comply with the obligations under the Act.
The next three chapters deal with these issues. Chapter 6 looks at the assessment of key institutions* in the management of official languages and the implementation of government initiatives related to the Action Plan for Official Languages. The following chapter reviews the performance of over 30 institutions as well as success stories. Chapter 8 describes investigations, audits and follow-ups.
The data in these three chapters lead to some general observations. First, the federal government does particularly well in developing official languages plans and policies. A significant number of institutions have the necessary infrastructure to move this issue forward. Thus, each of these administrative tools is not an end in itself, but rather a means. It does not guarantee results.
The federal administration has also demonstrated a good ability to establish a number of technical processes related to its official languages obligations. For example, bilingual signage, including posters in meeting rooms encouraging employees to express themselves in their language of choice, is widely used within the government. However, these are some of the simplest and least demanding processes—and essentially amount to good display practices. More than 35 years after the adoption of the Official Languages Act, such static means are not enough. We must aim higher—much higher.
The real challenge facing public institutions is to fully integrate linguistic duality within their organizational culture. From this perspective, admittedly, there remains a long way to go. For instance, with regard to service to the public—a key indicator—the data clearly points to a levelling off and, even in some cases, a decline in the quality of service offered. Similarly, with respect to language of work, higher levels of performance are proving difficult to achieve. In other words, it cannot yet be said that the two linguistic groups enjoy equal treatment.
Moreover, a review of all the data gathered points to the fact that several institutions are still at the education and awareness stages. While these are certainly essential elements, they are largely inadequate if not accompanied by other equally forceful measures.
That being said, results vary from institution to institution. Some have achieved superior performance or shown initiative with respect to official languages. Other institutions,however, do not give this issue a high enough priority, despite repeated interventions from the Commissioner.
The fact remains that many federal institutions have a fragmented perception of the Official Languages Act. Too often, this results in an unconnected series of rules with a minimalist implementation. This issue was dealt with in an earlier chapter on the regulatory framework. The common elements linking the related notions of "service to the public," "language of work," "community vitality" and "promotion of linguistic duality" must be made more evident.
It is widely recognized that the world as a whole is greater than the sum of its parts, simply because the parts do not add up, but are correlated. Similarly, experience teaches that the same is also true of the Official Languages Act. The real success of its implementation depends on an overall appreciation of all its parts. It is only when the Act is implemented in this way that all its riches will be revealed.
* Key institutions are: Privy Council Office, Public Service Human Resources Management Agency of Canada, Canadian Heritage, Justice Canada, and the Public Service Commission of Canada.
