Ottawa, October 8, 2003
Notes for a presentation to House Standing Committee on Official Languages
Dr. Dyane Adam - Commissioner of Official Languages
Check against delivery
Mr. Chairman,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
As you know, I have just tabled my fourth annual report, and I would like to take this opportunity to share its highlights with you. In addition to my presentation, I have also provided you with a copy of this year's recommendations.
I will, of course, also have something to say about health care in both official languages, as this is currently being examined by your committee. To start with, though, let's examine the contents of the report.
Overview of 2002-2003: the government changes course
Let's take stock. The year 2002-2003 began like many other years as far as official languages are concerned, with no great fanfare. However, the year certainly ended on a positive note. You closely monitor the health of English and French and you noted, as I did, an erosion of the government's commitment to official languages over the years. When I took office in 1999, I voiced serious concerns and called on the entire political class and the federal administration to show greater leadership on linguistic duality. To my great satisfaction, I now recognize that the federal government has begun to change course.
Action Plan for Official Languages: a piece to be performed by a full orchestra
My optimism about the future of official languages within the federal administration and Canadian society is in large part due to the publication of the much-anticipated Action Plan for the Official Languages. Let me be clear: this plan is one of the most significant expressions of leadership on official languages in the past decade. If I had to use an image to explain what this plan means for Canadians, I would say that it is a piece to be performed by a full orchestra. We have been waiting for the Canadian official languages symphony for some time, but now, thanks to the action plan, we have the score and all the musicians know their respective parts.
I applaud the determination that led to the development of the action plan, I see this as only the beginning. A plan, like a map, may very well serve as a guide, but we have only just begun the journey. To reach our destination, we must not only know how to read the map, but also actually set off on the journey. The true measure of success will be whether the plan is fully and completely implemented. It is not enough to set ambitious objectives; the government must also make the necessary effort to attain them.
Analysis of the action plan
My Office has closely studied the Action Plan for Official Languages. The annual report presents an analysis. I think it is a noteworthy contribution that will help re-launch the official languages program, but it is not a magic cure. For one thing, the plan does not deal with some important areas for official languages such as bilingualism in our national capital, the arts, and the promotion of our linguistic duality internationally. In addition, the plan does not place enough emphasis on how to make linguistic duality an integral part of our Public Service.
Strengthening the action plan: recommendations
What is more disturbing is that the plan provides no mechanism for evaluating its implementation at regular intervals. This is a weakness that could jeopardize the attainment of its objectives. I am going to take the government at its word and ask it to report on progress made towards the realization of the objectives of the plan. My first recommendation proposes three ways to strengthen the action plan. First, an evaluation framework must be established to assess the measures taken and the results obtained. Second, the government should establish a framework for intergovernmental cooperation with the provinces and territories. A number of objectives do, in fact, lie in areas of provincial jurisdiction, including education and health. I propose specific recommendations for each of these areas (Recommendations 5 and 6). I will return to these later. The third way in which the government could strengthen its action plan is to develop a strategy for ongoing consultation and dialogue with the official language majorities with a view to including them in the government's efforts.
Monitoring by parliamentary official languages committees
My second recommendation is addressed to your committee. I urge you to continue to closely monitor the implementation of the action plan and to convene each year those responsible so that they can report publicly on the results attained. Let me be very clear: your role as parliamentarians is essential to my work as an ombudsman. You lead by example and demonstrate, through your participation, that progress on official languages is a function of the efforts put into it. I thank you for your unflagging support.
Implementation of the Official Languages Act in the federal Public Service
This year's annual report contains a new component. We present an analysis of the implementation of recommendations contained in our studies, investigations and follow-ups. This analysis reveals that the federal administration's performance with respect to official languages is quite uneven.
I am still too often called upon to act as a disciplinarian and to do follow-ups on my follow-up studies. Institutions and managers should live up to their responsibilities as a matter of course. I call on the entire federal administration to take the success stories described in this report as an example to follow. Leadership by the federal administration is the necessary complement to political leadership. My fourth recommendation is aimed primarily at the senior Public Service: deputy ministers and associate deputy ministers should attain the same level of bilingualism as that required of other EXs in the Public Service and deputy minister positions open to those outside the Public Service should be staffed on an imperative basis to ensure bilingualism.
As you know, the President of the Treasury Board has tabled a bill on the modernization of human resources management (C-25), which should be adopted soon. I intervened in the legislative review process to propose amendments. One of the changes made to the bill is the addition of a clause in the preamble acknowledging linguistic duality as a fundamental value of the Public Service. This "guiding principle," to quote the President of the Treasury Board, should also serve as a basis for updating related policies. The annual report offers a detailed recommendation on modernizing human resources (Recommendation 3). This modernization must be accompanied by a change in culture conducive to linguistic duality by emphasising principles and values instead of rules, by informing senior public servants of their responsibilities, by making people appointed to senior positions aware of their responsibilities as soon as they are hired, and by progressively eliminating non-imperative staffing.
Health care: a national priority
Canadians tell us that health care is a national priority. The first step in care is listening. Quality care depends on the ability of health care professionals to establish a relationship of trust with the patient. As a clinical psychologist, I know that is a key element in the healing process. But how can someone provide a diagnosis and suggest a treatment if they cannot adequately understand or communicate with the patient? The responsibility of caring for our citizens with human dignity must necessarily include linguistic considerations. As the epic fight over the Montfort Hospital showed us, the official language minority communities are well aware of the fragile nature of the health care services they receive in their own language.
Recommendation 6: federal-provincial health-care agreements
You, as parliamentarians, are right to study the issue of health care in both official languages. A number of stakeholders have raised the possibility of signing new agreements with the provinces and territories to benefit the minority communities or of changing the current agreements to include specific provisions on health-care services in the minority language. Another possibility is to draw inspiration from the official languages in education agreements administered by Canadian Heritage and develop similar agreements in health care. I ask the Minister of Health, in my sixth recommendation, to take measures necessary to that end.
Recommendation 7: bilingualism in the national capital
In my report, I come back to the issue of bilingualism in the national capital. I recommend that the federal minister responsible for official languages examine the question and take all measures to have the national capital declared officially bilingual. If we look at the commitment made by the Premier-elect of Ontario, the context today looks much more favourable for implementing this recommendation.
Last year's recommendations
In our overview of the past year, we also note that the government did not implement all the recommendations in the 2001-2002 annual report. Of last year's seven recommendations, two have been fully implemented, two are in the process of being implemented and three have not yet been implemented. I had to reiterate two recommendations, including the one that the government give the Ministerial Reference Group on Official Languages the status of a permanent cabinet committee so that it can support the implementation of the Plan (Recommendation 8).
I know that you are committed to ensuring that concrete measures are taken to implement Part VII of the Official Languages Act. That is why I am also reiterating my recommendation from last year on the binding nature of this part of the Act (Recommendation 9). The vitality of the official language minority communities should not remain wishful thinking. It is a requirement for the promotion of linguistic duality as a fundamental value of this country.
Conclusion
Since I took office, and this annual report is no exception, I have stressed the importance of leadership at both the political and administrative levels. I return to this question year after year.
I must tell you however that I am very concerned about continuity these days. We are in a transitional period for the government. Some individuals may be called on to play new roles and new priorities will appear on the government's agenda. Given that this is a question of fundamental values, the government has a constitutional and legislative obligation to follow through on language matters. We must continue to move ahead. The effort devoted to developing a major action plan will not have been in vain. Many have tuned their instruments and some are already practising. We are eager to hear the symphony. Let us make sure that it is not an unfinished symphony! I will be happy to answer your questions.
